Mitt thinks the President is dividing America and that the alternative to the current plutocracy is ... North Korea??? Can we please harken back to the GOP mantra of class warfare? And, maybe, just who is actually waging it?
Regarding taxes, SS/FICA on median income is nearly 16% total employee/employer and 15% as the bracket which would be 31% and if you want to get picky and dismiss the employer end you'd still get to over 22% on every bit of wage. Without any monkey business Mittens pays 15% and no SS/FICA on the immaterial at his wealth cut-off because that income is not wage/salary and is exempt from SS/FICA. (this neglects the temporary cut)
We could get into the division between income gains by the top 1% versus the bottom 20% would be somewhat informing and you will please note that whether or not the bottom 1/5th pays a nickle of Fed Tax, every cent of wage is subject to SS/FICA.
One could point out to Mitt that while the vast majority of us were growing up in families that had to pay real attention to finances his Daddy was CEO of AMC and later Gov of MI. Maybe there are divides that you were insulated from, maybe there are outcomes of performance that you flatly never had to worry about. Maybe while you were busy raping companies the warfare aspect didn't dawn on you, something like that awareness might have cut into your returns, obscene returns by the standards of most investments.
Mr Romney, it is not the President and the Democratic Party that are using falsehoods and dog-whistles and code words to stir hate and resentment. Mr Romney, the President may be one of the best friends your particular version of wealth has. He may be the guy offering you a really good deal compared to what almost all Americans get. But then, anything other than the bootlicking you're used to is class warfare.
Friday, January 20, 2012
Friday, January 13, 2012
The Mitt Juggernaut
To listen to the media of late, you'd have to be really impressed by Mitt's strangle-hold on the GOP Primary. He's racking up the victories and that's really something. So, how's this impressive machine functioning today?
Mitt Romney got about three quarters of Iowan primary caucusers to vote for somebody else. That's right, he tied or lost or something real close with Rick Santorum. He got to New Hampshire and managed to get three fifths of their electorate to support someone else. Looking at the polling in South Carolina he's got over two thirds of that electorate looking elsewhere. Yep, and Newt is moving up.
This is the GOP version of the annointed, presumptive nominee. Wow, that's one hell of a machine.
Mitt Romney got about three quarters of Iowan primary caucusers to vote for somebody else. That's right, he tied or lost or something real close with Rick Santorum. He got to New Hampshire and managed to get three fifths of their electorate to support someone else. Looking at the polling in South Carolina he's got over two thirds of that electorate looking elsewhere. Yep, and Newt is moving up.
This is the GOP version of the annointed, presumptive nominee. Wow, that's one hell of a machine.
Newt, It Was Predictable
Going after another Republican was going to cause some heartburn in the GOP. Going after their presumptive nominee was going to cause some heartburn. Going after a Republican as a greed head plutocrat was going to cause apoplexy. The mental derangement has extended all the way to John Sununu making not so veiled economic threats to those funding the attacks and people fuming about Communism. Yes, really.
Now it is true that Ronnie Reagan made some references to some sort of Eleventh Commandment regarding fellow Republicans. That has been kept mostly in a theoretical sort of way as John McCain might note regarding a South Carolina Primary involving GW Bush. In fact, a bit more recently - like Iowa Caucuses - a certain Newt Gingrich got eviscerated by fellow GOPers without so much as a peep by anyone other than Newt.
You could be forgiven for scoffing at the idea that the GOP problem is with attacks on the front runner, especially since Newt was that guy in Iowa when he got whacked. You'd hurt yourself laughing trying to make the case that attacking Mitt hit the purity of the Party message.
Whew. That leaves the money issue. Not the personal money, money issue - the how I got my personal money issue. Outside of making big piles of money from Drugs and Hookers making big piles of money is the entire good for the GOP. (not so sure about the Hookers if it is Nevada) To the GOP it doesn't matter if you got your piles from gutting companies or making trades every two minutes or off taxpayers or from building an enterprise. The methodology is trumped completely by the big pile not the outcomes as long as it doesn't involve handcuffs. (you could make the case that if the handcuffs result from violating regulations... crickets chirping)
The sin being committed against Mitt is that somebody has the temerity to question the methodology from within the GOP. That is just not done. If you were to stop and think about it for even a moment it might raise questions regarding the "Job Creators" and some of the other themes. That cannot be done. Making big piles of money is the engine and it doesn't matter that those big piles of money are resulting in the impoverishment of our economy... or wrecking the environment or...
Now it is true that Ronnie Reagan made some references to some sort of Eleventh Commandment regarding fellow Republicans. That has been kept mostly in a theoretical sort of way as John McCain might note regarding a South Carolina Primary involving GW Bush. In fact, a bit more recently - like Iowa Caucuses - a certain Newt Gingrich got eviscerated by fellow GOPers without so much as a peep by anyone other than Newt.
You could be forgiven for scoffing at the idea that the GOP problem is with attacks on the front runner, especially since Newt was that guy in Iowa when he got whacked. You'd hurt yourself laughing trying to make the case that attacking Mitt hit the purity of the Party message.
Whew. That leaves the money issue. Not the personal money, money issue - the how I got my personal money issue. Outside of making big piles of money from Drugs and Hookers making big piles of money is the entire good for the GOP. (not so sure about the Hookers if it is Nevada) To the GOP it doesn't matter if you got your piles from gutting companies or making trades every two minutes or off taxpayers or from building an enterprise. The methodology is trumped completely by the big pile not the outcomes as long as it doesn't involve handcuffs. (you could make the case that if the handcuffs result from violating regulations... crickets chirping)
The sin being committed against Mitt is that somebody has the temerity to question the methodology from within the GOP. That is just not done. If you were to stop and think about it for even a moment it might raise questions regarding the "Job Creators" and some of the other themes. That cannot be done. Making big piles of money is the engine and it doesn't matter that those big piles of money are resulting in the impoverishment of our economy... or wrecking the environment or...
Thursday, January 12, 2012
"Roof, Roof," Said The Dog
Maybe Mitten's ability to translate doggisms to patricianisms made for a misunderstanding of "Woof" and resulted in Seamus the Irish Setter diarrhea-ing all over the roof of the Romney family station wagon during a 12 hour drive. If you're a bit worried about your economic status the idea of handing it over to someone who'd hose off the dog and car and continue on his way in the face of the dog's obvious distress may cause pause. If you throw that on the balance with Bain or some of Mitten's prescriptions for the nation, you could get to feeling like a distressed and dismissed dog.
If you'd do that to a dog...
I'd bet clever commenters could come up with "dog themes"
"Morning In America" to be followed by "Dog Day Afternoon" or something really a lot more clever?
If you'd do that to a dog...
I'd bet clever commenters could come up with "dog themes"
"Morning In America" to be followed by "Dog Day Afternoon" or something really a lot more clever?
When You Listen To The GOP...
The latest stuff out of the GOP "elite" (names - not money) is that attacks on the MultipleMitt come from the left and worse are damaging to the "front runner". Now the really odd thing about that argument is that they weren't making it when Newt led in Iowa and Mittens' surrogates gutted him. Now I don't really care which one of these outfits nails the other to their reactionary right wing cross and I could care less if they hit them from the left or populist side.
The huge difficulty every one of these GOPers faces is that what they stand for has driven what they've done and exposed to the light of day, starts to rot - like the gutted fish they ought to be. You really have to ask why Confederate Ron Paul has racist tripe newsletters? You really have to ask why Silver Spoon Plutocrat Mitt has a Bain in his past? You have to ask why... oh hell.
Really?
The huge difficulty every one of these GOPers faces is that what they stand for has driven what they've done and exposed to the light of day, starts to rot - like the gutted fish they ought to be. You really have to ask why Confederate Ron Paul has racist tripe newsletters? You really have to ask why Silver Spoon Plutocrat Mitt has a Bain in his past? You have to ask why... oh hell.
Really?
The Conservative "Return To The Values..."
Just to make what ought to be a self-evident statement, when Romney talks about returning the US to the values that made us great what he is talking about is The Gilded Age, or more properly, The Robber Baron Era. If you look at the tax structures, the regulatory structures, labor policies, and social "norms" he advocates in total, the time you've aped is pre - Teddy Roosevelt.
It is a part of the conservative mind set to promote the status quo; or a previous status quo if the current one is ... out of line with their kindergarten understanding of history. This ought to create some kind of cognitive revolt when the period you're trying to ape is so generally counted as ... sucky?
It is a part of the conservative mind set to promote the status quo; or a previous status quo if the current one is ... out of line with their kindergarten understanding of history. This ought to create some kind of cognitive revolt when the period you're trying to ape is so generally counted as ... sucky?
News Or Stenography
I guess some questions would seem jaw dropping in another era of media, but the NYT actually asks Should The Times Be a Truth Vigilante?. I wonder if the name Judith Miller has dropped out of institutional memory? I wonder if the appellation, paper of record, has any meaning?
There are some things that take awhile to dig out, especially if they've just suddenly popped up. Most political issues aren't in the least like that, particularly with the GOP. Any reporter that is anything more than a stenographer knows about most of the GOP hobby-horses and from a simple understanding ought to know what can be quickly analysed and what is going to take some time. Some things have been around long enough that if the reporter gave a rat's patoot about facts they'd already have gone over that ground and there would be an institutional archive.
Mitt Romney is scarcely a new phenomenon and neither is his bragging about Bain Capitol. If something like Bain Capitol has not already been researched by the NYT you'd have reason to question their competence and if it is already there, for it to not appear in direct juxtaposition to a candidate's claims is a source of question. That would be any candidate's claims regarding Bain. If a politician is going to make claims about "death panels" on whatever side they shouldn't be able to do it without any question by someone who purports to provide news.
There is a very serious difference between being partisan and being objective and there is also a very real difference between objective and being a stenographer. That a politician has something to say is not news, the content my be news. It is immaterial to buy the NYT (or other) to find out what any campaign will be happy to provide - a transcript or their talking points around it. What is meant and its relationship to facts is what actually counts and it is exactly what is not provided.
I'm happy to say that in my contacts with local papers of whatever stripe their questions almost always were directed at illumination rather than obfuscation - the sole offender in that regard was The Oregonian, which also purports to be a "paper of record." I'd see it as hopeful that the NYT asks the question, but I find it too distressing that they'd be in a position to find it necessary. I guess that's the result of a generation's worth of screaming "LIBERAL MEDIA !!!"
There are some things that take awhile to dig out, especially if they've just suddenly popped up. Most political issues aren't in the least like that, particularly with the GOP. Any reporter that is anything more than a stenographer knows about most of the GOP hobby-horses and from a simple understanding ought to know what can be quickly analysed and what is going to take some time. Some things have been around long enough that if the reporter gave a rat's patoot about facts they'd already have gone over that ground and there would be an institutional archive.
Mitt Romney is scarcely a new phenomenon and neither is his bragging about Bain Capitol. If something like Bain Capitol has not already been researched by the NYT you'd have reason to question their competence and if it is already there, for it to not appear in direct juxtaposition to a candidate's claims is a source of question. That would be any candidate's claims regarding Bain. If a politician is going to make claims about "death panels" on whatever side they shouldn't be able to do it without any question by someone who purports to provide news.
There is a very serious difference between being partisan and being objective and there is also a very real difference between objective and being a stenographer. That a politician has something to say is not news, the content my be news. It is immaterial to buy the NYT (or other) to find out what any campaign will be happy to provide - a transcript or their talking points around it. What is meant and its relationship to facts is what actually counts and it is exactly what is not provided.
I'm happy to say that in my contacts with local papers of whatever stripe their questions almost always were directed at illumination rather than obfuscation - the sole offender in that regard was The Oregonian, which also purports to be a "paper of record." I'd see it as hopeful that the NYT asks the question, but I find it too distressing that they'd be in a position to find it necessary. I guess that's the result of a generation's worth of screaming "LIBERAL MEDIA !!!"
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
The Bane of Bain or Mitt's Ba(i)ne?
I'm sorry to take such delight in the (mis)fortune of others. It's true I've poked away at poor mis-used Mitt over his unemployment difficulties and even his pink slip worries. I've had mean things to say about corporate raiders and maybe even meaner things to say about some lying wealthy SOBs.
All that just doesn't begin to cover my delight in watching Mitt get attacked from his right on the left. Uh, yes I did say his Right. I'll bet you thought (I did) he'd get creamed for being a "secret" liberal. I'll be go to hell, he's getting it in the neck for being a plutocrat from GOPers.
Don't worry too much, they aren't going all socialist on us, no fears they'll out left President Obama. This will all sort itself out before the General Election and all plutocrat all the time will be back into GOP songs.
I do get great joy out of almost 2/3 of GOPers being ABMs. You can pretty much figure there are going to be hard feelings.
All that just doesn't begin to cover my delight in watching Mitt get attacked from his right on the left. Uh, yes I did say his Right. I'll bet you thought (I did) he'd get creamed for being a "secret" liberal. I'll be go to hell, he's getting it in the neck for being a plutocrat from GOPers.
Don't worry too much, they aren't going all socialist on us, no fears they'll out left President Obama. This will all sort itself out before the General Election and all plutocrat all the time will be back into GOP songs.
I do get great joy out of almost 2/3 of GOPers being ABMs. You can pretty much figure there are going to be hard feelings.
What Is Too Stupid For NYT OpEd?
It seems from campaigning that maybe Mittens wishes that NYT had said his attack on the auto industry government deal wasn't good enough and wasn't out there to haunt him. Well, sure that's one thing but maybe Bill Keller's Hillary VP OpEd should have gotten the spike. You can read the thing for yourself to see what sort of silliness this thing gets up to in order to make its case, but I'd suggest saving your time and just laughing.
I'm not going to go into it, I read it to see if it was nearly as stupid as it sounded - it was (edit) worse. (h/t JG -BJ)
I'm not going to go into it, I read it to see if it was nearly as stupid as it sounded - it was (edit) worse. (h/t JG -BJ)
Monday, January 09, 2012
Who Gets To Have Nice Things?
DAVID GREGORY: All right. We're gonna come back to the question of obstacles to the nomination, but let me get to policy, Governor Huntsman. This is, by all accounts, an age of austerity for this country. A jobs crisis. Also a spending crisis in Washington. I wonder what specifically you would do to say to Americans, "These are cuts I'm going to make in federal spending that cause pain, that will require sacrifice?"
From the MTP "debate" transcript.
By all accounts... Age Of Austerity... Jobs Crisis... Spending Crisis... Sacrifice.
Hmmm. You know, if you took all those themes and addressed them as regarding working and poor Americans you might really have something. They are not, of course, regarding working/poor Americans other than the SACRIFICE. Every one of the people this horseshit question was addressed to has a tax plan up that would cut the taxes on wealth and increase the taxes on work and cut programs designed to keep people out of abject poverty.
If you were to read the comments on the MTP Debate transcript you'd find a whole lot of them attacking Gregory for being a LIBERAL trying to stir up trouble and - by the way - shorting Ron Paul's time to be a Confederate.
You would think that from the time of St Ronnie the Raygun there'd be enough data laying around to make something like a coherent case for something in regard to tax policy and the state of the economy. Well - it happens there is. The really big problem is that it doesn't support Clinton era tax rates much less StRR or GWB. The case that gets made in regard to the overall economic health is that StRR screwed things up and pretty much everybody made things worse and Bill Clinton only managed to mildly stem the tide in some regards.
Working/poor Americans have been sacrificing every damn day from StRR on in one way or another. Some of them tried to avoid that sacrifice and used their houses as a credit card or profit center but most just kept working harder for less while watching their betters rake in more of the scraps that might have fallen off the banquet table.
Now you have - no shit - the kid of Geo Romney talking about being "unemployed" and having to worry "about getting a pink slip," as if he had a worry about falling into the lap of luxury instead of off the face of the freaking earth. This is the kind of crap that gets served up as a goddam question by the goddam liberal elite media by talking head that has about as much to worry about or goddam sacrifice as Willard Mitt Romney does.
Mittens seems to make about $15M per year for doing nothing for Bain Capital (numbers vary - mostly up) which sounds like a bit of money, but probably ought to get taken in the context of $43K/yr median income family of four which works out to be 349 of them. Yes you suckers, Mittens makes that much money being un-damned-employed. Taken another way, he virtually makes DAILY that median income.
How it could be made much clearer to the rubes that these guys want to give themselves and their pals a big break while cutting your throat is way the hell beyond me. I don't begrudge these bastards their wealth... but I'm not hot on the idea of being their human sacrifice.
Wolf Wonders
At 1:13 PM during an interview regarding the Perry campaign talking about Mitten's job destruction record Wolf wondered if after the Primary they'd talk about the "tens of thousands of jobs Bain created at Staples and..." Nothing to indicate that this was an assertion of Mittens with any questions involved about the numbers. Stated as bald fact.
Gee, would one have cause to "wonder" if Mittens is Wolf's boy?
Oh yeah, "the liberal media"
*UPDATE
About twenty minutes later Wolf has POW on and feeds him the line about job creation and then goes on the fluff Bain, himself. Correcting the record is laudable - repeating a campaign's talking points is a bit of a different horse. CNN - news? There are a lot of measures of Bain, including how many jobs under their direction and what kind of paying jobs were involved - Wolf couldn't be bothered...
Gee, would one have cause to "wonder" if Mittens is Wolf's boy?
Oh yeah, "the liberal media"
*UPDATE
About twenty minutes later Wolf has POW on and feeds him the line about job creation and then goes on the fluff Bain, himself. Correcting the record is laudable - repeating a campaign's talking points is a bit of a different horse. CNN - news? There are a lot of measures of Bain, including how many jobs under their direction and what kind of paying jobs were involved - Wolf couldn't be bothered...
Sunday, January 08, 2012
Sanctimony Of What?
The GOPers all seem to have jumped on a sanctimonious train. Some how, some way sanctified has come to mean something most of us were unaware of. You know that county clerk you went to when you got your marriage license, that person has somehow become an agent of GOD.
I give you Merriam Webster online
sanctity
1: holiness of life and character : godliness
2 a: the quality or state of being holy or sacred
: inviolability bplural: sacred objects, obligations, or rights
Now back to that county clerk thing, that person would be an agent of the State, the ones drawing up the regulations regarding getting married. You may have noticed that the clerk let you get that license even though you hadn't, oh say converted. You see, Newt -et al; the clerk is following laws written by the State and isn't in the least interested in your view of religion in this regard. What that clerk is interested in and the State is interested in is that civil contract you're just about to engage in. You'd be forgiven for thinking that Newt, at the least, would be real familiar with the civil aspect of that contract considering the outcomes of trying to get out of it - in simple speak, divorce.
Now I'm not arguing that the State shouldn't set conditions on civil contracts but it is a pretty simple statement that all law-abiding citizens should have equal treatment under the law, ie: the same rights and responsibilities. I've been married for over twenty years and frankly if gays want to go there they are welcome to my club. It isn't like there aren't outcomes that aren't all rainbows and ponies... even avoiding the nastiness of divorce.
* Oh c'mon, which one of you is gonna claim you're a peach to be around day after day after day after... every day?
I give you Merriam Webster online
sanctity
1: holiness of life and character : godliness
2 a: the quality or state of being holy or sacred
: inviolability bplural: sacred objects, obligations, or rights
Now back to that county clerk thing, that person would be an agent of the State, the ones drawing up the regulations regarding getting married. You may have noticed that the clerk let you get that license even though you hadn't, oh say converted. You see, Newt -et al; the clerk is following laws written by the State and isn't in the least interested in your view of religion in this regard. What that clerk is interested in and the State is interested in is that civil contract you're just about to engage in. You'd be forgiven for thinking that Newt, at the least, would be real familiar with the civil aspect of that contract considering the outcomes of trying to get out of it - in simple speak, divorce.
Now I'm not arguing that the State shouldn't set conditions on civil contracts but it is a pretty simple statement that all law-abiding citizens should have equal treatment under the law, ie: the same rights and responsibilities. I've been married for over twenty years and frankly if gays want to go there they are welcome to my club. It isn't like there aren't outcomes that aren't all rainbows and ponies... even avoiding the nastiness of divorce.
* Oh c'mon, which one of you is gonna claim you're a peach to be around day after day after day after... every day?
All Hat And No...
So, Rick Perry wants to put troops back in Iraq? Just to mangle that saying: he's now demonstrated that he's all hat and no filler between the ears.
Saturday, January 07, 2012
GOPer Second Round. Can I Take Much More?
To recap, Mitt doesn't have a lot of blood in the water, but there is some pink tint. It is funny to watch Paul and Santorum joust. I hate to use the word reasonable and a GOPer in the same sentence much less next to each other, but Huntsman.
State's right to ban contraception - Mitt? No answer. Seems to ignore MS.
I can't take much more of this stuff,
if you've been amused, I'm sorry. My brain is melting away cells it can't afford to lose. I'm done.
The Sacrement of Marriage makes me want to puke. Which one of these folks got their Marriage License from a church? It is a goddam civil contract.
Screw this shit.
State's right to ban contraception - Mitt? No answer. Seems to ignore MS.
I can't take much more of this stuff,
if you've been amused, I'm sorry. My brain is melting away cells it can't afford to lose. I'm done.
The Sacrement of Marriage makes me want to puke. Which one of these folks got their Marriage License from a church? It is a goddam civil contract.
Screw this shit.
GOPers Cont...
Paul v spending, Santorum a big spender. Santorum - uhuh?
Perry - I'm the outsider. Get Teabaggers behind nominee. Nobody seems to be buying it. In TX we call Paul's earmarking voting against it hypocrisy - uh, yup.
Santorum - I tried to do something, did something.
uh oh, CIC
Huntsman - vision, leadership - I've got it, leadership that can be trusted. I heard that as a hit against Romney. Term limits.
Romney - Huntsman can do a lot better than Obama - one error after another. Failed Presidency. Integrity? From multiplemitt? Obama shrunk the military?
Perry - CIC in TX? WTF? Ah, money from the military to spend somewhere else.
Newt - child of vet. hmmm.
Paul - deferrments. I went. Vets messed up from undeclared war. Chickenhawk accusation.
Newt is pretty unhappy.
Uhoh - newsletters
Twenty years ago, didn't write. MLK a personal hero - pacifistic libertarianism - er, MLK Day?
first round - thank god
Perry - I'm the outsider. Get Teabaggers behind nominee. Nobody seems to be buying it. In TX we call Paul's earmarking voting against it hypocrisy - uh, yup.
Santorum - I tried to do something, did something.
uh oh, CIC
Huntsman - vision, leadership - I've got it, leadership that can be trusted. I heard that as a hit against Romney. Term limits.
Romney - Huntsman can do a lot better than Obama - one error after another. Failed Presidency. Integrity? From multiplemitt? Obama shrunk the military?
Perry - CIC in TX? WTF? Ah, money from the military to spend somewhere else.
Newt - child of vet. hmmm.
Paul - deferrments. I went. Vets messed up from undeclared war. Chickenhawk accusation.
Newt is pretty unhappy.
Uhoh - newsletters
Twenty years ago, didn't write. MLK a personal hero - pacifistic libertarianism - er, MLK Day?
first round - thank god
LIve Blog The GOPers - Masochism?
Romney, Obama has made the recession worse and longer. Obama as rooster taking credit for sun rising. Heh.
Santorum on not needing a manager - huh? OH, CEO isn't what a President is. True.
Romney wants us to connect him with entrepenures building businesses from the ground up - huh?
Newt - Romney taking apart companies.
Romney - surprised to see people on his stage taking on FREE ENTERPRISE
Huntsman - records count. My record v the rest of you.
Romney - Private sector counts - I'm the private sector.
Paul - Santorum is a big govt person, oops - lobbiests.
Santorum - CREW called me corrupt - ah Geo Soros - same stuff about PA getting its fair share back. I'm a CAUSE GUY. I'm a lobbiest - for all the right guys.
Santorum on not needing a manager - huh? OH, CEO isn't what a President is. True.
Romney wants us to connect him with entrepenures building businesses from the ground up - huh?
Newt - Romney taking apart companies.
Romney - surprised to see people on his stage taking on FREE ENTERPRISE
Huntsman - records count. My record v the rest of you.
Romney - Private sector counts - I'm the private sector.
Paul - Santorum is a big govt person, oops - lobbiests.
Santorum - CREW called me corrupt - ah Geo Soros - same stuff about PA getting its fair share back. I'm a CAUSE GUY. I'm a lobbiest - for all the right guys.
Friday, January 06, 2012
ABM And MultipleMitt.. and genetics?
You have to look at Mitt Romney and today's GOP and wonder how in hell you've got this situation where a guy like Mittens will just win, anyhow. There are a lot of ways I can laugh at the ABMs, but their dislike of Romney just isn't one of them. I understand, in ways that would offend them, just what it is they're up in arms about. It isn't about purity of view, it is about a fraud sticking the con down their throats.
It is true that what the ABMs have got to work with is pretty pathetic and there are a lot of them. Yes, that "a lot of them" does mean split votes letting pathetic Romney numbers count as victories. The recurring ABM implosions is what tells the story, those voters run away from losers once they've defined themselves as losers. They don't want MultipleMitt, but they've got nothing to work with so they will get stuck with him.
Considering the enthusiasm for ABM you have to ask why the ABM field sucks so badly. If this mess had started in '08 you could understand prospective candidates taking measure of Obama and saying, "uhuh, no way." That wasn't the case, the '10 elections had happened and the economy stinks and current Presidents get to own stinking economies. The odds of success against Obama should have measured as high when this got put together and good candidates come out in force. Instead, you have this clown car parade led by MultipleMitt.
Do you suppose I'd be going out on a limb to propose that what created this situation is the composition of the ABM electorate? In the face of Mitt they could have Huntsman, could... They don't want him even though he isn't the fraud Mittens is. What Huntsman isn't, is the brand of crazy they want. Yes, I finally got to the word "crazy." Now how the hell do you want crazy and applaud crazy and not get someone who is crazy and flawed?
Here's the thing ABMs, while you may make up the majority of the GOP Primary voters, your problem is that you're only that 27%+/- loon section of the electorate and your gene pool is pretty damned limited. You are getting what you breed.
It is true that what the ABMs have got to work with is pretty pathetic and there are a lot of them. Yes, that "a lot of them" does mean split votes letting pathetic Romney numbers count as victories. The recurring ABM implosions is what tells the story, those voters run away from losers once they've defined themselves as losers. They don't want MultipleMitt, but they've got nothing to work with so they will get stuck with him.
Considering the enthusiasm for ABM you have to ask why the ABM field sucks so badly. If this mess had started in '08 you could understand prospective candidates taking measure of Obama and saying, "uhuh, no way." That wasn't the case, the '10 elections had happened and the economy stinks and current Presidents get to own stinking economies. The odds of success against Obama should have measured as high when this got put together and good candidates come out in force. Instead, you have this clown car parade led by MultipleMitt.
Do you suppose I'd be going out on a limb to propose that what created this situation is the composition of the ABM electorate? In the face of Mitt they could have Huntsman, could... They don't want him even though he isn't the fraud Mittens is. What Huntsman isn't, is the brand of crazy they want. Yes, I finally got to the word "crazy." Now how the hell do you want crazy and applaud crazy and not get someone who is crazy and flawed?
Here's the thing ABMs, while you may make up the majority of the GOP Primary voters, your problem is that you're only that 27%+/- loon section of the electorate and your gene pool is pretty damned limited. You are getting what you breed.
Mittens And Taxes - On And On We Go
It has been pretty clear to anybody with two live brain cells in communication that the Federal Tax Policies proposed by the ABMs would result in great big tax breaks for the overburdened wealthy and large hits to everybody in escalating effects down scale. Now - in a huge surprise to everybody dead in the head - Mitten's plan has been shown to do the same thing.
It just goes on for-goddam-ever. Most of the voters in the country will be harmed in one way or another by this and over 40% would vote for MultipleMitt, anyhow. I know there's nothing new in this...
It just goes on for-goddam-ever. Most of the voters in the country will be harmed in one way or another by this and over 40% would vote for MultipleMitt, anyhow. I know there's nothing new in this...
Blah, Blah, Blah
Well, you have to give Rick (don't google me) Santorum credit for almost covering the Republican theme honestly. You know the theme, those "blah" people stealing hard working "why" people's money. Just lacking a certain coherence in consonants.
There certainly is some epic stealing going on, the problem is that it is by the (consonantly deprived) "ri" people. It would be deficient on my part both practically and consonantly to not note that they aren't just "ri" but "why" people; they certainly aren't "poo" people indicated by Santorum.
Just to be fair about it all, "Don't Google Me" isn't alone in the talk, just the part where there was a mistake involving consonants...
(I could have a bit of fun with the consonant thing but it would render both my writing unintelligible and probably my speech as well)
There certainly is some epic stealing going on, the problem is that it is by the (consonantly deprived) "ri" people. It would be deficient on my part both practically and consonantly to not note that they aren't just "ri" but "why" people; they certainly aren't "poo" people indicated by Santorum.
Just to be fair about it all, "Don't Google Me" isn't alone in the talk, just the part where there was a mistake involving consonants...
(I could have a bit of fun with the consonant thing but it would render both my writing unintelligible and probably my speech as well)
Thursday, January 05, 2012
Politics As A Suicide Pact
It hasn't been real unusual for Iowa GOPers to come up with some odd results, I mean historically it isn't as though Mike Huckabee happened in the Dark Ages before... well, anyhow. Here we are now with Mitt Romney and his bazillions of dollars and 2:1 PAC spending tied with little Rick Santorum - Mr Don't Even Google My Name - Catholic theocratic Abramoff/DeLay lap-dog. Given the past half decade of Catholic News stories being their alter boy ought to be a questionable public relations stunt. I can see how "blue collar parents" out plays "silver spoon in the kazoo" but somehow it seems that if Obama can get past the Kenya Daddy thing... Oh - wrong Party.
Rick Santorum is packing as much baggage the Right won't like as Mittens is. Oh it is a bit of a different variety since Rick didn't govern a state, but oooh boy does he have some reeking going on. It might be a bit difficult to reconcile his forced abortion Marianas Ils support with his conception-ism - even if there were big bucks for friends in the former. I don't think Newt shines sufficiently on this particular issue to lay a whacking on Rick.
The whopping Mitts PACs gave to Newt seems to have P-O'ed him a bit. After a moment's reflection answering the question of are you calling Mitt a liar, "Yes," is pretty ... ummm ... uncivil in political terms, even when talking about the other Party's members. Democrats don't seem to do that much at all and in regard to one's fellow Party member even when quite true will probably be pretty heavily counselled against. Maybe the ABMs braying for bloody Mittens will eat it up but I'm not so sure about how broad that sentiment is when it is their own brand name. I doubt it would offend even the most bland of Mittens' dollar men if it were about that guy currently in the White House but - whoa Nellie, Mittens wears an R. (well when convenient, anyhow)
Really, while it is pretty funny to think of any of these GOPers getting all up in the air and calling "liar" about any of the others and not having their collective noses grow; it isn't going to make coming together later all that easy. It may have been stupid for the Mittenpacs to nuke Newt considering who he is and just how much a threat he'd have been in the long haul, but if Newt's reaction to it is as telegraphed by that interview we may have reached a point where MAD (ok, mutual assured destruction) has been enacted as action rather than deterrent. The limits to that particular activity are exactly who the hell has standing.
I whole heartedly approve of the self-destruction of what the GOP has become. It is well past the time for lunacy and destruction of governance to stop being a political platform. I don't know how many pieces they'd splinter into, don't care, but it is not at all good to have a party of crazed plutocrats/theocrats opposed by the not quite crazed plutocrat party. Maybe three parties, crazed plutocrat, crazed theocrat, and crazed people's party would work. I don't know, but the result of the two theo/pluto - crat versus a not really opposition party isn't good. (you will notice that I said not spit about a mythical "crazed middle party") You get voters with a choice between dangerously deranged and "not as bad as" and big money busily buying anything not nailed down and valueless.
Republicans took the dominance engendered by the Civil War and let it become the recipient of the influence of big business and big money and later the resentment of the logical outcome of the War - Civil Rights - combine. It may be the politics of resentment that brought along the theocrats or possibly their native turf being home to its hotbed, but somehow you have a political Party that is the champion of unbridled wealth, melted together with the un-natural bed-fellows of race resentment and biblical governance and that, my friends, is a suicide pact and Iowa is the prophet.
The Democratic tent holds a large and frequently squabbling crowd, but their differences primarily involve who is in the front seats rather than diametrically opposed combatants. Mittens and Santorum are supposedly two faces of that with Newt's meanness thrown in for leavening. What may save Mitt is that while he really is that corporate raiding silver spoon unprincipled plutocrat, all his attackers have is the illusion that they aren't the same things. Hell, that may be what keeps the Republican Party intact - every one of them is a lying sack lying to people who want to be lied to.
What will ruin the Democratic Party is that the GOP is so damned crazy that they look sane despite where they follow the GOP.
*Edit
No, I am aware that I didn't bring up Ron Paul. That is because they are only GOP by default, not enthusiasm. I know their racism and 'fuck you I got mine' seems GOPer, but only on the fringes. They truly are the heirs of ole Jeff Davis rather than the panderers to him that the GOP is - other than the hangers on with their momentary enthusiasms for what they think "Drug War" and "Military Adventurisms" means in Paul-speak.
Rick Santorum is packing as much baggage the Right won't like as Mittens is. Oh it is a bit of a different variety since Rick didn't govern a state, but oooh boy does he have some reeking going on. It might be a bit difficult to reconcile his forced abortion Marianas Ils support with his conception-ism - even if there were big bucks for friends in the former. I don't think Newt shines sufficiently on this particular issue to lay a whacking on Rick.
The whopping Mitts PACs gave to Newt seems to have P-O'ed him a bit. After a moment's reflection answering the question of are you calling Mitt a liar, "Yes," is pretty ... ummm ... uncivil in political terms, even when talking about the other Party's members. Democrats don't seem to do that much at all and in regard to one's fellow Party member even when quite true will probably be pretty heavily counselled against. Maybe the ABMs braying for bloody Mittens will eat it up but I'm not so sure about how broad that sentiment is when it is their own brand name. I doubt it would offend even the most bland of Mittens' dollar men if it were about that guy currently in the White House but - whoa Nellie, Mittens wears an R. (well when convenient, anyhow)
Really, while it is pretty funny to think of any of these GOPers getting all up in the air and calling "liar" about any of the others and not having their collective noses grow; it isn't going to make coming together later all that easy. It may have been stupid for the Mittenpacs to nuke Newt considering who he is and just how much a threat he'd have been in the long haul, but if Newt's reaction to it is as telegraphed by that interview we may have reached a point where MAD (ok, mutual assured destruction) has been enacted as action rather than deterrent. The limits to that particular activity are exactly who the hell has standing.
I whole heartedly approve of the self-destruction of what the GOP has become. It is well past the time for lunacy and destruction of governance to stop being a political platform. I don't know how many pieces they'd splinter into, don't care, but it is not at all good to have a party of crazed plutocrats/theocrats opposed by the not quite crazed plutocrat party. Maybe three parties, crazed plutocrat, crazed theocrat, and crazed people's party would work. I don't know, but the result of the two theo/pluto - crat versus a not really opposition party isn't good. (you will notice that I said not spit about a mythical "crazed middle party") You get voters with a choice between dangerously deranged and "not as bad as" and big money busily buying anything not nailed down and valueless.
Republicans took the dominance engendered by the Civil War and let it become the recipient of the influence of big business and big money and later the resentment of the logical outcome of the War - Civil Rights - combine. It may be the politics of resentment that brought along the theocrats or possibly their native turf being home to its hotbed, but somehow you have a political Party that is the champion of unbridled wealth, melted together with the un-natural bed-fellows of race resentment and biblical governance and that, my friends, is a suicide pact and Iowa is the prophet.
The Democratic tent holds a large and frequently squabbling crowd, but their differences primarily involve who is in the front seats rather than diametrically opposed combatants. Mittens and Santorum are supposedly two faces of that with Newt's meanness thrown in for leavening. What may save Mitt is that while he really is that corporate raiding silver spoon unprincipled plutocrat, all his attackers have is the illusion that they aren't the same things. Hell, that may be what keeps the Republican Party intact - every one of them is a lying sack lying to people who want to be lied to.
What will ruin the Democratic Party is that the GOP is so damned crazy that they look sane despite where they follow the GOP.
*Edit
No, I am aware that I didn't bring up Ron Paul. That is because they are only GOP by default, not enthusiasm. I know their racism and 'fuck you I got mine' seems GOPer, but only on the fringes. They truly are the heirs of ole Jeff Davis rather than the panderers to him that the GOP is - other than the hangers on with their momentary enthusiasms for what they think "Drug War" and "Military Adventurisms" means in Paul-speak.
Tuesday, January 03, 2012
Reading Assignment - Charles Pierce
I read Charles Pierce over at Esquire's Daily Politics Blog regularly, partly for the politics but mostly for the writing. Charles Pierce does what I aspire to, and what I know how short I fall from doing. Pierce isn't for the fan of equivocation, but does use splendid language. If You haven't already, go check him out.
Twas A Dark And Stormy Night
Out in GOPland and especially the ABM faction, it has to be that sort of feeling. What you've got is the hard core Ron Paul faux-libertarian bunch who really, really like the standard bearer of The Confederate Party of Republicanism but once you get past that bunch ... Wow, the Romney PACs sure did a job on our favorite salamander which has left not so much other than late comer Santorum. (you make the jokes - Google) Paul will be around all the way to the end, the question is who else will.
Now if you look at the others beyond Ron Paul you see momentary poll enthusiasm followed by disregard. That isn't the behavior of a happy electorate. It sure isn't the behavior of a happy electorate for the presumptive nominee to be hanging around 27%; regardless of the size of the current field.
I have no idea how this parade of clown cars is going to play itself out. It is silly to ignore what Goldwater, Nixon, Reagan, ad infinitum actually were but I won't propose that today's GOP is the same Party rather than an out-growth and maybe natural consequence of its century long history. That makes predicting where the current GOP will jump a pretty iffy proposition. It is starting to look as though the enthusiasm will be composed of not much more than getting rid of the guy currently in the White House. It will be difficult to get much going with those not deep into the hate Obama camp if the GOP itself just tolerates its own candidate.
Six months ago this might have been the GOP's election to win, it now looks as though it might just not be.
Now if you look at the others beyond Ron Paul you see momentary poll enthusiasm followed by disregard. That isn't the behavior of a happy electorate. It sure isn't the behavior of a happy electorate for the presumptive nominee to be hanging around 27%; regardless of the size of the current field.
I have no idea how this parade of clown cars is going to play itself out. It is silly to ignore what Goldwater, Nixon, Reagan, ad infinitum actually were but I won't propose that today's GOP is the same Party rather than an out-growth and maybe natural consequence of its century long history. That makes predicting where the current GOP will jump a pretty iffy proposition. It is starting to look as though the enthusiasm will be composed of not much more than getting rid of the guy currently in the White House. It will be difficult to get much going with those not deep into the hate Obama camp if the GOP itself just tolerates its own candidate.
Six months ago this might have been the GOP's election to win, it now looks as though it might just not be.
Newt - Mitt Is A Liar
So Newt shocks an interviewer by saying that MultipleMitt is a liar. That is a shock? It sure is shocking that the word actually got used, but in relation to Mittens it had to be coming but when lobbed by Newt it does seem a bit odd. Actually, I'm pretty sure damn near every GOPer should avoid the word like a plague if they don't want it freely applied to themselves.
I pretty much forgive exaggeration, a candidate for freshmean House seat sure isn't going to get far by being realistic about the impact of freshman Reps. There are some things like the Mittens ad using Obama quoting the McCain campaign as Obama's own words that isn't exaggeration but an out and out lie. If you're a Democrat looking at the GOP and expect anything different, you're ... being silly. If there is a question about the regard such things are held in, it applies to the un-affiliated. Don't hold your breath.
I pretty much forgive exaggeration, a candidate for freshmean House seat sure isn't going to get far by being realistic about the impact of freshman Reps. There are some things like the Mittens ad using Obama quoting the McCain campaign as Obama's own words that isn't exaggeration but an out and out lie. If you're a Democrat looking at the GOP and expect anything different, you're ... being silly. If there is a question about the regard such things are held in, it applies to the un-affiliated. Don't hold your breath.
Saturday, December 31, 2011
A Laugh For Starting The New Year
My Mom sent this to me, thought you could use a laugh to start 2021
Ole's car was hit by a truck in an accident. In court, the trucking company's lawyer was questioning Ole.
'Didn't you say, sir, at the scene of the accident, 'I'm fine, ?' asked the lawyer.
Ole responded, 'Vell, I'll tell you vat happened. I had yust loaded my favorite mule, Bessie, into da.....'
'I didn't ask for any details', the lawyer interrupted. 'Just answer the question. Did you not say, at the scene of the accident, 'I'm fine'?
Ole said, 'Vell, I had yust got Bessie into da trailer and I vas driving down da road... ..
The lawyer interrupted again and said, 'Judge, I am trying to establish the fact that, at the scene of the accident, this man told the Highway Patrolman on the scene that he was just fine. Now several weeks after the accident he is trying to sue my client. I believe he is a fraud. Please tell him to simply answer the question.'
By this time, the Judge was fairly interested in Ole's answer and said to the lawyer, 'I'd like to hear what he has to say about his favorite mule, Bessie'.
Ole thanked the Judge and proceeded. 'Vell, as I vas saying, I had yust loaded Bessie, my favorite mule, into da trailer and vas driving her down da highvay ven dis huge semi-truck and trailer ran da stop sign and smacked my truck right in da side. I vas trown into one ditch and Bessie vas trown into da other. I vas hurting real bad and didn't vant to move. However, I could hear Bessie moaning and groaning. I knew she was in terrible shape yust by her groans'. 'Shortly after da accident da Highway Patrolman, he came to da scene.. He could hear Bessie moaning and groaning so he vent over to her'..
'After he looked at her and saw her fatal condition he took out his gun and shot her right 'tween da eyes.
Den da Patrolman, he came across da road, gun still smoking, looked at me and said, 'How are you feeling?'
'Now vut da hell vould YOU say?
Ole's car was hit by a truck in an accident. In court, the trucking company's lawyer was questioning Ole.
'Didn't you say, sir, at the scene of the accident, 'I'm fine, ?' asked the lawyer.
Ole responded, 'Vell, I'll tell you vat happened. I had yust loaded my favorite mule, Bessie, into da.....'
'I didn't ask for any details', the lawyer interrupted. 'Just answer the question. Did you not say, at the scene of the accident, 'I'm fine'?
Ole said, 'Vell, I had yust got Bessie into da trailer and I vas driving down da road... ..
The lawyer interrupted again and said, 'Judge, I am trying to establish the fact that, at the scene of the accident, this man told the Highway Patrolman on the scene that he was just fine. Now several weeks after the accident he is trying to sue my client. I believe he is a fraud. Please tell him to simply answer the question.'
By this time, the Judge was fairly interested in Ole's answer and said to the lawyer, 'I'd like to hear what he has to say about his favorite mule, Bessie'.
Ole thanked the Judge and proceeded. 'Vell, as I vas saying, I had yust loaded Bessie, my favorite mule, into da trailer and vas driving her down da highvay ven dis huge semi-truck and trailer ran da stop sign and smacked my truck right in da side. I vas trown into one ditch and Bessie vas trown into da other. I vas hurting real bad and didn't vant to move. However, I could hear Bessie moaning and groaning. I knew she was in terrible shape yust by her groans'. 'Shortly after da accident da Highway Patrolman, he came to da scene.. He could hear Bessie moaning and groaning so he vent over to her'..
'After he looked at her and saw her fatal condition he took out his gun and shot her right 'tween da eyes.
Den da Patrolman, he came across da road, gun still smoking, looked at me and said, 'How are you feeling?'
'Now vut da hell vould YOU say?
Ron Paul - There Is A Difference
I've been hearing lately about some "liberal" love for Ron Paul. I don't know about this, I hear things that frequently sound like something but have no weight. Just to act as though there is something to this, I'll go to the heart of some of the nonsense.
Yes, Ron Paul is against the Federal Drug War and that somehow puts him to the left of Obama and maybe the Democratic Party. I don't like the Federal Drug War but I don't propose the having the States wage it is some kind of improvement or somehow Left of any damn thing. I don't see where there are benefits to be gained from being executed in Mississippi for smoking pot and taxed in California.
I don't like wars of adventurism, or frankly - any of them. I can actually be persuaded that it has to be done, but the operative word there is "has." I don't propose that the way to avoid foreign wars is to disengage. I'll agree that the US is stupidly reflexively supportive of Israel and quick to forgive that nation's anti-democratic and theocratic behavior while bashing its neighbors for the same things but it is an entirely different matter to propose its abolition as a state.
I'm not in the least in favor of indefinite detention or other of the National Security tomfoolery but that doesn't put me in the camp of opposing the Civil Rights Act as though entire states and a region didn't use law to treat citizens as a despised second class. Ron Paul would have you believe it was an un-necessary infringement of liberty to make people stop doing that. He'd love to have the Civil War undone.
As for his "consistency" I'd have to question that in regards to the professed Libertarian view of not interfering in citizen's lives in view of his stance on abortion and actual Federal legislation he's written to interfere with it. He's perfectly fine with mucking around in a women's uterus as a Federal agent, but then men don't have such a thing. Maybe more to the point is that white men don't have them...
It matters how you get to a position. Let's say you and I agree to meet at a parking lot at noon. I leave early and drive carefully arriving at noon. You leave late and arrive at noon with your car beat to hell and smashed cars and run down pedestrians in your wake. We're both in the parking lot at noon, but you're a criminal asshole and I'm not.
Ron Paul is not to the left of anything other than Ghengis Khan.
Yes, Ron Paul is against the Federal Drug War and that somehow puts him to the left of Obama and maybe the Democratic Party. I don't like the Federal Drug War but I don't propose the having the States wage it is some kind of improvement or somehow Left of any damn thing. I don't see where there are benefits to be gained from being executed in Mississippi for smoking pot and taxed in California.
I don't like wars of adventurism, or frankly - any of them. I can actually be persuaded that it has to be done, but the operative word there is "has." I don't propose that the way to avoid foreign wars is to disengage. I'll agree that the US is stupidly reflexively supportive of Israel and quick to forgive that nation's anti-democratic and theocratic behavior while bashing its neighbors for the same things but it is an entirely different matter to propose its abolition as a state.
I'm not in the least in favor of indefinite detention or other of the National Security tomfoolery but that doesn't put me in the camp of opposing the Civil Rights Act as though entire states and a region didn't use law to treat citizens as a despised second class. Ron Paul would have you believe it was an un-necessary infringement of liberty to make people stop doing that. He'd love to have the Civil War undone.
As for his "consistency" I'd have to question that in regards to the professed Libertarian view of not interfering in citizen's lives in view of his stance on abortion and actual Federal legislation he's written to interfere with it. He's perfectly fine with mucking around in a women's uterus as a Federal agent, but then men don't have such a thing. Maybe more to the point is that white men don't have them...
It matters how you get to a position. Let's say you and I agree to meet at a parking lot at noon. I leave early and drive carefully arriving at noon. You leave late and arrive at noon with your car beat to hell and smashed cars and run down pedestrians in your wake. We're both in the parking lot at noon, but you're a criminal asshole and I'm not.
Ron Paul is not to the left of anything other than Ghengis Khan.
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
The ABMs Are Gonna Be Pissed
It wasn't a real surprise when the Establishment GOP and its hangers on started to pile on to Newt. It may have surprised Newt, but it shouldn't have. Once Perry's head exploded publicly those folks had no place to go but MultipleMitt. Be assured, despite the endorsements and the Newt kicking they didn't want Mitt either. Well, he's one of them, you say - nope. Mitt is a Mormon Robot from corporate raiderhood. First of all, the candidate is supposed to be a Christian and second - you don't let the marks in on the scam, no broken companies, layoffs, and gadzillion profits doing it. No, rich is fine, a plutocratic tool desirable, but a shape shifting ruthless job raper with the personality of a board is not fine.
Three years ago they had no hope of winning, now that they've broken government's function of governing they do actually have a chance and they want to badly. They're seriously hamstrung with MultipleMitt but Newt was a ticking time bomb. They are, of course, scandalized enough by R Paul to keep real quiet and they pay no attention to the other loons, but Perry was supposed to do the job after all their first choices bailed on the idea. Newt as the last to rise and near IA Caucuses had to be stomped even though Mitt would be the beneficiary.
The ABMs are pretty screwed. Despite the racism and assorted bigotry, forced birthism, god-bothering and general screw the poor that Paul packs around with him - he misses real big on war and dope. Bachmann and Santorum are crazy enough, but just the wrong crazy. Perry should have been it, then he opened his mouth. Newt is getting cannonaded from all sides by the Establishment; so where have they got to go?
I don't know, but the ABMs are gonna have some real resentments when they start going to the polls. It might dawn on them that they're being played for the rubes... again. Mitt can go on all the TV shows in the world and even "poke fun" at himself and the result for the ABMs will be ... nnaaahhh.
Yeah, if Perry doesn't rise and Newt keeps sliding it will be Newt, the possibly electable one, and the ABMs will feel about like Democrats would have if Hoe LIEberman had been the 08 candidate.(not real unreasonably) I just shake my head.
(It would pay to think about Newt being hit with 2400 negative ads mostly from SuperPacs in the last 2wks in IA, of all places - CU Decision)
Three years ago they had no hope of winning, now that they've broken government's function of governing they do actually have a chance and they want to badly. They're seriously hamstrung with MultipleMitt but Newt was a ticking time bomb. They are, of course, scandalized enough by R Paul to keep real quiet and they pay no attention to the other loons, but Perry was supposed to do the job after all their first choices bailed on the idea. Newt as the last to rise and near IA Caucuses had to be stomped even though Mitt would be the beneficiary.
The ABMs are pretty screwed. Despite the racism and assorted bigotry, forced birthism, god-bothering and general screw the poor that Paul packs around with him - he misses real big on war and dope. Bachmann and Santorum are crazy enough, but just the wrong crazy. Perry should have been it, then he opened his mouth. Newt is getting cannonaded from all sides by the Establishment; so where have they got to go?
I don't know, but the ABMs are gonna have some real resentments when they start going to the polls. It might dawn on them that they're being played for the rubes... again. Mitt can go on all the TV shows in the world and even "poke fun" at himself and the result for the ABMs will be ... nnaaahhh.
Yeah, if Perry doesn't rise and Newt keeps sliding it will be Newt, the possibly electable one, and the ABMs will feel about like Democrats would have if Hoe LIEberman had been the 08 candidate.(not real unreasonably) I just shake my head.
(It would pay to think about Newt being hit with 2400 negative ads mostly from SuperPacs in the last 2wks in IA, of all places - CU Decision)
Monday, December 19, 2011
The House And The XL Bill
The GOPers in the House are beating the drum of a one year extension of the UE/FICA Pipeling thing versus the sixty day one the Senate managed. The crux is that the Senate couldn't figure out how to pay for the thing longer than sixty days and the House isn't satisfied with that. Now maybe you're thinking sixty days is a bit of underperformance and I'd agree.
My guess is that the House wants to poison the thing so badly that they can get an optics switch into the Democrats sinking the thing. I'll be real frank, though they could have done that next year it is probably a lot more politically efficient to poison the thing before Christmas. It is probably their hope that it won't be noticed that in order to deliver the present some other poor group must get coal in their basket. That and that pesky Pipeline thing must be fixed - the Prez might say no...
OK Democratic Party, they're going to put the ball in your court once again. They're going to try real hard to stick you with choices that you don't want to make and you're not going to get to jamb your choices down their throats because the flatly don't care about the hostages. You care, they don't, now what?
You know that poison beyond Pipeline is going to be in your future and you'll have to make some decisions regarding what you'll give up. Or not.
Heh.
My guess is that the House wants to poison the thing so badly that they can get an optics switch into the Democrats sinking the thing. I'll be real frank, though they could have done that next year it is probably a lot more politically efficient to poison the thing before Christmas. It is probably their hope that it won't be noticed that in order to deliver the present some other poor group must get coal in their basket. That and that pesky Pipeline thing must be fixed - the Prez might say no...
OK Democratic Party, they're going to put the ball in your court once again. They're going to try real hard to stick you with choices that you don't want to make and you're not going to get to jamb your choices down their throats because the flatly don't care about the hostages. You care, they don't, now what?
You know that poison beyond Pipeline is going to be in your future and you'll have to make some decisions regarding what you'll give up. Or not.
Heh.
Some Of My Best Friends Are Democrats
Yep, really...(there's also a not so nice joke there) Despite the outcomes of Democratic votes in the Senate and the House there are actually a pretty fair number of them who are to the left of Geo HW Bush. Some more than others, but that does include some some who are pretty far left of Ole George I. They don't get much acknowledgement, thanks to the contingent of plutocratic buttkisser who wear the same (D) and their fellow travelers who are scared spitless somebody will notice that St Ronnie the Never Existed wouldn't approve.
You really should have some admiration for these folks laboring under the shadow of the cretins who'd faint if a GOPer yelled "boo," and it isn't fair in the least to blame them for the actual outcomes of Democratic votes. It isn't so easy to forgive the collegiality that keeps them quiet in the face of a ... Max Baucus or especially a LIEberman. It isn't cowardice that makes it happen, partisanship is part of getting votes and coralling support for projects. The plain fact of it is that if you want to get even some watered down POS passed you can't have Mary Landri...whats her face... going off in a huff because you called her quite accurately a corporate whore. So they're stuck with making nice with someone they'd walk across the street to avoid because homocidal maniacs are running the other side. (exaggeration you say? well, bomb bomb Eyeeeran)
These folks (I'm being nice) are going to exist as long as the NABA GOP holds true. I'm not kidding, you'd rather live next door to a shoplifter than Gengis Khan so you let the thief into your neighborhood. Well, there is that and the endless pursuit of the imaginary middle (I)s. There's a bunch for you, despite the media pretense it is only homogenous in its label. That masquerade consists of:
Democrats too left/right
GOP too left/right
I'm busy don't bother me
They're all the same
They're all crooks
They should all get along
Don't rock the boat
I don't know anything and I'm proud of it
and a few other critters with their special hobbyhorse nobody pays attention to.
who could forget the Libertarians and their special world - though they may have jumped the corral.(I amost did forget them)
Sometimes it is really difficult to make a case to them that holds water and that is especially true for Democrats. If one of the best cases you can make is we're not as bad as the loons and your outcomes range from St Ronnie to GHWB and that leaves you crying in the corner because some GOPer called you a socialist you've got a tough sale. For pete's sake, I've been a Democrat since like forever and it is hard to get me to see past voting against the horror show that is the GOP. I'm not voting my interests or the well-being of the nation, I'm voting against its destruction. That's a choice? Really, in the end run, I'm not voting against the destruction of the nation, just the pace it progresses at. It would be nice to vote for something, but that would involve the risk of running on clear principles and advocation of clear actions...
Ah well, thanks guys for existing, anyhow.
You really should have some admiration for these folks laboring under the shadow of the cretins who'd faint if a GOPer yelled "boo," and it isn't fair in the least to blame them for the actual outcomes of Democratic votes. It isn't so easy to forgive the collegiality that keeps them quiet in the face of a ... Max Baucus or especially a LIEberman. It isn't cowardice that makes it happen, partisanship is part of getting votes and coralling support for projects. The plain fact of it is that if you want to get even some watered down POS passed you can't have Mary Landri...whats her face... going off in a huff because you called her quite accurately a corporate whore. So they're stuck with making nice with someone they'd walk across the street to avoid because homocidal maniacs are running the other side. (exaggeration you say? well, bomb bomb Eyeeeran)
These folks (I'm being nice) are going to exist as long as the NABA GOP holds true. I'm not kidding, you'd rather live next door to a shoplifter than Gengis Khan so you let the thief into your neighborhood. Well, there is that and the endless pursuit of the imaginary middle (I)s. There's a bunch for you, despite the media pretense it is only homogenous in its label. That masquerade consists of:
Democrats too left/right
GOP too left/right
I'm busy don't bother me
They're all the same
They're all crooks
They should all get along
Don't rock the boat
I don't know anything and I'm proud of it
and a few other critters with their special hobbyhorse nobody pays attention to.
who could forget the Libertarians and their special world - though they may have jumped the corral.(I amost did forget them)
Sometimes it is really difficult to make a case to them that holds water and that is especially true for Democrats. If one of the best cases you can make is we're not as bad as the loons and your outcomes range from St Ronnie to GHWB and that leaves you crying in the corner because some GOPer called you a socialist you've got a tough sale. For pete's sake, I've been a Democrat since like forever and it is hard to get me to see past voting against the horror show that is the GOP. I'm not voting my interests or the well-being of the nation, I'm voting against its destruction. That's a choice? Really, in the end run, I'm not voting against the destruction of the nation, just the pace it progresses at. It would be nice to vote for something, but that would involve the risk of running on clear principles and advocation of clear actions...
Ah well, thanks guys for existing, anyhow.
The Elite Liberal Media
The Erin post got me thinking, well reflecting, on that frequently abused seldom verified creature and its hydra-headed clique. Sooo, how many practitioners of that dark art are there in major print and broadcast media? I started counting and so far I haven't had to take off my socks. If I were to get real loose in the definition I might have to take one off.
The really sad part is that I don't really care to have that imaginary creature (GOP hobgoblin) as a media. I would, however, appreciate some fact checking and a bit of questioning when Pols spout stuff for their edification. (regurgitation is more apropos) The job is supposed to involve a bit more than just giving a Kyl or even an Obama a platform to just say any damn thing. Maybe the job is even to tell some of the things that wouldn't make your Corporate owner's friends real happy for the rubes to know.
I know print is bleeding money like a ink on paper in a thunderstorm and the internet is cutting into their advertising, but they're also approaching bad internet in their credibility. Broadcast is in competition with shrieking "reality" shows and whatever the hell you'd call the Nancy Grace type thing. But honestly you jerks, I can go to any Party/Candidate website and get their take without all the damn commercials and I'd really like my news a bit more newsy than a Whamo commercial and maybe a bit more... truthful?
If there's a service MSM has provided in recent years it has been to run the GOP clowncar Primary show, despite the fawning softball questions and horse race foolery involved Americans have actually gotten to see them on display. I don't know what the much vaunted vigorously courted (I)s will make of it. Considering the '10 new hires a ballbat to the head wouldn't make much difference to the thinking processes involved.
How about just a little news to break up the commercials?
The really sad part is that I don't really care to have that imaginary creature (GOP hobgoblin) as a media. I would, however, appreciate some fact checking and a bit of questioning when Pols spout stuff for their edification. (regurgitation is more apropos) The job is supposed to involve a bit more than just giving a Kyl or even an Obama a platform to just say any damn thing. Maybe the job is even to tell some of the things that wouldn't make your Corporate owner's friends real happy for the rubes to know.
I know print is bleeding money like a ink on paper in a thunderstorm and the internet is cutting into their advertising, but they're also approaching bad internet in their credibility. Broadcast is in competition with shrieking "reality" shows and whatever the hell you'd call the Nancy Grace type thing. But honestly you jerks, I can go to any Party/Candidate website and get their take without all the damn commercials and I'd really like my news a bit more newsy than a Whamo commercial and maybe a bit more... truthful?
If there's a service MSM has provided in recent years it has been to run the GOP clowncar Primary show, despite the fawning softball questions and horse race foolery involved Americans have actually gotten to see them on display. I don't know what the much vaunted vigorously courted (I)s will make of it. Considering the '10 new hires a ballbat to the head wouldn't make much difference to the thinking processes involved.
How about just a little news to break up the commercials?
Hey Erin Burnett, Anybody Home?
Maybe they all went Out Front into the yard when your show came on. If a lovely, vapid, Wall Street pimp was supposed to put CNN into a good ratings place, well, maybe not. It only takes a little exposure to this Bidness Shill to wear out anybody that knows anything not put out by Rupert's outfit. I really have to applaud this bold move into the toilet by CNN. Somebody had to replace Beck and the IMMIGRANT!!! GUY (ok Dobbs) who could manage stupid without being homely or scary crazy. Well, she is pretty and if you turned the sound off she might be interesting to watch for a couple minutes... the problem is that you'd get about as much information that way (maybe more with the crawler).
If you're thinking CNN just sort of wandered into this consider that her entire work life is tied to working for, fluffing on air, and even getting engaged to bankster.greed.crooked/unindicted. I have heard that there are those who think much of the criticism is sexist... now how the hell could sex have any bearing on a CNN hire of a bathing beauty bidness carney barker for a news program? I know the GOP and Big Bidness ain't getting a fair shake anywhere other than from the Murdochians...and WaPo...and ABC...and well hell everywhere other than a couple MSNBC programs and never seen Current and FSTV. (yeah, you probably have to ask - Free Speech TV)
Damn CNN, you're supposed to keep at least a veneer of not being a Corporate Propaganda Arm Network. If you keep it up you're gonna let the marks in on the scam.
*if you think I'm piling on poor widdle Erin with two posts close to each other, somebody asked me about her and I wondered about her ratings and got way more info than I wanted so I thought I'd share overload with you all... oh yeah regarding her sympathies she's supposed to be worth somewhere north of $12M and $2M/year. You surely wouldn't want her to be a class traitor in the War On Capitalism that's being waged... uhhh maybe that's not quite right? Let me call the GOP. Yup, class warfare aimed at the JOB CREATORS.
If you're thinking CNN just sort of wandered into this consider that her entire work life is tied to working for, fluffing on air, and even getting engaged to bankster.greed.crooked/unindicted. I have heard that there are those who think much of the criticism is sexist... now how the hell could sex have any bearing on a CNN hire of a bathing beauty bidness carney barker for a news program? I know the GOP and Big Bidness ain't getting a fair shake anywhere other than from the Murdochians...and WaPo...and ABC...and well hell everywhere other than a couple MSNBC programs and never seen Current and FSTV. (yeah, you probably have to ask - Free Speech TV)
Damn CNN, you're supposed to keep at least a veneer of not being a Corporate Propaganda Arm Network. If you keep it up you're gonna let the marks in on the scam.
*if you think I'm piling on poor widdle Erin with two posts close to each other, somebody asked me about her and I wondered about her ratings and got way more info than I wanted so I thought I'd share overload with you all... oh yeah regarding her sympathies she's supposed to be worth somewhere north of $12M and $2M/year. You surely wouldn't want her to be a class traitor in the War On Capitalism that's being waged... uhhh maybe that's not quite right? Let me call the GOP. Yup, class warfare aimed at the JOB CREATORS.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Kim Jong Il Shuffles Off This Mortal Coil
Dead is what I mean, you know - checked out, permanently. It seems Kim Jong Un the third son of the third...marriage is now the boss. He's twenty eight or nine and last year was appointed a four star general. He looks a lot like daddy and may have daddy's diabetes along with high blood pressure. Daddy thought a lot of him apparently and he seems to have spent the last year cementing his position - essentially scaring the military into obeisance.
Not a heck of a lot is known about the guy, reports are that intelligence agencies have very little to work with. I'd be willing to guess that since daddy was into him his grasp on reality might be a tad bit loose. I suppose that what governments that have to deal with NK are hoping is that he isn't more cracked than the block he was chipped off of.
I suppose it's too much to get the pants wetters minds off Iran to point out that NK has actually managed to make a bit of an atomic bang. As you might guess, NK is suffering through a cold winter and has food shortages - just no shortage of Kim Jongs...
Not a heck of a lot is known about the guy, reports are that intelligence agencies have very little to work with. I'd be willing to guess that since daddy was into him his grasp on reality might be a tad bit loose. I suppose that what governments that have to deal with NK are hoping is that he isn't more cracked than the block he was chipped off of.
I suppose it's too much to get the pants wetters minds off Iran to point out that NK has actually managed to make a bit of an atomic bang. As you might guess, NK is suffering through a cold winter and has food shortages - just no shortage of Kim Jongs...
The XL Pipeline Bill & Other Crap
Oh, sorry - the UE, SS/FICA, Medicaid Bill with some fancy non-descriptive title bill has bit the Boner, er Boehner. It appears that the Prez won't have to sign the XL Bill as written. It does seem he'll be signing the Indefinite Detention Bill - er, NDAA Bill as re-written with its life in prison without trial provision.
Wait...it only says INDEFINITE, that's not the same thing. Well, if you have a "War" that isn't one and is never going to end it certainly is. The same applies to the "POW exists" appologists.
No, I never expected different. There is a real cost to constant fear mongering and that cost has been getting paid for a lot longer than since even the miscreant GWB held office. It is always pretty much the same crap, fear stoking and it's only about 'them' and it'll never come to haunt you and... well can't afford to hurt "our guy" whoever the hell that is. The GOPers used to make quite a stir about "slippery-slopes" and then the Dems were quite outraged and then... well none of it really meant spit - civil liberties are just disposable to the fear of the moment. Terrorist, Mafia, Guns, whatever.
Really people? We can expect the '12 elections to be run by democrats making the point that they're NABA. Just not quite as bad as is the accurate part. You surely aren't expecting someone to set out clear principles and goals are you? (well other than the clown car GOPer Primary bunch) ((well other than MultipleMittens, er - Newt))
Yeah, I'll vote for Obama - not in the interest of something positive, just in preference for a slower route to hell than the Clowncar Express. That is about the entire Endorsement. I don't expect that indicates much of an interest in making donations, knocking on doors, voter registration, or other propagandistic endeavors. I no longer see much point in pushing at Democrats, they know I'll (or like me) will vote for them out of horror at the consequences so they'll do policy that mirrors the previous decade or so GOPerism and feel safe. The thing is that one day the horror may over-load and result in the REAL GOP having both Houses and the Presidency and the rest of the SCOTUS. Do you REALLY think the GOPers can't be completely crazy and get there? Do you REALLY think there is some line the Dems can't cross in pursuit of not offending the rightward shift?
Maybe there is a line, but it sure the hell isn't going to get drawn without absolute revolt from the Democratic Voters and I don't see any sign of that - just a whole lot more capitulation. Here's the thing about that revolt - it will mean GOP dominance because pols sure aren't going to get the idea as long as they get VOTES.
Hell, they'd get the wrong idea if they didn't get votes...
.
.
.
.
So why keep blogging? It's bad for my digestion to keep swallowing bile.
Wait...it only says INDEFINITE, that's not the same thing. Well, if you have a "War" that isn't one and is never going to end it certainly is. The same applies to the "POW exists" appologists.
No, I never expected different. There is a real cost to constant fear mongering and that cost has been getting paid for a lot longer than since even the miscreant GWB held office. It is always pretty much the same crap, fear stoking and it's only about 'them' and it'll never come to haunt you and... well can't afford to hurt "our guy" whoever the hell that is. The GOPers used to make quite a stir about "slippery-slopes" and then the Dems were quite outraged and then... well none of it really meant spit - civil liberties are just disposable to the fear of the moment. Terrorist, Mafia, Guns, whatever.
Really people? We can expect the '12 elections to be run by democrats making the point that they're NABA. Just not quite as bad as is the accurate part. You surely aren't expecting someone to set out clear principles and goals are you? (well other than the clown car GOPer Primary bunch) ((well other than MultipleMittens, er - Newt))
Yeah, I'll vote for Obama - not in the interest of something positive, just in preference for a slower route to hell than the Clowncar Express. That is about the entire Endorsement. I don't expect that indicates much of an interest in making donations, knocking on doors, voter registration, or other propagandistic endeavors. I no longer see much point in pushing at Democrats, they know I'll (or like me) will vote for them out of horror at the consequences so they'll do policy that mirrors the previous decade or so GOPerism and feel safe. The thing is that one day the horror may over-load and result in the REAL GOP having both Houses and the Presidency and the rest of the SCOTUS. Do you REALLY think the GOPers can't be completely crazy and get there? Do you REALLY think there is some line the Dems can't cross in pursuit of not offending the rightward shift?
Maybe there is a line, but it sure the hell isn't going to get drawn without absolute revolt from the Democratic Voters and I don't see any sign of that - just a whole lot more capitulation. Here's the thing about that revolt - it will mean GOP dominance because pols sure aren't going to get the idea as long as they get VOTES.
Hell, they'd get the wrong idea if they didn't get votes...
.
.
.
.
So why keep blogging? It's bad for my digestion to keep swallowing bile.
Secure The Borders
The GOP has spent quite a bit of rhetoric on securing the borders. Now their emphasis seems to be on the illegal immigrants crossing for jobs. Given that a border is the edge of a nation there is some reason to think it being an actual edge ought to mean something, even if it is just a line on a map. There are some issues with borders that aren't disputed, the biggest one being some form of smuggling, whatever that is including terrorism.
The job stealing aspect is another thing entirely and the most obvious consequence of porous borders. Well, thinking a border won't be porous is pretty damn optimistic and if the most obvious thing is jobs then why aren't you addressing jobs and employment? Let's be clear, legal hiring and illegal hiring are two completely different things.
Even if an illegal hire has proper taxes with-held they have essentially no recourse with an employer. Thanks to their legal status they cannot afford to stick their heads up and they're easily replaced by another. The consequence is low wages and a second class work force. Because business is profit driven a further result is lower wages in surrounding employment. In virtually every business endeavor labor cost is the one variable, material costs of whatever sort are pretty even as well as regulatory costs. The outcome of legal hiring is that prices on some products will rise, the real question is just how much. The crux is that labor costs are a much smaller piece of the cost of an item than most people realize and the real costs of illegal hiring aren't too easily quantified and some are not measurable by dollars.
The aspect that isn't dollar oriented but that has huge consequences is the creation of a second class group of residents. Try real hard to comprehend the soul crushing mind bending results of having your life in a place depend on never attracting the notice of the government. Throw in the disdain or even hate of large portions of the legal residents and tell me this is an outcome this nation can afford. And... the driving factor is cheap labor.
The point where correction can be made is at the root, not the border but at the employer. Employers do not care because the costs of infractions are so low. It is easy enough to claim Americans will not do the work, which is entire nonsense, what they will not do is that work for that wage. No, businesses cannot survive when there is a large wage differential amongst competitors. If the farm next to yours, or across a state line, has significantly lower labor costs; your goose is cooked because you do not have the margin to cover it. You cannot address this by "securing the borders."
This issue is entirely separate from the reality dealing with people who have been in this country for quite some time in large numbers. The only possible way to make any form of amnesty work, whatever the qualifiers, is to lock down employment into legal compliance. It will absolutely not work without that just as St Ronnie's amnesty didn't. It is simply an invitation to enter until the problem is once again unmanagable. You will not be able to do a thing about the greedy cheating employers unless they understand that they will be caught and the costs will be unsupportable and that the playing field is even, that 'my' legal hires will not be undercut by 'your' cheating.
This matter cannot be left to States to sort out, they will not do it well and the results will be entirely uneven. This matter cannot be left to simmer much longer, the American public already is getting unreasonable in its temperment and willingness to scapegoat. It is time to stop with the idea of a Berlin Wall around this nation and do something real. If the employment issue is fixed the qualifiers for staying will be met or unemployment will be the result.
I do not have the time or energy to start trying to set out what qualifiers need to be, other than that we have a moral and ethical responsibility to do something right by those who've tried to do the right things without that work visa.
The job stealing aspect is another thing entirely and the most obvious consequence of porous borders. Well, thinking a border won't be porous is pretty damn optimistic and if the most obvious thing is jobs then why aren't you addressing jobs and employment? Let's be clear, legal hiring and illegal hiring are two completely different things.
Even if an illegal hire has proper taxes with-held they have essentially no recourse with an employer. Thanks to their legal status they cannot afford to stick their heads up and they're easily replaced by another. The consequence is low wages and a second class work force. Because business is profit driven a further result is lower wages in surrounding employment. In virtually every business endeavor labor cost is the one variable, material costs of whatever sort are pretty even as well as regulatory costs. The outcome of legal hiring is that prices on some products will rise, the real question is just how much. The crux is that labor costs are a much smaller piece of the cost of an item than most people realize and the real costs of illegal hiring aren't too easily quantified and some are not measurable by dollars.
The aspect that isn't dollar oriented but that has huge consequences is the creation of a second class group of residents. Try real hard to comprehend the soul crushing mind bending results of having your life in a place depend on never attracting the notice of the government. Throw in the disdain or even hate of large portions of the legal residents and tell me this is an outcome this nation can afford. And... the driving factor is cheap labor.
The point where correction can be made is at the root, not the border but at the employer. Employers do not care because the costs of infractions are so low. It is easy enough to claim Americans will not do the work, which is entire nonsense, what they will not do is that work for that wage. No, businesses cannot survive when there is a large wage differential amongst competitors. If the farm next to yours, or across a state line, has significantly lower labor costs; your goose is cooked because you do not have the margin to cover it. You cannot address this by "securing the borders."
This issue is entirely separate from the reality dealing with people who have been in this country for quite some time in large numbers. The only possible way to make any form of amnesty work, whatever the qualifiers, is to lock down employment into legal compliance. It will absolutely not work without that just as St Ronnie's amnesty didn't. It is simply an invitation to enter until the problem is once again unmanagable. You will not be able to do a thing about the greedy cheating employers unless they understand that they will be caught and the costs will be unsupportable and that the playing field is even, that 'my' legal hires will not be undercut by 'your' cheating.
This matter cannot be left to States to sort out, they will not do it well and the results will be entirely uneven. This matter cannot be left to simmer much longer, the American public already is getting unreasonable in its temperment and willingness to scapegoat. It is time to stop with the idea of a Berlin Wall around this nation and do something real. If the employment issue is fixed the qualifiers for staying will be met or unemployment will be the result.
I do not have the time or energy to start trying to set out what qualifiers need to be, other than that we have a moral and ethical responsibility to do something right by those who've tried to do the right things without that work visa.
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Back To Serious Business - Skyrim
I doubt anybody will be stopping around looking for something new at this time so I'm going back to my second go-around with Skyrim on the XBox 360. If you're a gamer you know or ought to that this is a First Person Shooter (FPS) involving a fictional medieval sort of Norse country with dragons and magic and assorted bad guys and good guys. The thing is massive in scope and complexity of story, characters, build options, and serious eye candy.
I think it is pretty much a foregone conclusion that the thing will be Game of the Year just like it's predecessor Oblivion. Its Bethesda cousins are Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas and it is properly a part of the Elder Scrolls.
If you're used to the idea of video games being a fig leaf of a story to move killing around this isn't it. There is a deliberate and mostly successful attempt to involve the player in the story and to further complicate his life by making some major choices one of ambivalence or outright distaste. Beyond the major theme of the return of dragons there is a civil war raging requiring taking sides along with the day to day decisions imposed by gods, demons, asassins, theives, and general difficulties imposed by residence in a fantastical world of magic, arms and armor, and even marriage in an open access world map.
The game is stand alone, one need not have played any of the Elder Scrolls to deal with it, but I would strongly suggest Oblivion as an introduction - especially with its bargin price now and all the down loads available. Be prepared for games that will have around 200+ hours run time, I kid you not. (no I don't mean time involved in having to re-run sequences for getting killed - actual forward progress time)
There have been some kinks and Bethesda has made up-dates but I don't know how thoroughly all issues have been addressed.
I think it is pretty much a foregone conclusion that the thing will be Game of the Year just like it's predecessor Oblivion. Its Bethesda cousins are Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas and it is properly a part of the Elder Scrolls.
If you're used to the idea of video games being a fig leaf of a story to move killing around this isn't it. There is a deliberate and mostly successful attempt to involve the player in the story and to further complicate his life by making some major choices one of ambivalence or outright distaste. Beyond the major theme of the return of dragons there is a civil war raging requiring taking sides along with the day to day decisions imposed by gods, demons, asassins, theives, and general difficulties imposed by residence in a fantastical world of magic, arms and armor, and even marriage in an open access world map.
The game is stand alone, one need not have played any of the Elder Scrolls to deal with it, but I would strongly suggest Oblivion as an introduction - especially with its bargin price now and all the down loads available. Be prepared for games that will have around 200+ hours run time, I kid you not. (no I don't mean time involved in having to re-run sequences for getting killed - actual forward progress time)
There have been some kinks and Bethesda has made up-dates but I don't know how thoroughly all issues have been addressed.
Hmmph?
How do you like that, a couple people are actually reading my new content...
Maybe I ought to do it a bit more often.
Sometimes it's damn hard not to be too depressed by the news before I get to it to actually have any desire.
Maybe I ought to do it a bit more often.
Sometimes it's damn hard not to be too depressed by the news before I get to it to actually have any desire.
Friday, December 16, 2011
Erin Burnett???
Why the hell did CNN hire a CNBC corporate buttkisser for a news show? Is this a competition with FauxNews to get to the lowest possible denominator in reporting/news reading? Who the hell writes her scripts, Lehman Bros?
I just watched her take big swipes at Fannie and Freddie in the light of investigations/charges for officers and not bother in the least to mention who the hell sold the paper to them - hint, hint = her former buttkissed buds at Banksters.greed.crooks/unindicted...
My low opinion of CNN is scrambling to find new expressions. (ones that don't involve inventive physically impossible profanities)
I just watched her take big swipes at Fannie and Freddie in the light of investigations/charges for officers and not bother in the least to mention who the hell sold the paper to them - hint, hint = her former buttkissed buds at Banksters.greed.crooks/unindicted...
My low opinion of CNN is scrambling to find new expressions. (ones that don't involve inventive physically impossible profanities)
Childish Pursuits
You might not believe it, but once I was young. A couple things that are relevant to this blog were a part of being young, one is that I was raised by professional middle class parents in an environment that stressed broad education and striving. You might not think that as a white boy with those advantages growing up in smaller to mid-sized cities in Ohio that I'd take on the ideas that some people in this country are given nothing resembling a fair shake and that manual labor was honorable, valuable, and even attractive and even odder, that Religion was over-rated.
As a youngster I didn't find myself ostracized or odd for holding these ideas, despite having prayer in school and this being Ohio. Since I was born in 1953 a bit of math will tell you my age as things like Civil Rights and other happenings were going on. I can tell you that I found myself riveted to the reporting of the events surrounding the Civil Rights struggle, including kids in dikes, fire hoses, white German Shepards, all the stuff. Given my feeling that there were some who were actively screwed by our own governments and their neighbors the stuff happening burned into me a fierce anger.
I was always interested whenever some kind of work was going on, I'd be there if a tree was being cut, street work was going on, something was being built. No doubt I was a nuisance, always trying to see, asking questions, and trying to scavenge lumber for my own "projects" and, you know, I don't remember a worker ever getting mad at me. I thought it was amazingly cool that these folks were out there using their hands and tools to get something done that needed to be done or making something out of a bunch of bits and pieces. It never occurred to me that they were failures who'd not managed a better education or something. I thought they were an example of what to do.
I fell out of religion as I learned it and watched its "practitioners" in action. People talk when there is a kid around if they think their talk is over that kid's head. They will say things that don't begin to square with their "Book," not realizing that that kid is there measuring the two. More information about the Books started to poke me in that part that didn't think people were getting a fair shake and the idea that God was the instigator sat very poorly. I couldn't quite square the part where a good person of another faith got screwed by ... God. It sure looked a lot like those folks being beaten by police or spit on by their neighbors for nothing other than not being them.
I was young and there was quite a bit I didn't know about law or other religions or how people wind up cleaning a house. I know a lot more about it now - I haven't changed my mind. I will tell you right now that this country and its wealth are built on the labors of people who do things and that the screwing of people hasn't diminished (minus the cops and shepards out front) and that "Books" aren't the problem, but their readers sure the hell are when they take them too seriously.
If you think I'm FOS that's alright, but I do have to tell you that we are mortal enemies because I want to see your viewpoint stomped into the dust of history. I'll even admit that I've done what I can to ensure it. Sadly, I might as well yell at clouds for being there.
As a youngster I didn't find myself ostracized or odd for holding these ideas, despite having prayer in school and this being Ohio. Since I was born in 1953 a bit of math will tell you my age as things like Civil Rights and other happenings were going on. I can tell you that I found myself riveted to the reporting of the events surrounding the Civil Rights struggle, including kids in dikes, fire hoses, white German Shepards, all the stuff. Given my feeling that there were some who were actively screwed by our own governments and their neighbors the stuff happening burned into me a fierce anger.
I was always interested whenever some kind of work was going on, I'd be there if a tree was being cut, street work was going on, something was being built. No doubt I was a nuisance, always trying to see, asking questions, and trying to scavenge lumber for my own "projects" and, you know, I don't remember a worker ever getting mad at me. I thought it was amazingly cool that these folks were out there using their hands and tools to get something done that needed to be done or making something out of a bunch of bits and pieces. It never occurred to me that they were failures who'd not managed a better education or something. I thought they were an example of what to do.
I fell out of religion as I learned it and watched its "practitioners" in action. People talk when there is a kid around if they think their talk is over that kid's head. They will say things that don't begin to square with their "Book," not realizing that that kid is there measuring the two. More information about the Books started to poke me in that part that didn't think people were getting a fair shake and the idea that God was the instigator sat very poorly. I couldn't quite square the part where a good person of another faith got screwed by ... God. It sure looked a lot like those folks being beaten by police or spit on by their neighbors for nothing other than not being them.
I was young and there was quite a bit I didn't know about law or other religions or how people wind up cleaning a house. I know a lot more about it now - I haven't changed my mind. I will tell you right now that this country and its wealth are built on the labors of people who do things and that the screwing of people hasn't diminished (minus the cops and shepards out front) and that "Books" aren't the problem, but their readers sure the hell are when they take them too seriously.
If you think I'm FOS that's alright, but I do have to tell you that we are mortal enemies because I want to see your viewpoint stomped into the dust of history. I'll even admit that I've done what I can to ensure it. Sadly, I might as well yell at clouds for being there.
Awww, Ron
I can get along with the idea that insurance companies are not the only devil in escalating medical costs and that Medicare will run into financial trouble at some point if its difficulties are not addressed. I can almost get along with the idea that there might be a GOP Congressperson who isn't batshit insane and who a Democrat could possibly work with... providing said Dem didn't expect to get his fingers back after reaching across the aisle. I can actually manage to swallow, with lots of choking and complaining, quite a bit - see ACA...
What has me spitting bile and finding my veins standing out on my forehead is any Democrat putting his name anywhere near that POS Paul Ryan. I'll just stop right there so I don't start spewing profanities that would upset my dear mother. The rest of you can fill in that big blank space following this sentence with as many convoluted references to ... well, you get the idea and think CONSTRUCTION SITE.
What has me spitting bile and finding my veins standing out on my forehead is any Democrat putting his name anywhere near that POS Paul Ryan. I'll just stop right there so I don't start spewing profanities that would upset my dear mother. The rest of you can fill in that big blank space following this sentence with as many convoluted references to ... well, you get the idea and think CONSTRUCTION SITE.
Extension Packages?
Now that the details on the funding, UE, and payroll tax break extensions look like and what Democrats seem to agree to go along with; it might be time to start considering what is going to happen when the BushCo Tax Cuts expire.
Ron Paul Almost Right
I'll have to paraphrase ole Ron because I don't have a transcript but anyhow, when asked if he could win in the General Election he answered 'Anyone up here could.' That wasn't quite right, but what should frighten the hell out of anyone with two live brain cells that talk to each other is that it isn't quite right.
Any one of the cretins on the stage with him would poll in the 40s in a General Election against Pres. Obama. Now you can play with intellectualizing reasons for that all damn day but it does not change the fact that such a percentage of voting Americans would look at the election in such a manner.
Any one of the cretins on the stage with him would poll in the 40s in a General Election against Pres. Obama. Now you can play with intellectualizing reasons for that all damn day but it does not change the fact that such a percentage of voting Americans would look at the election in such a manner.
Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Scrooge
I'm not in the mood but here's your damn Christmas/Holiday Card. No pictures of over decorated trees or white stuff on the ground or cutsie family portraits. You get Harley because, well because I like 'em.
No, I don't know why the picture is cock-eyed, operator error...
Taken near Glacier Nat Park.
No, I don't know why the picture is cock-eyed, operator error...
Taken near Glacier Nat Park.
'Tis The Season To Be Jolly...?
Now that the NAR has admitted to inflating pre-owned home sales since around 2007 it would seem that maybe housing is and has been in worse shape than the currently abysmal condition... I let my contractor's license expire this fall after subsidizing it for 2 years so I'm not a, umm, fan.
Congress is what it is, something as apparently functionally useful as extending unemployment benefits is going nowhere and a really good sized number of people are going to suffer - along with the people who sell the stuff they'd buy. The GOP is willing to go along if they can poison it, the Democrats along with the GOPers are bound and determined to pay for it, despite the fact that neither is willing to pay for it in any way the other would.
Once again we're playing at DEADLINES in terms of government funding. The GOP makes the calculation that the 'gubmint loving' Democrats will go along with eating a poo sandwich in order to keep their thing going. Evidence seems to be on their side but there might be a limit to the size sandwich they'll eat. If that is the case and things shut down, a pretty good sized chunk of money that would get spent isn't going to be. I haven't seen much debate that business isn't hiring because people aren't buying. (well, that and it isn't made here anymore, anyhow)
Americans are getting dis-enfranchised without committing an offense - other than maybe not being reliable GOP voters. In fact without evidence of offenses against the system that is purportedly being defended.
The catalogue is pretty long and depressing and it sure looks as though Santa is going to deliver out of it. I know that some of you who are left of George Wallace are getting some 'jollies' out of the GOP Primary - I'm not. I'm not being a sour-puss here or some seasonally depressed spoil-sport. That mess over at the GOP is a symptom of this nation's condition. Unless you're willing to propose a 70/30 election in 2012 and get along with the high 40's for the other side no matter who the heck pulls it out; then you're getting laughs at nearly half the nation being barking at the moon crazy. This doesn't begin to address what space the President/down ticket can get into without trespassing into their territory.
No, I am not full of cheer and I give a rat's patoot if it is a White Christmas and Merry HoHo to you to.
Congress is what it is, something as apparently functionally useful as extending unemployment benefits is going nowhere and a really good sized number of people are going to suffer - along with the people who sell the stuff they'd buy. The GOP is willing to go along if they can poison it, the Democrats along with the GOPers are bound and determined to pay for it, despite the fact that neither is willing to pay for it in any way the other would.
Once again we're playing at DEADLINES in terms of government funding. The GOP makes the calculation that the 'gubmint loving' Democrats will go along with eating a poo sandwich in order to keep their thing going. Evidence seems to be on their side but there might be a limit to the size sandwich they'll eat. If that is the case and things shut down, a pretty good sized chunk of money that would get spent isn't going to be. I haven't seen much debate that business isn't hiring because people aren't buying. (well, that and it isn't made here anymore, anyhow)
Americans are getting dis-enfranchised without committing an offense - other than maybe not being reliable GOP voters. In fact without evidence of offenses against the system that is purportedly being defended.
The catalogue is pretty long and depressing and it sure looks as though Santa is going to deliver out of it. I know that some of you who are left of George Wallace are getting some 'jollies' out of the GOP Primary - I'm not. I'm not being a sour-puss here or some seasonally depressed spoil-sport. That mess over at the GOP is a symptom of this nation's condition. Unless you're willing to propose a 70/30 election in 2012 and get along with the high 40's for the other side no matter who the heck pulls it out; then you're getting laughs at nearly half the nation being barking at the moon crazy. This doesn't begin to address what space the President/down ticket can get into without trespassing into their territory.
No, I am not full of cheer and I give a rat's patoot if it is a White Christmas and Merry HoHo to you to.
Monday, December 12, 2011
Mitten's Bain
You'd think that a Romney might figure out that Newt and Fannie (jokes write themseleves) would bring on a Bain hit. That it didn't seem to dawn on him (them) kind of points up their view on capitalism. There was a time, a long time ago (before I had a furry face), that business thought corporate raiders were akin to pond scum though a bit lower in elevation. The words "bankruptcy, out-sourcing, lay-offs are a big easily documented piece of Bain type "business." It is plain amateur hour to go after someones business when your own has big capital letter STOP signs all over it.
You know I think they're both sad pieces of work, but for such a shapeshifter of political conveniences as Romney to not get this is stunning in its incompetence. Keep in mind that this is the guy that the Media portrayed as the inevitible smart candidate - now they've got their Newt toy, so we'll see what they come up with.
The GOP is the Party Of Business, think about it. I don't know exactly what that says about "business" in the US, it doesn't seem kind.
You know I think they're both sad pieces of work, but for such a shapeshifter of political conveniences as Romney to not get this is stunning in its incompetence. Keep in mind that this is the guy that the Media portrayed as the inevitible smart candidate - now they've got their Newt toy, so we'll see what they come up with.
The GOP is the Party Of Business, think about it. I don't know exactly what that says about "business" in the US, it doesn't seem kind.
Lowe Down Cowards
TLC is running a show called "American Muslim" about ordinary Muslims living in Dearborn, MI. An outfit in Florida, American Family Association pressured Lowe's to pull its advertising because the show is some sort of stealth attack on Americans. This AFA's problem would seem to me to be one of projection - they figure the evil Muslims are gonna put religious law onto Americans because that is their agenda. Theocrats are just exactly that, religious law is their thing and it must also be everybody else's thing.
The divorcement of overt religion from public institutions isn't simply a matter of keeping an arm's distance between the two - it is Godless Atheism winning a religious war. The vastly majority religion in the US is under attack and being persecuted because... well because they don't get to drape their version of religion in the mantle of government.
This is what Lowe's caved to, a pissant organization with theocracy at its core...
I don't much care for big box stores and I do like locally owned business so it isn't much of a deal for me to not shop at a Lowe Down Coward Store. I don't care about the "Muslim show" what I do care about is giving these cretins power.
The divorcement of overt religion from public institutions isn't simply a matter of keeping an arm's distance between the two - it is Godless Atheism winning a religious war. The vastly majority religion in the US is under attack and being persecuted because... well because they don't get to drape their version of religion in the mantle of government.
This is what Lowe's caved to, a pissant organization with theocracy at its core...
I don't much care for big box stores and I do like locally owned business so it isn't much of a deal for me to not shop at a Lowe Down Coward Store. I don't care about the "Muslim show" what I do care about is giving these cretins power.
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Appeasement
I've been thinking about the Mitt "appease, appease, appease" speech the other day. The root of this seems to be the base's idea that Barack Obama is weak. I might agree that the President has been a bit weak on economics and a bit on Civil Liberties. What they, GOPers, seem to have mental lacunae about is that this guy has done things as President, some of them damned aggressive in foreign policy and he has faced ludicrous lockstep opposition from the GOPers and still managed to get some things done.
Maybe, when they get ready to trot out this junk, they just completely miss what it means to be black in this society. If you look at the complexions of the actors it is pretty clear that they've not had to personally deal with the (at best) whispers, the profiling traffic stops, above the mean requirements to succeed, and ... This guy never has gotten to forget it, every morning that mirror restates the condition. The work Obama did before his political office career was a constant reminder. Somehow this man not only managed to run for offices but to actually win a nomination against the presumptive nominee and beat an angry old white guy war hero POW.
Playing at 'weak appeaser' is factually stupid and politically extremely risky. Flying in the face of facts this way only gets the stupid vote and gives the target a chance to make you look ridiculous while touting his own record. It isn't as though almost anybody reading this doesn't know where this theme comes from or know what sliver of the electorate Mitt was reaching out to. The question is why such a candidate thought it was a good idea since even FauxNews was likely to run the President's response.
As this Primary goes on the GOPer clown show just seems to get more broadly stupid, despite the seeming unreasonableness of such an occurrence.
Maybe, when they get ready to trot out this junk, they just completely miss what it means to be black in this society. If you look at the complexions of the actors it is pretty clear that they've not had to personally deal with the (at best) whispers, the profiling traffic stops, above the mean requirements to succeed, and ... This guy never has gotten to forget it, every morning that mirror restates the condition. The work Obama did before his political office career was a constant reminder. Somehow this man not only managed to run for offices but to actually win a nomination against the presumptive nominee and beat an angry old white guy war hero POW.
Playing at 'weak appeaser' is factually stupid and politically extremely risky. Flying in the face of facts this way only gets the stupid vote and gives the target a chance to make you look ridiculous while touting his own record. It isn't as though almost anybody reading this doesn't know where this theme comes from or know what sliver of the electorate Mitt was reaching out to. The question is why such a candidate thought it was a good idea since even FauxNews was likely to run the President's response.
As this Primary goes on the GOPer clown show just seems to get more broadly stupid, despite the seeming unreasonableness of such an occurrence.
Monday, December 05, 2011
Cain Legacy?
I honestly did hear this mentioned, the phrase, on a national "news" cast. Then I stopped to think about it - for a couple seconds...
I suppose that if there is a Cain "legacy" it would be one of the warning sign - big yellow curve sign - variety. There are serious risks to Palinism. Knuckle-heads with big problems on their resume probably ought not get near National Politics. As suck-up and stenographic as mass media is, there are limits to what they'll ignore or justify as "both sides do it." Even Mt Everest is a bit hard to miss for the paid equivocators... well, maybe...
I suppose that if there is a Cain "legacy" it would be one of the warning sign - big yellow curve sign - variety. There are serious risks to Palinism. Knuckle-heads with big problems on their resume probably ought not get near National Politics. As suck-up and stenographic as mass media is, there are limits to what they'll ignore or justify as "both sides do it." Even Mt Everest is a bit hard to miss for the paid equivocators... well, maybe...
Monday, November 21, 2011
A Stupid Man's Idea
Krugman doesn't thnk much of the GOP "IdeaMan"
This would be fun other than what it says about the state of our two party system...
“It was his time, the Republican base doesn’t want Romney and they keep looking for an alternative, and Newt — although somebody said ‘he’s a stupid man’s idea of what a smart person sounds like,’ but he is more plausible than the other guys they’ve been pushing up.”
This would be fun other than what it says about the state of our two party system...
The President, "No"
So who was that guy on my TV? He looked a lot like Pres Obama.
I assume he means it, "No," you don't get to just bypass your "Super Committee" deal. I found the whole "Super Committee" thing ludicrous on its face and political buck passing by the GOPers. Now lets see if Americans get straight in their heads who has what role - Congress passes laws and the Pres signs or vetoes them. His actual power is that and it begins to look as though the GOPers walked into a massive trap.
My affection for the Pres veers around quite a bit and it is based mostly on what he is willing to tolerate and some of that I don't like one damn bit. He is a hugely better choice for President than anyone the GOP is promoting, but that is also a pretty back-handed compliment.
I've heard people say that if in 2012 we'll have won if we re-elect the President in regard to things like OWS and rightwing nuttery. I disagree. Rather than making actual progress we'll have marked place or slowed the descent to hell. We won't have won spit and we won't until this nation ceases to tolerate positions where Obama seems anything other than moderate right.
You can love this President and still agree with me...
I assume he means it, "No," you don't get to just bypass your "Super Committee" deal. I found the whole "Super Committee" thing ludicrous on its face and political buck passing by the GOPers. Now lets see if Americans get straight in their heads who has what role - Congress passes laws and the Pres signs or vetoes them. His actual power is that and it begins to look as though the GOPers walked into a massive trap.
My affection for the Pres veers around quite a bit and it is based mostly on what he is willing to tolerate and some of that I don't like one damn bit. He is a hugely better choice for President than anyone the GOP is promoting, but that is also a pretty back-handed compliment.
I've heard people say that if in 2012 we'll have won if we re-elect the President in regard to things like OWS and rightwing nuttery. I disagree. Rather than making actual progress we'll have marked place or slowed the descent to hell. We won't have won spit and we won't until this nation ceases to tolerate positions where Obama seems anything other than moderate right.
You can love this President and still agree with me...
The GOP's Deep Bench?
It has been an article of faith amongst Democratic activists that one thing the GOP has done is to develop a deep bench. There sure the hell are alot of candidates "running" in the GOP Presidential Primary but if this is a bench it surely is an egg sucker of one. If you look at MultipleMitt as the presumptive front runner/nominee it looks as though the quarterback ought to be playing tiddly-winks and his back-ups can't get out of the sandbox. Now, lots of GOPers go with the claims that there are those not running who ought to be, but that sure begs the question of, "why aren't they if they're so good?"
One of the "conservative" favorites is Mitch Daniels, but he appears to have some kind of family problems and a close national look at Indiana politics ought to blow right up in his face. Then there's Chris Christy, who might be just plain too mean spoken to appeal to somebody other than the angry right and he's just way too damn NE Liberal GOP to do spit in the Confederate Party of Republicanism. Jeb Bush, um - Bush? I'm really at a loss to come up with replacements from whatever bench it is proposed to exist.
The bench is composed of GOPers, after all. That does mean they adhere to the GOP idiotology and that has gotten so far out of hand that reason is one of the last things they have to offer to voters. It looks as though they'll have to fall back to their old standbys of fear and hatred. That will work with a certain percentage (27% seems to be it) but that should be short.
I'd say it is up to Democrats to offer something that looks like a real alternative other than "not as bad as."
(hmmm, I think I'll coin a new tag - NABA)
One of the "conservative" favorites is Mitch Daniels, but he appears to have some kind of family problems and a close national look at Indiana politics ought to blow right up in his face. Then there's Chris Christy, who might be just plain too mean spoken to appeal to somebody other than the angry right and he's just way too damn NE Liberal GOP to do spit in the Confederate Party of Republicanism. Jeb Bush, um - Bush? I'm really at a loss to come up with replacements from whatever bench it is proposed to exist.
The bench is composed of GOPers, after all. That does mean they adhere to the GOP idiotology and that has gotten so far out of hand that reason is one of the last things they have to offer to voters. It looks as though they'll have to fall back to their old standbys of fear and hatred. That will work with a certain percentage (27% seems to be it) but that should be short.
I'd say it is up to Democrats to offer something that looks like a real alternative other than "not as bad as."
(hmmm, I think I'll coin a new tag - NABA)
Can’t we do better than this?
John Cole at BalloonJuice asked that question, in a post regarding the violence at UC Davis:
I like BalloonJuice and I think Cole is a really good writer, but...
Maybe there's an age difference or maybe some different choices in reading American history between us, but the tone is one of offense taken to a violation of an accepted standard that I don't see as having existed except theoretically. I do understand that if you stay within the bounds of what the establishment finds acceptable in belief or values you should be fine. You won't have done a damn thing to better the system, but you won't get pepper sprayed in your Teabagger costume of 'Ladyliberty.' It was quite well understood by the cops and their directors that the Teabaggers were the GOP and quite within the bounds of belief that the plutocratic state approves. The same cannot be said for OWS, it is a direct assault on that plutocratic state.
It has been said that history is just the story the victors tell. That was much more true of periods when literacy was uncommon than it has been from the time literacy was fairly common - at least for something other than "popular" history. The actuallity of the history of anti-establishment movements and protest in this nation is that they've been met with state approved violence with numbing consistency. On occassion this violence has backfired by engaging the general populace in matters that 'were not their concern.' (see Civil Rights or Labor) At those times, as today, most media was complicit in demonizing the protesters and scoffing at their cause.
No John, we're not better than this; this is what we do and what we have done from the time Declaration of Independence signers were still holding office. I am scarcely suggesting that we shouldn't do better - I just want it understood that this establishment protection behavior is deeply engrained and it involves one hell of a fight to do something about it and the natural tendencies of police too ... well act like ... police.
EDIT
(in case anyone think I'm bashing John as ignorant - I think the failing is more one of POV, he wants to trust our establishment and I flatly do not. I think history is on my side. The civics lesson of the run up to and process of the Revolutionary War was quickly forgotten by a hell of a lot of the leaders - the Establishment protects itself whether it be George V or Citibank.)
Which leads me to what bothers me the most, which is the failure of leadership in every institution in this country. Can’t we do better than this? Can’t we do better than pay 400k to someone who doesn’t have an instinctive gut rejection of the idea of macing a bunch of kids sitting on a sidewalk. Can’t we do better than that? Shouldn’t we be able with that kind of money and benefits and perks to find someone who would immediately recoil at the thought of sending riot police with batons and chemical weapons to go thump the kids paying 35,000 a year for the privilege to sit in that public space? Can’t we find people whose immediate response to everything is not the application of force and a reliance on police brutality? Are we really this lost as a nation that our academic institutions are run by sociopaths with no problem solving skills? It’s just fucking amazing, whether it be UC Davis or Penn State or Wall Street or the Catholic Church or, well, wherever.
I like BalloonJuice and I think Cole is a really good writer, but...
Maybe there's an age difference or maybe some different choices in reading American history between us, but the tone is one of offense taken to a violation of an accepted standard that I don't see as having existed except theoretically. I do understand that if you stay within the bounds of what the establishment finds acceptable in belief or values you should be fine. You won't have done a damn thing to better the system, but you won't get pepper sprayed in your Teabagger costume of 'Ladyliberty.' It was quite well understood by the cops and their directors that the Teabaggers were the GOP and quite within the bounds of belief that the plutocratic state approves. The same cannot be said for OWS, it is a direct assault on that plutocratic state.
It has been said that history is just the story the victors tell. That was much more true of periods when literacy was uncommon than it has been from the time literacy was fairly common - at least for something other than "popular" history. The actuallity of the history of anti-establishment movements and protest in this nation is that they've been met with state approved violence with numbing consistency. On occassion this violence has backfired by engaging the general populace in matters that 'were not their concern.' (see Civil Rights or Labor) At those times, as today, most media was complicit in demonizing the protesters and scoffing at their cause.
No John, we're not better than this; this is what we do and what we have done from the time Declaration of Independence signers were still holding office. I am scarcely suggesting that we shouldn't do better - I just want it understood that this establishment protection behavior is deeply engrained and it involves one hell of a fight to do something about it and the natural tendencies of police too ... well act like ... police.
EDIT
(in case anyone think I'm bashing John as ignorant - I think the failing is more one of POV, he wants to trust our establishment and I flatly do not. I think history is on my side. The civics lesson of the run up to and process of the Revolutionary War was quickly forgotten by a hell of a lot of the leaders - the Establishment protects itself whether it be George V or Citibank.)
Monday, November 14, 2011
The Not Mitt Of The Week
I'll save myself the blood pressure hike of analyzing every body's favorite lizard Newt, and you the boredom of repetition. This week or last week the leader is/has been the NotMitt. I can certainly understand the NotMitt sentiment on their side - what they've got is an opposition field that completely sucks eggs. The NotMitts consist of grifters running performance art projects ... and Rick Perry. The Perry Problem is that he's managed to look dumber than a post next to ... posts. (no I didn't mention Huntsman - nobody does)
The GOP adopted a proportional delegate selection process which may cause them some real heartburn this time out. There certainly are smaller areas where MultipleMitt will do well on the basis of not being barking at the moon crazy but that leaves plenty of smaller areas where that barking will be the compelling narrative. MultipleMitt just doesn't create what you could call enthusiasm - well he does in a negative sense. Enthusiasm of some form is what gets people to go out and actually vote for a candidate in something like a Primary and Primaries are notoriously low turnout elections. (even amongst GOPers)
When the voting does start, if somebody is in the position of the NotMitt of the Week they could benefit from Mitten's lack of appeal. If that translates to a loss or very narrow win for Mittens those NotMitts will get a bump with Primaries starting to stack up. Proposing to use logic and reason to analyze how things shake out is a real iffy project with the crazy/stupid. Reason would tend to favor somebody who has run in at least statewide elections and done well and who has money - Perry. There is a reason US House members are under-represented as Presidents. Playing to a small electorate with narrow interests isn't the same thing as appealing to the public at large.
The Administration apparently has decided that the eventual nominee will be MultipleMitt. I don't know, they're pros and all, but I do wonder if that disqualifies them from figuring out how this will go. The professionals and establishment keep beating the drum about Multiple being the only one with a chance against Obama and thus getting the final nod. One could point to some '10 elections and scratch his head.
This could give me a headache... OMG, I just realized I'd spent all these words to tell you nothing.
The GOP adopted a proportional delegate selection process which may cause them some real heartburn this time out. There certainly are smaller areas where MultipleMitt will do well on the basis of not being barking at the moon crazy but that leaves plenty of smaller areas where that barking will be the compelling narrative. MultipleMitt just doesn't create what you could call enthusiasm - well he does in a negative sense. Enthusiasm of some form is what gets people to go out and actually vote for a candidate in something like a Primary and Primaries are notoriously low turnout elections. (even amongst GOPers)
When the voting does start, if somebody is in the position of the NotMitt of the Week they could benefit from Mitten's lack of appeal. If that translates to a loss or very narrow win for Mittens those NotMitts will get a bump with Primaries starting to stack up. Proposing to use logic and reason to analyze how things shake out is a real iffy project with the crazy/stupid. Reason would tend to favor somebody who has run in at least statewide elections and done well and who has money - Perry. There is a reason US House members are under-represented as Presidents. Playing to a small electorate with narrow interests isn't the same thing as appealing to the public at large.
The Administration apparently has decided that the eventual nominee will be MultipleMitt. I don't know, they're pros and all, but I do wonder if that disqualifies them from figuring out how this will go. The professionals and establishment keep beating the drum about Multiple being the only one with a chance against Obama and thus getting the final nod. One could point to some '10 elections and scratch his head.
This could give me a headache... OMG, I just realized I'd spent all these words to tell you nothing.
Friday, November 11, 2011
Mitt, 'Idiotology Trumps Facts'
Oh for gods sake, Mittens...
We must help those poor veteran victims of socialization...
Steve Benen bothered to take a look at what actually happens at the VA. Quoting Philip Longman:
This surely needs Mitten's grubby profit hands all over it.
Facts entirely optional GOPers...
I'm not suggesting that health care isn't (rude word) up.
“Sometimes you wonder, would there be someway to introduce some private sector competition, somebody else that could come in and say, you know, each soldier gets X thousand dollars attributed to them and then they can choose whether they want to go on the government system or the private system and then it follows them, like what happens with schools in Florida where they have a voucher that follows them. Who knows.”
We must help those poor veteran victims of socialization...
Steve Benen bothered to take a look at what actually happens at the VA. Quoting Philip Longman:
An answer came in 2003, when the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine published a study that compared veterans health facilities on 11 measures of quality with fee-for-service Medicare. On all 11 measures, the quality of care in veterans facilities proved to be ‘significantly better.’ … The Annals of Internal Medicine recently published a study that compared veterans health facilities with commercial managed-care systems in their treatment of diabetes patients. In seven out of seven measures of quality, the VA provided better care.”
This surely needs Mitten's grubby profit hands all over it.
Facts entirely optional GOPers...
I'm not suggesting that health care isn't (rude word) up.
Wednesday, November 09, 2011
How Long Mitt? (edit) NOT LONG)
How much time will elapse between the elections last night and Mitten's refutation of his support for Zygote Citizenship and Union Busting? Suppose it will be some nuanced, well those were sorta like what I want but not quite and ... Obama, anyhow - or will he just forget he ever had anything to do with such things?
Most of the rest of them were too far into that camp to switch gears and besides their voters won't tolerate any ... back-sliding.
I don't know that OH2 and MS26 signal any political re-structuring but they certainly give The Administration a Romney Ballbat. That is useful...
I do have to wonder how a debate on a "business" channel is going to work out in MI with previous anti-auto bailout rhetoric laying there like a large ... dogpile. That and the approval of the State subsidized foreign auto makers in ... ooops ... The Confederacy. Er Mitt, Michigan was pretty proud of the number of troops it sent into the Civil War Meatgrinder. Maybe in the rarified Romney surroundings you missed the monuments in every town?
Oh hell, there is that safe 27% of the electorate is safely ... CPR*.
*see tag
****UPDATE
So it took until this afternoon for the Romney campaign to state that he never was on they Zygote Bandwagon. Ummm ... video tape Mittens? Mike Huckabee and the word "Absolutely"? Honestly, this makes the crumbiest choices Democrats have had look like a choice between saints.
Gotta love it...
Most of the rest of them were too far into that camp to switch gears and besides their voters won't tolerate any ... back-sliding.
I don't know that OH2 and MS26 signal any political re-structuring but they certainly give The Administration a Romney Ballbat. That is useful...
I do have to wonder how a debate on a "business" channel is going to work out in MI with previous anti-auto bailout rhetoric laying there like a large ... dogpile. That and the approval of the State subsidized foreign auto makers in ... ooops ... The Confederacy. Er Mitt, Michigan was pretty proud of the number of troops it sent into the Civil War Meatgrinder. Maybe in the rarified Romney surroundings you missed the monuments in every town?
Oh hell, there is that safe 27% of the electorate is safely ... CPR*.
*see tag
****UPDATE
So it took until this afternoon for the Romney campaign to state that he never was on they Zygote Bandwagon. Ummm ... video tape Mittens? Mike Huckabee and the word "Absolutely"? Honestly, this makes the crumbiest choices Democrats have had look like a choice between saints.
Gotta love it...
In Ohio and Mississippi Stupidity Loses
The first order of business is to acknowledge all the smart hard work done by volunteers and congratulate them on the outcomes. Ohio's 2 and Mississippi's 26 went down by large margins. The issues at hand managed to essentially offend a broad spectrum of voters and failed thanks to that. Well, that and some actual organizing and pushback that amounted to more than whining.
There has been a lot of happiness on the leftish side about the overfall results of the off-season elections. It is nice to have something to be happy about but over reading the elections isn't smart. I don't have much to say about MS26 because it was patently stupid and obviously a step way too far. OH2 was a bit of a different thing, it was a GOP wet-dream and something they really wanted - a mechanism to break unions. The GOP's problem is that they struck at something important to people, more important than "god, gays, and guns." The GOP didn't just play the division game, they played an actual issue. That is the crux.
The GOP does pretty well with emotional division bullshit, and have for quite awhile. OH2 turned on something else and blew up in their faces. This ought to be considered in any leftish celebrations. OH2 isn't a repudiation of the GOP, it is a repudiationn of their stepping out of their baliwick of emo-stupidity. If you're thinking the GOP hate and division machine is mortally wounded then you're just not paying attention to what voters get up to. There is a difference between smacking a broad coalition in the face and kicking the small and impotent around. The GOP miscalculated the amount of "the other" factor involved with unions - it just isn't the same thing as ... gay. There are just way too many people involved, especially if you include friends and relatives.
The other side, loosely called Democrats, can learn something from this - especially the part about giving a broad spectrum something to get excited about. Sure, go ahead and hold your breath...
There has been a lot of happiness on the leftish side about the overfall results of the off-season elections. It is nice to have something to be happy about but over reading the elections isn't smart. I don't have much to say about MS26 because it was patently stupid and obviously a step way too far. OH2 was a bit of a different thing, it was a GOP wet-dream and something they really wanted - a mechanism to break unions. The GOP's problem is that they struck at something important to people, more important than "god, gays, and guns." The GOP didn't just play the division game, they played an actual issue. That is the crux.
The GOP does pretty well with emotional division bullshit, and have for quite awhile. OH2 turned on something else and blew up in their faces. This ought to be considered in any leftish celebrations. OH2 isn't a repudiation of the GOP, it is a repudiationn of their stepping out of their baliwick of emo-stupidity. If you're thinking the GOP hate and division machine is mortally wounded then you're just not paying attention to what voters get up to. There is a difference between smacking a broad coalition in the face and kicking the small and impotent around. The GOP miscalculated the amount of "the other" factor involved with unions - it just isn't the same thing as ... gay. There are just way too many people involved, especially if you include friends and relatives.
The other side, loosely called Democrats, can learn something from this - especially the part about giving a broad spectrum something to get excited about. Sure, go ahead and hold your breath...
Tuesday, November 08, 2011
Sexual Harassment
Just to be real clear, I don't think sexual harassment is a joke or mostly made up. I don't have much of anything like experience with it at a personal level for a couple reasons, I work construction and I was boss and I would not tolerate any crap that broke the relationship of being a crew.
Doing something that makes the work place a hostile environment is wrong and if done from a position of power even more unacceptable. I just don't give the least bit of a damn about Cain.
Doing something that makes the work place a hostile environment is wrong and if done from a position of power even more unacceptable. I just don't give the least bit of a damn about Cain.
The Cain Game Fun
The Media, even David Gregory, have been busy analyzing the Cain situation ... no really ... not just stenographing. This is a pretty funny thing to see. Any GOPer you can think of is allowed to make fact free assertions on their programs that flatly contradict actual, ummm, facts without even a bit of questioning.
What could possibly be different here? Well there is the sex aspect of it. The sex aspect has driven some stories before. Here is one thing that certainly is true in this case - Herman Cain is not the Establishment's candidate. That "NOT" is important, the Establishment does not want the candidate of their Party to be an actual clown - as opposed to a multiple choice Mittster type.
I doubt that Mitt's weaknesses please them, but they certainly don't have a real problem with his current momentary positions. Cain is certainly in line with them, but Cain as GOP candidate for President is a joke and that's known by everybody other than the twenty some percent who say they'll vote for him.
I'm not saying anything about the veracity of the women's allegations. People have been known to lie and they've also been known to tell the truth in extremely difficult situations. I could care less about Herman Cain, what I care about is what this says about our political process and the media's part in it and the plutocratic control of the whole damn mess.
Hold onto your hats ... I just heard David Gregory, no kidding, state that Cain has no facts to back up his assertion that OWS and the Democrat-machine ramped this up. "NO FACTS" from David Gregory??? Honest-to-pete when these people go this far out of character you have to know something is going on that isn't ordinary.
Don't forget that for the Establishment to have a Cain type as candidate could allow a Democrat to say something Progressive and not get hung for it... That certainly would not do.
*Edit
Just to be clear about harassment
What could possibly be different here? Well there is the sex aspect of it. The sex aspect has driven some stories before. Here is one thing that certainly is true in this case - Herman Cain is not the Establishment's candidate. That "NOT" is important, the Establishment does not want the candidate of their Party to be an actual clown - as opposed to a multiple choice Mittster type.
I doubt that Mitt's weaknesses please them, but they certainly don't have a real problem with his current momentary positions. Cain is certainly in line with them, but Cain as GOP candidate for President is a joke and that's known by everybody other than the twenty some percent who say they'll vote for him.
I'm not saying anything about the veracity of the women's allegations. People have been known to lie and they've also been known to tell the truth in extremely difficult situations. I could care less about Herman Cain, what I care about is what this says about our political process and the media's part in it and the plutocratic control of the whole damn mess.
Hold onto your hats ... I just heard David Gregory, no kidding, state that Cain has no facts to back up his assertion that OWS and the Democrat-machine ramped this up. "NO FACTS" from David Gregory??? Honest-to-pete when these people go this far out of character you have to know something is going on that isn't ordinary.
Don't forget that for the Establishment to have a Cain type as candidate could allow a Democrat to say something Progressive and not get hung for it... That certainly would not do.
*Edit
Just to be clear about harassment
Caligula's Horse
Pierce at Esquire had this to say about voting for GOPers in, say, Ohio:
I know some actual liberals/progressives from the various states that elected Kasich types to "responsible" positions who vehemently did not vote for them. To be sure, it is unfair to paint with too broad a brush but the election results speak for themselves. Maybe the polling shows that voters would do something different and you'd like to think they've learned a lesson. I also have a bridge in Brooklyn...
If lessons were learned in this way you'd think there would have been second thoughts about putting the cretins who wrecked the economy back in charge. You'd think that what some random woman does with her uterus is less important than ... gads, fill in the damn blank.
I pretty much grew up in Ohio and got a good education thanks to their system and had some other fair opportunities - along with the privilege of watching some of my peers get shot by the National Guard under another GOPer. That was also a point where a significant portion of the public figured those kids had it coming. I never saw any good reason for the large percentage of Ohioans who were members of the Northern Confederacy; but they certainly do exist.
That bunch would elect Caligula's horse if it wore an (R). I have no idea what the rest of the Kasich voters' excuse is. Well, they do say things, but...
I'm really glad there are people out there who have had the nerve and energy to push back - it shouldn't have been necessary. THAT is the whole point of voting.
***Just a note in fairness - I live in OR-02 and they've proven they'd elect that horse... er have done it, at least the back portion of it.
You knew what they were when you invited them in. You might as well be surprised and offended when your dog licks his nuts in front of the vicar.
I know some actual liberals/progressives from the various states that elected Kasich types to "responsible" positions who vehemently did not vote for them. To be sure, it is unfair to paint with too broad a brush but the election results speak for themselves. Maybe the polling shows that voters would do something different and you'd like to think they've learned a lesson. I also have a bridge in Brooklyn...
If lessons were learned in this way you'd think there would have been second thoughts about putting the cretins who wrecked the economy back in charge. You'd think that what some random woman does with her uterus is less important than ... gads, fill in the damn blank.
I pretty much grew up in Ohio and got a good education thanks to their system and had some other fair opportunities - along with the privilege of watching some of my peers get shot by the National Guard under another GOPer. That was also a point where a significant portion of the public figured those kids had it coming. I never saw any good reason for the large percentage of Ohioans who were members of the Northern Confederacy; but they certainly do exist.
That bunch would elect Caligula's horse if it wore an (R). I have no idea what the rest of the Kasich voters' excuse is. Well, they do say things, but...
I'm really glad there are people out there who have had the nerve and energy to push back - it shouldn't have been necessary. THAT is the whole point of voting.
***Just a note in fairness - I live in OR-02 and they've proven they'd elect that horse... er have done it, at least the back portion of it.
Monday, November 07, 2011
GOP ABM* Strikes
*Anyone But Mitt
With Huntsman deep in the weeds, Mitt seems the only "establishment" candidate to the GOP. That is just plain unacceptable and thus:
Trump Bump
Bachmann Bump
Perry Bump
Cain Bump
And now ... MSM is on about a Newt bump. A bump for the tired old idea (I use that word extremely loosely - fantasies) man; a guy whose personal behavior most of them would loath and whose campaign is transparently about self-promotion. The Media Pundits may ignore this stuff but even if Newt moves up some I strongly doubt he can strike any emotional chords with the ABMs nor does he have real money to sustain himself without a real connection to emotion. I think the Media is playing the "it's his turn" theme rather than looking at Newt and the ABMs.
The sex stuff isn't going to do huge damage to Cain, but he will implode at some point with that group and never ever forget that he is ... well, black. What I do think is that if Perry can stop doing things the way he has been he's going to be their guy. He's white, he's from Texass, and he's ... hmmmm ... pretty ... and he's white... Oh yeah, he does have some real money. And even if he is stupid he might be able to stop doing it in front of voters.
When something is operating in a mode like ABM, an entire negative, staying power helps - that and an ability to not do something stupid. You've got people looking for someplace to land, not an actual enthusiasm for, and about all that requires is an ability to stay in front of them and some sort of "charm." Charm is another of those words I'm using loosely since it can easily include a 'go for the nuts' type persona they wouldn't want as a dinner guest - supposedly a Perry characteristic.
I'm not presenting this as some sort of prediction - it's silly to do that with crazy people; not that I like Mitt a bit, either. The Obama Campaign seems to think Mitt will be the one but I'm less sure. They may well have fallen into the trap of using reason in regard to craziness. I'm inclined to think an ABM could pull it off, especially considering Mitt's consistent 23%.
With Huntsman deep in the weeds, Mitt seems the only "establishment" candidate to the GOP. That is just plain unacceptable and thus:
Trump Bump
Bachmann Bump
Perry Bump
Cain Bump
And now ... MSM is on about a Newt bump. A bump for the tired old idea (I use that word extremely loosely - fantasies) man; a guy whose personal behavior most of them would loath and whose campaign is transparently about self-promotion. The Media Pundits may ignore this stuff but even if Newt moves up some I strongly doubt he can strike any emotional chords with the ABMs nor does he have real money to sustain himself without a real connection to emotion. I think the Media is playing the "it's his turn" theme rather than looking at Newt and the ABMs.
The sex stuff isn't going to do huge damage to Cain, but he will implode at some point with that group and never ever forget that he is ... well, black. What I do think is that if Perry can stop doing things the way he has been he's going to be their guy. He's white, he's from Texass, and he's ... hmmmm ... pretty ... and he's white... Oh yeah, he does have some real money. And even if he is stupid he might be able to stop doing it in front of voters.
When something is operating in a mode like ABM, an entire negative, staying power helps - that and an ability to not do something stupid. You've got people looking for someplace to land, not an actual enthusiasm for, and about all that requires is an ability to stay in front of them and some sort of "charm." Charm is another of those words I'm using loosely since it can easily include a 'go for the nuts' type persona they wouldn't want as a dinner guest - supposedly a Perry characteristic.
I'm not presenting this as some sort of prediction - it's silly to do that with crazy people; not that I like Mitt a bit, either. The Obama Campaign seems to think Mitt will be the one but I'm less sure. They may well have fallen into the trap of using reason in regard to craziness. I'm inclined to think an ABM could pull it off, especially considering Mitt's consistent 23%.
Friday, November 04, 2011
Sure, It's Fun Laughing At The GOPers...
I know a lot of my readers (using the words 'a lot' is hyperbole) get some real fun out of what the GOP has to offer this time around. They're so easy to mock and so full of s**t on a regular basis that...
Here's the thing about that; this has something to say about the state of the nation that isn't in the least reassuring. There are two Parties in this country and one of them is producing what the GOP is. What that means to the "other" party is yet to be seen. Running against lunatics/multiple choicers leaves that "other" party with a hell of a lot of options to be ... stupidly almost GOP. How will the Democrats read the public? Will they read the election as really being between Right and Righter? They have done that previously.
The most open question today is whether the electorate can understand that fiddling around at the margins of the system is inadequate and that the failure to recover falls on the heads of those fiddlers and the total obstructionists. There is discontent, how deep and how reflective it is I can't begin to measure. If the "Middle" is still stuck on the "fiddle around" with the status quo position we are going to see candidates and policies that reflect that and the same failures. Politicians aren't generally known as risk takers and expecting them to move more than marginally from the status quo isn't reasonable if the "Middle" hasn't already been there for some time.
I don't think the Democrats generally are so stupid as to not realize that being the Party of the GOP's previous decade or so isn't going to address what's wrong with the nation. That particular intellectual "accomplishment" doesn't mean spit in regard to what policies they'll advocate or support. I'm not ignoring the percentage of Democratic legislators that would do something, I'm flatly aware of what the outcomes are.
OWS may mean something, but in regard to actual useful policy it won't mean anything unless that "Middle" is truly pissed off. I don't have polite words for the outlook of that group other than status quo at all costs. Accurate adjectives involve swearing and words like ... nah, not gonna go there. If that's where you stand - I have no appologies to make.
No, I'm not in the least optimistic.
Here's the thing about that; this has something to say about the state of the nation that isn't in the least reassuring. There are two Parties in this country and one of them is producing what the GOP is. What that means to the "other" party is yet to be seen. Running against lunatics/multiple choicers leaves that "other" party with a hell of a lot of options to be ... stupidly almost GOP. How will the Democrats read the public? Will they read the election as really being between Right and Righter? They have done that previously.
The most open question today is whether the electorate can understand that fiddling around at the margins of the system is inadequate and that the failure to recover falls on the heads of those fiddlers and the total obstructionists. There is discontent, how deep and how reflective it is I can't begin to measure. If the "Middle" is still stuck on the "fiddle around" with the status quo position we are going to see candidates and policies that reflect that and the same failures. Politicians aren't generally known as risk takers and expecting them to move more than marginally from the status quo isn't reasonable if the "Middle" hasn't already been there for some time.
I don't think the Democrats generally are so stupid as to not realize that being the Party of the GOP's previous decade or so isn't going to address what's wrong with the nation. That particular intellectual "accomplishment" doesn't mean spit in regard to what policies they'll advocate or support. I'm not ignoring the percentage of Democratic legislators that would do something, I'm flatly aware of what the outcomes are.
OWS may mean something, but in regard to actual useful policy it won't mean anything unless that "Middle" is truly pissed off. I don't have polite words for the outlook of that group other than status quo at all costs. Accurate adjectives involve swearing and words like ... nah, not gonna go there. If that's where you stand - I have no appologies to make.
No, I'm not in the least optimistic.
Thursday, November 03, 2011
OWS, I Appologize - Sort of
From the start OWS garnered my emotive support and my intellectual dismissal. I understood what OWS was unhappy about, in fact I figured it was about thirty years late in coming. What my intellect dismissed was its staying power and the reach it could have into political discourse.
I didn't believe the plutocracy would allow its reporting or physically allow them to stay. I never thought the lack of a narrow political agenda was a problem, but I did dismiss their chances of pushing the economic dialogue anywhere in their direction.
I don't think the GOP is real impressed yet, they still see it as a target of convenience. I have an utter disbelief that Democratic outcomes will show any particular effect any time soon but I am actually impressed to see the President and a few other speaking in more openly populist terms. Lacking OWS I strongly doubt the President would have adopted his current ... confrontational? ... style.
I don't think it is so late that flaming mansions are required to get some sort of relief within the halls of government, though thinking something realistically effective is coming soon is pretty damn optimistic. It isn't as though we lack models that have demonstrated their utility through practice, it is true that those models are nowadays considered radical.
Facts are blatantly on the side of OWS, that has never proven a decisive factor in politics. People are actually starting to make a fight out of something that should have been settled business a half-century ago. No, I don't really expect the plutocracy to let much happen and they certainly own sufficient law-makers to ensure not much happens. Sides are being picked ... what that means is still an open question as are the consequences for being on the wrong side from the American people.
I cannot afford to do a damn thing to help keep OWS going beyond typing this handful of words but if you've got even a couple bucks with nothing to do there are ways to help out, even if it is just ordering a pizza to be delivered to their site, it would be something.
Oh yeah, about that appology ... sorry to be too quick to dismiss.
I didn't believe the plutocracy would allow its reporting or physically allow them to stay. I never thought the lack of a narrow political agenda was a problem, but I did dismiss their chances of pushing the economic dialogue anywhere in their direction.
I don't think the GOP is real impressed yet, they still see it as a target of convenience. I have an utter disbelief that Democratic outcomes will show any particular effect any time soon but I am actually impressed to see the President and a few other speaking in more openly populist terms. Lacking OWS I strongly doubt the President would have adopted his current ... confrontational? ... style.
I don't think it is so late that flaming mansions are required to get some sort of relief within the halls of government, though thinking something realistically effective is coming soon is pretty damn optimistic. It isn't as though we lack models that have demonstrated their utility through practice, it is true that those models are nowadays considered radical.
Facts are blatantly on the side of OWS, that has never proven a decisive factor in politics. People are actually starting to make a fight out of something that should have been settled business a half-century ago. No, I don't really expect the plutocracy to let much happen and they certainly own sufficient law-makers to ensure not much happens. Sides are being picked ... what that means is still an open question as are the consequences for being on the wrong side from the American people.
I cannot afford to do a damn thing to help keep OWS going beyond typing this handful of words but if you've got even a couple bucks with nothing to do there are ways to help out, even if it is just ordering a pizza to be delivered to their site, it would be something.
Oh yeah, about that appology ... sorry to be too quick to dismiss.
The Perry Saviour
You can look at the current GOP field and find something interesting at the most optimistic and if you were a GOPer - appalling. It is pretty obvious that there exists a rather sizable and wealthy "Anybody But Mitt" segment of the GOP. This is where the Rick Perry campaign came from.
Now, if you cannot understand the sizable "ABM" sentiment because you aren't a GOPer you could try this one on to see how you would react - Joe Lieberman For President (D). If the mere concept makes you throw up a little, you can start to "sympathize" with the "ABM"s. I may have found Barack Obama, the primary candidate, a bit lacking in leftism but supportable as intelligent and generally in agreement with my concept of a Democrat - something Joe Lieberman totally fails. It is reasonable to assume that the GOPers who put forward Rick Perry were at least astute enough to understand that the rest of the clown parade were ... well, clowns and never going to get anywhere in a General Election. In shorter terms, not completely stupid.
Before his entry, I was somewhat familiar with Rick Perry by reputation. The reputation of not losing elections, the reputation for being a 'hardnosed' candidate, and someone the handful of thinking Texans I know of, loathed and considered stupid. It has taken his entry into "Presidential" politics to acquaint me with the levels of incompetence he has, a Texan who makes GWB look able and Sarah Palin a speaker of the English language. It isn't as though he wasn't good at debating, a shy child would have out-performed him. His speech in New Hampshire ... well, jeeze. His failure at the persona of candidate isn't even the crux of the issue.
This guy's campaign looked at a demographic that thought the tax code is a mess and decided to add a voluntary additional layer to the current mess. Never mind that the voluntary chunk would screw them and aid the oligarchy - even the factually impaired will quickly grasp that it is just another layer of complexity.
What you're looking at in this little snapshot of Rick Perry is what the ABMs came up with, their best shot. This is the cure for Mittism. Imagine that you are a GOPer and this is what a bunch of your movers and shakers came up with as Party Saviour.
I find it real damn difficult to feel sorry for the GOPers, but there's an actual twinge.
Now, if you cannot understand the sizable "ABM" sentiment because you aren't a GOPer you could try this one on to see how you would react - Joe Lieberman For President (D). If the mere concept makes you throw up a little, you can start to "sympathize" with the "ABM"s. I may have found Barack Obama, the primary candidate, a bit lacking in leftism but supportable as intelligent and generally in agreement with my concept of a Democrat - something Joe Lieberman totally fails. It is reasonable to assume that the GOPers who put forward Rick Perry were at least astute enough to understand that the rest of the clown parade were ... well, clowns and never going to get anywhere in a General Election. In shorter terms, not completely stupid.
Before his entry, I was somewhat familiar with Rick Perry by reputation. The reputation of not losing elections, the reputation for being a 'hardnosed' candidate, and someone the handful of thinking Texans I know of, loathed and considered stupid. It has taken his entry into "Presidential" politics to acquaint me with the levels of incompetence he has, a Texan who makes GWB look able and Sarah Palin a speaker of the English language. It isn't as though he wasn't good at debating, a shy child would have out-performed him. His speech in New Hampshire ... well, jeeze. His failure at the persona of candidate isn't even the crux of the issue.
This guy's campaign looked at a demographic that thought the tax code is a mess and decided to add a voluntary additional layer to the current mess. Never mind that the voluntary chunk would screw them and aid the oligarchy - even the factually impaired will quickly grasp that it is just another layer of complexity.
What you're looking at in this little snapshot of Rick Perry is what the ABMs came up with, their best shot. This is the cure for Mittism. Imagine that you are a GOPer and this is what a bunch of your movers and shakers came up with as Party Saviour.
I find it real damn difficult to feel sorry for the GOPers, but there's an actual twinge.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)