« A Bright Light Seen Across the Universe | Main | Halfway »

October 19, 2017

Comments

The "dog" was developed to be a robotic pack mule for the military, for carrying supplies in difficult terrain.... I'm sure somebody somewhere is looking for a good use case for it.

As recently as 30 years ago -- don't know about today -- some of the telephone companies in the Mountain West still had mule strings for carrying equipment into remote areas for repairs.

The agency going on about the evils of human trafficking, and to which one was asked to report, was...ICE.

This gives me the heebie-jeebies, to tell the truth. Sad to be so cynical, but are they then going to deport the victims for being here without papers, or what?

I'd bet that, if you asked ICE, they would tell you that they believe that the traffickers are the illegal immigrants. And are abusing real Americans who they are trafficking in. (That's their story, and they'll stick to it. Until the actual busts hit.)

wj, yes, that's related to what I was thinking.

What seems to be the ACLU's main page on trafficking doesn't mention ICE one way or the other. I dislike that it only mentions women in the headline, though it does mention men and children in the first paragraph.

Victims can get services and have opportunities to stay here, in various circumstances that all involve cooperation with prosecuting the perps.

wj, separate topic, have you got anything to say about the California Republican convention? Do you still have hopes of reclaiming your party?

While any human-trafficking number above zero is too many, law enforcement isn't making all that many arrests for it in spite of the effort they're spending on the problem.

For instance, Florida reported 105 investigations into human-trafficking offenses in 2016 but zero human trafficking arrests last year. Nevada worked on 140 human-trafficking investigations but made only 40 arrests on trafficking charges. Louisiana looked into 123 potential cases of human trafficking but only arrested 16 people for it.
Human-Trafficking Arrests Are Very Rare in Most States: The exceptions in 2016 were Minnesota and Texas, according to newly released FBI data.

Janie,
Hope to? Yes.

Expect to, any time soon? Not so much.

While there are increasing numbers of Republican officials at the local (and even state legislature) level who are sensible. The folks running the state party are, for now, still from the ideological nut case faction.

Those people spent, if memory serves, a couple of decades (if not more) working their way into control of the state party. Getting them out again will likely take at least as long -- probably longer, given their disinterest in working with others, something that handicapped those who opposed their original drive.

Florida reported 105 investigations into human-trafficking offenses in 2016 but zero human trafficking arrests last year. Nevada worked on 140 human-trafficking investigations but made only 40 arrests on trafficking charges. Louisiana looked into 123 potential cases of human trafficking but only arrested 16 people for it.

I don't know California's total numbers. But I did find this in my local paper this summer:
http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/07/26/danville-couple-convicted-in-nationwide-human-trafficking-ring/

wj: While there are increasing numbers of Republican officials at the local (and even state legislature) level who are sensible. The folks running the state party are, for now, still from the ideological nut case faction.

I hope we agree that if "Republican" means nothing else, it means "not-a-Democrat". Okay, I'll allow that one can be simultaneously "sensible" and "not-a-Democrat". As a citizen and a voter, I mean.

For an elected official, the label "Republican" means something more. At the very least, it has to mean that you will vote for the Republican (and not the Democrat) to be Speaker, for example. In the Congress for sure, and I believe in most if not all legislatures organized on the same principles, the House Speaker and the Senate Majority Leader get to set the agenda. No back-bencher, however "sensible", can bring to the floor a bill the Speaker or Leader doesn't want to be voted on. If the Speaker or Leader is of the "nutcase faction", what's a "sensible" back-bencher to do?

Run as an independent, that's what.

Oh sure, a "sensible" Republican could try running for office on the promise of NOT voting for the nutcase at the top to be Speaker or Leader. Has that actually heppened? Did that candidate get past the primary? If elected, did that candidate get assigned to anything beyond the Committee on Postage and Carpet Maintenance?

I am not asking, BTW, about a Republican candidate who vows not to vote for the Republican at the top on the grounds that said leader is not nutcase-y enough.

Bottom line: anybody running for office as a "Republican" starts out with at least one strike on the "sensible" count.

--TP

Bottom line: anybody running for office as a "Republican" starts out with at least one strike on the "sensible" count.

is excluded from the "sensible" count.

the President, which they, statistically speaking all support is a blithering fucking idiot. a disgrace. an affront to everything every fucking single one of their all-hallowed Founding Father figures stood for.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/23/16522456/trump-bartiromo-transcript

anyone who supports the GOP is a goddamned degenerate America-hating waste of carbohydrates.

burn the GOP down and cast the ashes in the Oort cloud.

The Money Honey Bartiromo, an ignorant republican fluffer posing as a broadcast "business" journalist, was with CNBC I believe when she was "interviewing" a Wall Streeter regarding Social Security, who was inclined to support the program, and in a haranguing huff she asked him if HE liked it so much, why wasn't HE on the program and receiving benefits, to which taken aback by the abyss of conservative dipshit republican fuck-all stupidity yawning before him, he spluttered something about the fact that he was only in his fifties and not eligible for benefits yet and then gave up on the rest of the explanation knowing full well it was being received by the darkened brainless vacuum inside the obtuse skull of a republican asshole conservative full of shit cloth-eared beet.

Bartiromo moved to FOX soon thereafter and brought the median IQ at that joint up a point or two, but only because she has smart looking legs while doing the twirl.

Between rump and her alone, carbohydrates have found a home.

Rump's senseless sentences remind me of the phrasing of the Second Amendment.

Three commas separated by argle-bargle.

He should take a gulp of water and gargle and scratch his crotch while he answers questions.

burn the GOP down and cast the ashes in the Oort cloud.

OK, let's say we go that route. Where does a new alternative party come from? Are you expecting the Democrats to just split?

Because, at least to date, the only way we get a new major party to replace one of the old ones is to have a massive motivating issue for it to form around. The closest we seem to have to such a thing at the moment is tne massive sense of grievance that animates the Trump enthusiasts. Somehow, I don't see them becoming, or having the least interest in becoming, a "party of government." They seem to be all about smashing things, not about building anything positive.

the massive sense of grievance is that a lot of people live in fear. the basis and quality of their lives is contingent, unstable, vulnerable.

take it from there.

if the (R)'s want to make a contribution, address that. trump is addressing it in the most harmful ways possible, in your name. don't let him do that.

take your party back, or cut it loose.

Melissa V. Ramirez

I'm trying to figure out how " cut it loose" works. What comes next? Both for non-Democrats and those who just think we need two viable political parties.

Late to the discourse, and little to say beyond this:

I believe that it's only a hurricane if it is in the Atlantic. In the Pacific, it's a typhoon. (Wonder which one they use for storms like that in the Indian Ocean....)

Neither. They are cyclones there, I believe.

Hurricanes are in the Atlantic and "western" Pacific (between N. America and Hawai'i). So the storms that hit Baja California are Hurricanes.

And if they drift far enough west, they get renamed as typhoons. But to be named a 'cyclone' they'd have to make it south of the Equator or into the Indian Ocean.

If they make it to Jupiter, they get called a "spot".

Where does a new alternative party come from?

i don't care.

one step at a time.

I'm trying to figure out how " cut it loose" works

how did a cadre of reactionaries and randian weirdos get control of the party in the first place? they figured it out. folks who want their party back need to do the same.

the alternative is to be unrepresented at the national level.

The first rule of fight club is don't tell them it will be boring. I can't wait until the alt-right and cyborg punk make common cause:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/giant-robot-fight-organizers-say-next-step-is-giant-robot-fighting-league/ar-AAtXi5E

how did a cadre of reactionaries and randian weirdos get control of the party...

More importantly, how did they get control of the country?

OK, let's say we go that route. Where does a new alternative party come from? Are you expecting the Democrats to just split?

Given a political eraser that could obliterate the GOP, why yes, the Dems would split. Our first past the post election structure pretty much mandates two parties.

Ever since Thaddeus Stevens and Charles Sumner died, the GOP has been run by hard money imperial expansionist lunatics dedicated to the prime directive that all the wealth produced by our economy belongs to a select few. That some of these clowns were in the Democratic Party was an accident of history, and they figured out their true political home starting in the 1970's.

Perhaps, wj, you forgot what happened to "reasonable" Whigs. They went extinct.

you know, you could always just register as a (D).

seriously, folks like obama and clinton are too "left"?

all of the centrist conservatives at the national level have (D) after their names these days.

my representation is warren, markey, and moulton. markey might be a little too old-school liberal for the average centrist conservative. moulton should be right up your alley, warren too if you can ignore the whining of the baksters for ten minutes.

sane, rational, reasonable, responsible people, trying to achieve the common good. not remotely the lefty bomb throwers of fox news' dreams.

the (R) you remember is now the (D)'s. at the national level, anyway.

come on over.

Look at the last 4 administrations - Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump - spanning nearly a quarter of a century. What were the worst things done or attempted during these administrations, and under which administrations did they happen? What about the best things? How did the country fare in general? What happened when congress was controlled by the same party that controlled the White House? How have different states done when controlled by either party over the last 25 years?

How do the answers to these questions affect your desire to remain a Republican?

russell to wj: come on over.

From the "Don Juan in Hell" scene in Act III of Man and Superman.

THE STATUE: I have come to a momentous decision, my boy. But first, where is our friend the Devil? I must consult him in the matter. And Ana would like to make his acquaintance, no doubt.

...

THE DEVIL: Why, sir, do you not join us, and leave a sphere for which your temperament is too sympathetic, your heart too warm, your capacity for enjoyment too generous?
THE STATUE: I have this day resolved to do so. In future, excellent Son of the Morning, I am yours. I have left heaven forever.

It's only an echo, born of the strong image of someone making a momentous decision to cross over to the other side. Shaw's heaven and hell don't match up well with the political parties, and his Devil is nothing like russell. But I'm getting a chuckle out of the image of russell as the Son of the Morning welcoming wj heartily to his side of the great divide.

OK, I have gotten my laughter under control.

Warren is a centrist? She may be left of Bernie. C'mon, not a one of those people is anywhere near the center outside Cambridge.

Warren is a centrist? She may be left of Bernie.

As you wish. You can lead a horse to water...

As always, not my circus.

GovTrack thinks Warren is an extreme lefty.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/elizabeth_warren/412542

but then again, their analysis isn't actually based on positions. it's based on who co-sponsors the bills each Senator proposes. Warren gets support from Democrats, and that's it.

but that's no surprise, since she's widely hated by the same people who love Donald Trump.

I'm getting a chuckle out of the image of russell as the Son of the Morning welcoming wj heartily to his side of the great divide.

It's more like "when you get tired of beating your head against the wall, maybe think about not beating your head against the wall".

But, whatever. The (D)'s are, in fact, the devil himself in some folks' eyes. Warren's a lefty, Obama was a tyrant, Clinton is a world-historical evil power-hungry dictator-in-waiting.

Carry on, y'all. See ya on the flip side, assuming there is one.

GovTrack thinks Warren is an extreme lefty.

Elizabeth Warren is an extraordinarily qualified academic in economics, whose research led her to the conclusion that the financial sector was rogering the American public.

She didn't start there, she ended up there. Based on information, not prejudice or tribal affiliation.

She ended up there, remains there, and her policies follow from that.

She reliably voted for (R)'s until the mid-90's because, in her own words, she believed they were more supportive of market economics. Which she supports and advocates.

As of the mid-90's, she started voting (D), because she no longer believed that (R) policies were favorable to healthy markets.

The fact that she is considered to be a "lefty" is everything anybody needs to know about the curdled and dysfunctional state of American politics.

All of the folks who hear the name "Warren" and respond with either "lefty" or "Pocohantas" need to watch their @sses, because the banksters will be very happy to rob them blind. If that isn't clear from the last 10 years, I don't know what it would take to make it clear.

Not my circus. If you like the (R)'s, by all means hang your hat with the (R)'s.

When you get tired of beating your head against the wall, maybe quit beating your head against the wall.

That's all I'm saying.

She reliably voted for (R)'s until the mid-90's because, in her own words, she believed they were more supportive of market economics. Which she supports and advocates.

As of the mid-90's, she started voting (D), because she no longer believed that (R) policies were favorable to healthy markets.

Too many people cannot tell oligarchs from supporters of free, fair, open, and competitive markets (to the extent that they are applicable to a given situation). And if free, fair, open, and competitive markets "naturally" lead to oligarchy, who needs them (besides oligarchs)?

That is but one of the many problems with politics in today's United States of America.

Russell: how did a cadre of reactionaries and randian weirdos get control of the party in the first place? they figured it out. folks who want their party back need to do the same.

the alternative is to be unrepresented at the national level.

Actually no. The alternative is that we have the nut cases running the country half the time. Because if that is the only alternative major party (i.e. one which can get more than 20% of the votes), then that is what we will see.

Pro bono: More importantly, how did they get control of the country?

See above. The country, for better or worse, has a habit of switching out parties in power. For the Presidency, they have done so (with a single exception) every 8 years or less since WW II -- i.e. for the entire lifetimes of the overwhelming majority of voters.

For Congress, less often but the majority has generally been slim. What that means is that, when the voters decide it is time for a change there, it is going to be the other major party that gets in. The number of independents and third party members in Congress is going to remain miniscule.

All of which is to say, it's everybody's problem. Whether or not it is your party that has the problem.

As of the mid-90's, she started voting (D), because she no longer believed that (R) policies were favorable to healthy markets.

It can take a while for people to realize that, in spite of tribal affinity, they are being lied to and propagandized. Most would rather die in agony than give up their cherished delusions.

"may all their wishes come true!"

As the American West (Census Bureau's western region) has shift towards the Democrats over the last 15-25 years, state-level Republicans there have been protected by the safety-valve of ballot initiatives. So you get a red state like Arizona passing independent redistricting commissions, higher minimum wages, and renewable energy mandates by initiative rather than through the normal legislative channel. (Side note: every state in the US that has adopted recreational marijuana has done so by means of a ballot initiative.)

I assert that one reasonable way to measure the overall electorate (at least in the West) is to look at the kinds of ballot initiatives that are passed. In the 1990s, there was a trend towards things like (a) tax restrictions, (b) outlawing same-sex marriage, and (c) restrictions on abortions. In the 2000s and 2010s, there has been a dramatic shift towards more progressive matters like renewable power, higher minimum wage, and legal access to marijuana.

you know, you could always just register as a (D).

. . .

the (R) you remember is now the (D)'s. at the national level, anyway.

come on over.

As noted, I think the fact that the nut cases have taken over the GOP is everybody's problem. It won't get solved by just joining the Democrats.

If there is a new party on offer, one which has a realistic chance to become a new second party, I'd go for it. (Reluctantly, because I'm a sentimentalist. But I'd go.) However, until that happens, the best choice on offer is to remain a Republican, so as to be able to vote in the primaries for folks that are at least halfway sane. And, when that primary vote doesn't prevail (which happens all too often), vote for the D in the general election.

And that's what I have been doing. The last Republican I could bring myself to vote for for President in a general election was Bob Dole. Which was quite a while ago. (Romney might have been possible, had he not clearly chosen to embrace insanity in pursuit of the prize. Maybe even McCain, if he had still been in 2008 the man he had been in 2000. But they hadn't.)

More local elections have offered more viable GOP options. Some of whom have made it thru the primaries. Even at the state level in California -- which is to say, they finished second in the "top two" primary. The R after their name has still kept them down in the general, but at least they have been able to demonstrate that sanity has not quite totally left the party.

The alternative is that we have the nut cases running the country

I guess I meant the alternative for you, personally.

However, until that happens, the best choice on offer is to remain a Republican, so as to be able to vote in the primaries for folks that are at least halfway sane.

Can't disagree with this. Sounds like you're fighting the good fight and taking one for the team, which is to say, the country.

I appreciate your willingness to put up with it. Carry on, and best of luck.

I assert that one reasonable way to measure the overall electorate (at least in the West) is to look at the kinds of ballot initiatives that are passed.

I don't disagree with this.

I'd actually go further and say that (R) representation at the national level is profoundly out of alignment with the actual populations they represent.

The question is how to get them the hell out of power.

I personally have no particular levers to bring to bear, other than occasionally supporting candidates in other states that seem reasonable, to me. My representation is, famously, a pack of leftist revolutionaries.

That last part was a joke.

If you live somewhere that is represented at the national level by a (R), you can make a dent.

Go for it.

Here's hoping Pocahontas scalps John Smith and cuts his nuts off:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/whitefish-puerto-rico-utility-contract

Conservative principles spreading throughout government like measles through a Lakota settlement.

what once were vices are now habits.

I was about to congratulate you, russell, on being the modern Martial or Horace, but then I looked it up and saw I should be congratulating the Doobie Brothers instead!

hey, the count's link made me think of zinke, which made me think of this bill which was forwarded through the House Natural Resources Committee a couple of weeks ago.

it would prevent the POTUS from creating any national monument larger than 85,000 acres. states or local municipalities could veto anything larger than 10,000.

living here in the cramped northeast, those sound like pretty big patches of land. however, every park in this list is half a million acres or more.

death valley, yellowstone, grand canyon, yosemite, joshua tree, glacier bay, everglades, smoky mountain, sequoia, zion, canyonlands.

too big. under this law, they could not be created.

even dinky little katahdin waters in woods up in maine is too big.

zinke says no existing park will be eliminated, although some may be reduced in size, and/or opened to more commercial use.

god forbid we should leave anything the hell alone.

god forbid we should leave anything the hell alone.

The creations of the parks were cases of not "leave anything the hell alone." :)

living here in the cramped northeast, those sound like pretty big patches of land.

For years, the Army proposed using eminent domain to take a section of Colorado to expand the Pinon Canyon tank maneuver area. The area they want is slightly larger than the state of Massachusetts. The plans are currently on hold, but the Army hasn't ever killed the idea officially.

too big. under this law, they could not be created.

No, under this law they couldn't be created by the President acting alone. Congress would still be able to create any of them. Only Congress has ever been able to create a national park. It's fairly clear that the intent at the time the Antiquities Act was originally passed was to allow the President to act quickly on small areas. The massive national monuments are a quite recent development.

I'm waiting for Trump to sign an executive order reclassifying parts of some national monuments back to national forests or whatever, and for it to get to court. Current law says nothing about "uncreating" national monuments.

"It can take a while for people to realize that, in spite of tribal affinity, they are being lied to and propagandized. Most would rather die in agony than give up their cherished delusions."

Fill circle, it is laughable to the actual centrist in me that somehow your politicians are all honest and the other politicians all lie.

Who is NOT being lied to, is the question. Once that is cleared up tribalism becomes secondary.

Above hsh asks a good question, they all, all 25 years worth, lied. They all tried to do good stuff and bad. They all tried to get tbeir party reelected and in control.

That leaves us to figure it out ourselves, thus the grand variety of opinions.

@russell,
With absolutely no disrespect, your comment at 1:28 is why many western politicians are concerned about letting people from out east have much of a voice on the public lands in the West. A national park, a national monument, a national forest/grassland, and a national wilderness area are all different things, can be created in different ways, with very different amounts of public input, and with vastly different restrictions on use of the designated land and sometimes the surrounding areas.

I can introduce you to progressive western Democrats who feel the federal government's power over and responsibility towards western public lands needs to be changed.

I actually do get that Michael, and FWIW I doubt that either I or my elected representatives have all that much power over public lands in the West.

All of that said, my point was to contrast the size of what would be permitted with the size of existing parks and monuments that many folks are already familiar with.

And which would likely not exist, and would not have been allowed to exist, under the new law.

Lastly, I can assure you that it isn't just folks out West who are affected by federal policies governing the use of natural resources. Ask anyone in New England who fishes for a living.

Neysa Tonks

All of that said, my point was to contrast the size of what would be permitted with the size of existing parks and monuments that many folks are already familiar with. And which would likely not exist, and would not have been allowed to exist, under the new law.

The bill says nothing about national parks, national forests, or national wilderness areas. It only mentions national monuments, and specifically, the President's authority to unilaterally recategorize existing federal lands above a certain size to monument status. If the Antiquities Act had included the same restriction from the beginning, it would have had no effect on the creation of the parks and wilderness areas that exist today.

Restrictions on the President's power to make such designations is not new. After Jackson Hole National Monument was created in 1943, Congress changed the law so that no new national monuments could be declared in Wyoming without Congressional consent. After Jimmy Carter used the authority to create several large monuments in Alaska, Congress changed the law again to require consent for any monument status changes greater than 5,000 acres in Alaska.

It is quite likely that smaller versions of most of the recent large monuments would have been approved by state and local governments. If the bill passes, I will be looking forward to the first court case where a state approves a monument and the local government does not. There's a lot of case history that only the state can delegate any sort of sovereignty to the local governments within its borders.

wj wrote:

"However, until that happens, the best choice on offer is to remain a Republican, so as to be able to vote in the primaries for folks that are at least halfway sane."

The halfway sane, well, halfway not clinically and criminally psychotic in a normal world, are leaving the field and handing the entire mess to batshit, vermin, subhuman rumpsters and the right wing filth in the slavery caucus in the House.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/flake-says-he-will-not-run-for-senate-again

I don't believe in electoral politics any longer.

I believe in savage retribution. Not on an individual basis. Not lame stuff like Antifa and Black Lives Matter, nor the Democratic Party.

I mean a tidal wave of bloody rage that takes everyone and everything off its foundations and sows the political landscape with salt and fire.

No platform, no issues.

Just shocking, sudden overwhelming vengeance.



The bill says nothing about national parks, national forests, or national wilderness areas.

All good. I stand corrected.

https://www.balloon-juice.com/2017/10/24/just-words-4/

Yup.

Jordan Mclldoon

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/the-trump-corker-feud-resumes/

Double yup.

Fuck 'em all.

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a13085304/f-35-oxygen-pilot/

I'm glad rump managed to arm-wrestle a buck or two off each of private sector firm Lockheed Martin's boondoggles.

If as many guns misfired as this flying Fiat does, the murder/suicide rate in America would plummet.

I understand the F-35 uses the Edsel chassis.

I guess none of their top managememnt's executive team and engineers require the CHIP program for their kids.

I understand the F-35 uses the Edsel chassis.

No way. The Edsel flopped in the market. But its engineering was superior. Probably the best of its era.

The F-35 is, if anything, the opposite. Its sales are great. But its engineering? Underwhelming.

More John Cole, former republican youth and Redstate Board member:

https://www.balloon-juice.com/2017/10/24/the-reason-i-am-tired-of-this-lip-service-from-the-gop-bullshit-artists/

I don't believe in electoral politics any longer.

An opinion shared by large swaths of the GOP rank and file and as expressed in the public policies adopted by their political leadership.

To wit: Aggressive gerrymander
Voter suppression laws

The last big political realignment was the Solid South fleeing into the arms of the GOP. This temporarily reversed the decline of the GOP into irrelevance after the Goldwater flameout and the embarrassment of Dick Nixon.

The Reagan ascendancy was the high water mark.

Since then, it has been all smoke and mirrors - cf Bush v. Gore.

The split will be rural/urban as rural areas empty out (thanks, unconstrained technology!) to be replaced by an opiod dystopia with, thanks to the anomalies of the Electoral College, will continue to hold outsized political power.

As the GOP increasingly has to resort to political trickery to retain power despite their minority status, the center shall not hold and the precious reed of democracy will bend and then break due to the accelerating rightward shift into crypto-fascist religion driven racist xenophobia of the GOP base and the political superstructure they will drag along with them.

They know something their leaders do not. They are about to lose. Big Time.

The democratic response should be one of unbending scorched earth. You gerrymander Dems out of office in Wisconsin? Goodby to ANY GOP representative from California. You artificially create a Pennsylvania Congressional delegation that does not reflect the political outlook of the majority? Goodbye, upstate New York Congresscritters. You repress the black vote in Texas? There won't be a precinct polling place anywhere near a GOP leaning district in Las Vegas.

We may have to "go to the mattresses" but that's the way things have to be if democracy is to survive.

This will be the next great political realignment. Count (cough, cough) on it.

Bobby, that stuff in your next to last paragraph isn't really necessary. Rather soon, the charge to the far right will exceed the ability of anybody to overcome via gerrymandering. Even with the baked-in advantages from the electoral college.

No, it won't happen instantly. But probably faster than you can implement your proposal.

the charge to the far right will exceed the ability of anybody to overcome via gerrymandering

Trump was elected by less than 19% of Americans.

the gerrymandering is built into the Constitution, we call it "the Electoral College". it's one of the many ways the founders fucked up.

Yup.

Basically, I think it kind of sucks to be a (R) right now. Even with the White House, majorities in both houses of Congress, and a solid presence in the SCOTUS and the judiciary generally.

Because "the base" is insane, and if you want to hold national office as a (R), you have to kiss up to the base.

So some folks are just going to call it a day. Who needs that crap?

it's one of the many ways the founders fucked up.

As far as I can tell, the founders did not want a democracy, and were frankly suspicious of democracy per se. Certainly a large number of them were.

They wanted a republic. And specifically, a republic governed by an elite, which meant people like them. White men with property.

Not the only factor that contributed to the establishment of the Electoral College, but a significant one.

so Presidential.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/01/28/upshot/donald-trump-twitter-insults.html

Corporate America designed a Christian robot, pierced with the fake commercial stigmata of the only Americans ensouled by the randian republican God Mammon, the Corporations, and who like a sexless android Christ wielding the scepter of Dagney Taggart in one hand and the reliquaried diseased phallus of Tom Delay in the other, and programmed for devotional smugness, lurched into the temple of the people, and welcomed all of them who bought and sold in that temple and opened fake accounts and sold fake insurance in thy names in that temple, and helped them to set up the tables of the moneychangers (changing our money into theirs) and the seats of them that hosted vicious corporate raptors, And said unto them, It is written, My house shall be called the house of soul-less corporate corruption; and my conservative principles shall spread throughout my house, so that it shall be remade a den of thieves.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/pence-breaks-tie-to-nix-obama-era-consumer-arbitration-rule/ar-AAu0pOl

Pass the opioids to the androids and load the clips.

Jessica Klymchuk

The new rule covers Equifax's ass while letting them off the hook for not covering ours from rumpian/russian hackers:

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/congress-votes-disallow-consumers-suing-033159253.html

They wanted a republic. And specifically, a republic governed by an elite, which meant people like them. White men with property.

Even then, they screwed up, at least if you measure their decision by the result of the last presidential election. They got the white part, but not the elite part. Just the sort of rabble-rousing boob they were trying to avoid having as president is what we got.

But I suppose it would be tough to foresee, in the late 18th century, what the US has become in terms of population distribution among 50 states.

it's one of the many ways the founders fucked up.

It is one of the religious transcendental delusions of liberalism to believe that the proper perfect forms and practices of governance will overcome human character and history. And make politics, everyday social interactions, persuasion and compromise and the satisfaction of constituent needs, irrelevant and unnecessary.

Weapons of the weak and agency and complicity are the facts on the ground. As a revolutionary, I accept and understand that the oppressed don't want to starve, get beaten or die, but that remains a choice, and even the most oppressive regime must provide a minimal level of comfort to avoid suicidal riotous constituents.

Too far afield, too digressive. Shorter, I don't look very much or care very much about forms, institutions and structures. Power is everywhere, pretty much evenly distributed, but exercised unevenly, by preference, self-restraint, and ignorance.

The Electoral College is not the problem. You don't like it, moving to a small-pop state is only one of many options.

throw a few more on the Trafficking pile:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/crime/article179538886.html

Agents with the Federal Bureau of Investigation rescued 84 minors, including three in North Carolina, this month during a nationwide operation that targeted underage human trafficking.

"YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BUT YOUR CHAINS" is the fact on the ground.

Everything else you have, are, care about including what and who you love and your life involves complicity and cooperation with an evil oppressive system. There is absolutely no possibility of anything good there.

"But I suppose it would be tough to foresee, in the late 18th century, what the US has become in terms of population distribution among 50 states."

If Constitutional originalists has prevailed, there wouldn't be 50 states.

Constitutional originalists, like the spiritualist at the head of the table during a seance, can divine precisely what the Founders were thinking and intended 230 years ago regarding rights, neither adding nor subtracting from what the Founders divined, AND as well imbue those Founders with infinite foresight into the future regarding whatever transpires as this thing called history unfolds.

If the Constitution and the Bill of Rights had instead been written 2300 years ago, Gorsuch and company would still justify semi-automatic weapons in the hands of the citizenry based on slingshots instead of muskets and we would still have real live Congresspeople who believe the Last Supper featured steaks carved from the stegosaurus the Apostles rode in on.

We are founding as we live in real time. Martin Luther King was a Founder. Susan B Anthony was a Founder. Abraham Lincoln was a Founder.

That two of them were shot in the head is merely evidence of what happens to Founders-come-lately, as they are hazed by originalists.

Founding didn't stop in 1776 because Jesse Helms, John Wilkes Booth, and Robert Mercer, all assassins one way or another, say so.

There is absolutely no possibility of anything good there.

riiiiiight

Please, please lock up Hillary Clinton.

Then we can get on with the cataclysm republican America fucking deserves.

We are founding as we live in real time. Martin Luther King was a Founder. Susan B Anthony was a Founder. Abraham Lincoln was a Founder.

This is great. I'm certainly going to steal it...

It's like adulthood: it's not a milestone, or a moment, it's a process, never-ending.

Chainsaw accidents in the state-level laboratories (pronounce that word like Boris Karloff did) of America:

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a13085898/human-body-part-sales-deregulated/

Because in one state enclosed by imaginary lines on a map it's OK to dismember those corpses by chainsaw, whereas in another, where humans are completely different on account of the relative values held by folks who believe in universal values, you can shove a stick of dynamite up a corpse's tush without permission.

Who is to say which is better?

http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/10/flake

The only difference between so-called mainstream republicans and rump is the former fuck us up the ass while telling us soothingly this is righteous, pious God showing us how to relax, while rump fucks us up the ass and tells us we knew what we were getting into all along and he is going to give it to us hard and fast, loser.

Neither care if we call Uncle.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/youtube-trumpkin-and-former-milo-intern-kills-his-own-dad-for-calling-him-a-nazi?via=newsletter&source=DDMorning

He was under consideration for a middling post at the rump/sessions Department of Justshit.

There are good people on both sides of the knife.

Hillary hadda been in on this. Lock her up.

I suppose now I'm going to ban knives.

we could just ban sons.

Everything else you have, are, care about including what and who you love and your life involves complicity and cooperation with an evil oppressive system. There is absolutely no possibility of anything good there.

The rabid libertarian position in a nutshell. I guess not having to maintain a personal defense system against criminals isn't a "good". Nor being relieved of running extensive engineering and scientific tests before making any purchase, to be sure that you are getting what you are paying for, and nothing toxic included. Among numerous other things that government does -- admittedly with varying levels of success.

Otherwise, what cleek said.

Neither care if we call Uncle.

Is there a "safe word"?**

** A concept I would never have encountered, if I didn't read a lot. Not part of my quite mundane real life.

Sure, wj. Whatever...

The rabid libertarian position in a nutshell

Totally backwards.

I want everyone in governance, preferably wearing a uniform.

But we were talking about the Electoral College, the "I moved from Montana to San Francisco, and my vote got diluted. Not Fair" crowd. The system should make my preferences non-consequential crowd.

And those benefiting from Empire preening about their accomplishments and achievements, and claiming the system absolves them of responsibility. All Trump's fault.

when your model no longer bears any relation to reality, it's time to abandon your model.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/trumps-republican-collaborators-must-choose-country-or-party-2017-10-25?siteid=bigcharts&dist=bigcharts

republicans want their robots to emulate them precisely.

My robot sings "get outta my face".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efJGDpCSrJY

Maybe my robot, a many-armed Shiva crushing a dove in one hand, swinging a machete in another, a bumpstocked semi-automatic in another and a nuclear warhead in another, should be exponentially more like the NRA than one million NRAs:

via a Hullabaloo link:

https://www.salon.com/2017/10/25/in-the-gop-civil-war-theres-one-clear-winner-the-nra/

Maybe becoming more like the enemy and surpassing its ruthlessness exponentially in word and deed is the only path available to make room in this country for getting back to being ourselves again.

I learned yesterday that in the beginning Jeff Bezos' favored name for what is now Amazon was "Relentless". He was overruled by his mates.

I think "Relentless" should replace "Resist".

DJIA down 163 points as we speak.

rump tweets the DJIA day chart upside down, declares "fake" news, then tweets DJIA chart for the eight years spanning Obama's Presidency, also upside down, and declares it the greatest bear market in recorded history.

Jeff Flake, Bob Corker and company shrug and say "well, yeah".

Fats. Aint that a shame....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8KJe8Ugtd8

If the Constitution and the Bill of Rights had instead been written 2300 years ago, Gorsuch and company would still justify semi-automatic weapons in the hands of the citizenry based on slingshots instead of muskets[...]

Do NOT underestimate slingshots!
https://www.youtube.com/user/JoergSprave/videos

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/graham-stand-up-trump-but-trying-get-taxes-cut

For republican filth reluctant to put out in other ways, tax cuts are the new casting couch.

If Stalin had offered tax cuts, he wouldn't have had to murder so many of his colleagues. They would have been putty in his hands.

Your average German on the street in the late 1930's: "Yes, my Jewish neighbors disappeared and the last time I saw my kid's Jewish teacher, she was being hustled off to the train station, but the Fuhrer is going to cut my taxes, so what do you want from me?"

Fuck you, republicans.

rump sycophant, ersatz journalist, and "kind of a dick" Mark Halperin should have followed his hero's lead and offered tax cuts to the women he was "pursuing relationships with" (a few dogs have pursued a relationship with my leg in the same manner) by pressing his tumescent crotch up against them.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/veteran-journalist-mark-halperin-accused-of-sexual-misconduct

He probably could have made it with the republican women.

"Is that a tax cut in your pocket, big boy, or are you happy to see me?"

It is well known that Roger Ailes would interview conservative women who wanted a job with FOX News to pursue their dream of faking journalism by having them close their eyes, and do the twirl while thinking about big tax cuts.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/second-woman-accuses-george-hw-bush-of-groping

It's the explanation in this one that burns: "To try to put people at ease, the president routinely tells the [Cop-a-feel] joke — and on occasion, he has patted women’s rears..."

speaking of rabid libertarians...

i'd like to hear one explain how faux-freedom fetishist, Rand Paul, can square his brand of shmibertarianism with Roy Moore's brand of Christian Sharia.

You screw with republicans and they will threaten to kill you and your family:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/wilson-away-ongoing-threats

On the other hand, you shoot a republican like Steve Scalise and if you live through it, he'll offer you more and bigger weapons of war for the next time around.

No limits.

Yeah, it's the federal flood insurance program that entices the swamp-dwellers:

http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/10/selling-florida-swampland

rump country:

http://www.news-press.com/story/news/politics/2016/11/08/election-night-results/93495738/

Fuck you, republicans.

Please jail Hillary Clinton! Hang the witch!

I'm begging you, filth, do it!

https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2017/10/checking-in-with-alternative-facts-media.html

And then we can get on with what needs to be gotten on with in pigfucker republican America.

Ed Gillespie has run a rumpian, flagrantly racist, white nationalist, confederate, homophobic campaign in Virginia on behalf of all racist, white nationalist, homophobic republicans, 63 million of them scuttling out from under the baseboards, in the country.

He's found more ways to say "nigger" than even Lee Atwater dreamed of.

If he wins, all of the targets of his disgraceful, racist pigfucking, but typically republican campaign need to join the NRA and load up on weapons of war and ammo to defend themselves from the government violence that will follow.

George W. Bush followed rump in endorsing Gillespie.

That's not weird shit at all

Of course.

i'd like to hear one explain how faux-freedom fetishist, Rand Paul, can square his brand of shmibertarianism with Roy Moore's brand of Christian Sharia.

Libertarians would like an explaination too.

Moore has a passion for the Constitution in the sense that Roman Polanski has a passion for children’s issues —Popehat
Constitutional Conservatives for Defrocked Judges: Ted Cruz joins Rand Paul and Mike Lee in enthusiastically endorsing lawless jurist Roy Moore.

i sometimes wander over to reason.com, to see what's up in Libertariana. i usually find a couple of articles that seem like the product of a coherent ideology - they're at least well-reasoned, given the tenets of libertarianism.

and then i look at the comments.

sheesh.

You screw with republicans and they will threaten to kill you and your family

. . .

On the other hand, you shoot a republican like Steve Scalise and if you live through it, he'll offer you more and bigger weapons of war for the next time around.

You just completely misunderstand. If it's us buying and using weapons, that's great because of the 2nd Amendment. But if it's you using weapons against us, our devotion to "law and order" requires that we throw the book at you -- and increase penalties from time to time, just for extra insurance.

See? Simple!

and then i look at the comments.

sheesh.

The commenting culture went south at reason when they switched to threaded comments. Which seem to facilitate "your mamma" back and forths, trolling, snark, etc.

Aside from a couple of trolls, unlibertarian like comments are often for ironic effect and in group jokes. There's a history to why references to "woodchippers" appear handles and comments.

Do NOT underestimate slingshots!

a good old sling will do some damage as well. takes some practice to be accurate, though.

apparently the folks in the balearic islands were the best shots, back in the day.

You screw with republicans and they will threaten to kill you and your family

I have a buddy who occasionally calls me for gigs. back in the day he had a sort of semi-hit, complete with video on MTV. the obligatory female model in the video later married Scott Brown.

when Brown first ran for Kennedy's Senate seat, the video got lots of hits. look, Scott Brown's wife in an MTV video!!

and, my buddy got lots of death threats and various other promises of serious abuse.

for writing a song, that had a video, that featured Brown's wife being sort-of naughty in a red dress, before she was Brown's wife, decades before Brown ran for national office.

some people need some serious therapy.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad