Showing posts with label John Kasich. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Kasich. Show all posts

Monday, October 2, 2017

After Puerto Rico Can We NOW Agree That Dotard Is A Degenerate Narcissist?

Related image
"Them Puerto Ricans are lazy bums! They need to help themselves!"


On Sunday this loathsome lunatic continued his Twitter rants on "politically motivated ingrates:" when this sickening turd was lollygagging at his golf course with billionaire pals. This as the people of Puerto Rico fought for their survival, something the entitled Dotard has never done in his silver spoon life.

Anyone who's seen the scenes of devastation on the island - a territory of the U.S. with 3.5 million  American CITIZENs, would know the level of need:  95 percent with no electricity, 50 percent without potable water, hospitals having to shut doors because life -sustaining resources are no longer available including ice to preserve critical meds.  And Dotard believes a thousand or so federal troops are enough?  He's insane.

Out of Dotard's own tweety "mouth" we beheld:

"The Mayor was complimentary to me a few days ago but now the Democrats told her she must be nasty to Trump"

No, asshole, this is not about "Trump" or being "nasty" to your miserable ass, this is about accepting your responsibility as the president of the Puerto Rican commonwealth too  - like you did for white  people of Houston, TX. It is not about abandoning them to their own hours and days of need because there are too many brown, Spanish speakers.

Dotard, degenerate narcissist that he is,  makes this about himself when it's about getting critical resources to the people of this island. That means at least 50,000 soldiers (according to Gen. Russell Honore(Ret.)) to get all the needed supplies to the people scattered across the   square miles - including using chopper drops as was done (finally) after Katrina struck New Orleans in 2005


Asked on Meet the Press on NBC whether she felt personally attacked by Trump, mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz. said: “I don’t care. He can attack me all he wants, you know, bring it on, I’m here, if it saves lives. If it gets the message in the right place, frankly my dear, I don’t give a damn.

This, spoken like a true leader of steel and grit and understands what's on the line for her 400,000 people as well as the population of the island. She knows Trump's tweets don't mean diddly or squat and exposing him as the clown prince of ego he is may be her only play left to get the attention the island needs - and the resources. It if means shaming Do-turd, so be it.

Trump and senior administration figures are set to visit Puerto Rico on Tuesday, at which point they will come face to face with the ongoing hardship on an island that is home to 3.5 million American citizens. There have been some signs of tentative progress made but it simply isn't enough, not in terms of the sheer magnitude of the catastrophe..

As of Sunday morning, nearly 65% of gas stations, 11% of cell phone towers and 49% of supermarkets were open, according to the Puerto Rican government. But on Saturday the governor’s office said 53% of the country still did not have water service, and although large quantities of supplies have started to arrive at the ports the distribution of the goods to outlying regions continues to prove difficult as a result of damage to roads and bridges.

The Trump administration has clearly been rattled by the searing criticism from the San Juan mayor, and by a growing theme on social media and cable news comparing the apparently sluggish response to the Puerto Rican disaster to the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans in 2005.
Chief economics adviser Gary Cohn interrupted an interview on the new tax plan with Fox News Sunday to make a statement on Puerto Rico. He insisted the US had gone through “extraordinary efforts to deliver goods to the island”.

We are working full steam ahead,” he said. To which I call 'Bullshit!' You're not even working at quarter speed. On the other hand,  Puerto Ricans  themselves have risked life and limb to get fuel, food, water and ice to their fellows. Yet Donald Dotard has the nerve to say  they are "too lazy" to help themselves. No, Dotard, YOU are the laziest guy to ever become president - racking up more golf and vacay days than any other in history.

Meanwhile Trump's budget cutting sidekick Mick Mulvaney, director of the federal Office of Management and Budget, told CNN’s State of the Union blabbed :  "It’s unfair to say we haven’t done everything we can, because we have. It’s unfortunate that the San Juan mayor wants to go against the grain – we’d love to have her on the team.”

How can she be on your useless "team" when she's trying her best to triage the situation in San Juan?

Mulvaney added: “Judge us by the actions please. Judge us by what’s happening on the island, judge us by the men and the women who have worked tirelessly.”

A nice patter full of PR but all phony because you nitwits underestimated the severity and the need. If you hadn't you'd have had hospital ships off the island and ferrying the most compromised patients on board. You didn't, so STFU.

Trump, who was spending the weekend at his property in Bedminster, New Jersey, also faced a barrage of outrage over his assault of Cruz by Twitter. Bernie Sanders put it most caustically on CNN.
                 In an update to his schedule on Sunday, Trump was due to attend the Presidents Cup golf tournament at Liberty National in Jersey City. The White House said he would participate in the trophy presentation.  As  for the millions of brown skinned Puerto Ricans, they were left to their own devices to fish or cut bait while the pompous one gratified his  enormous egomania.
Trump also faced criticism from within his own party. John Kasich, the governor of Ohio who ran against Trump in the Republican presidential primaries, accused him of acting inappropriately in a
 disaster situation.

“It’s just not the way that I think it ought to be handled,” Kasich said of Trump’s attack on the mayor. “No matter what they say you have to be bigger than the nonsense.”

Correction, the only "nonsense" is emanating from Dotard Trump.  That means those like the people of Puerto Rico, the. Governor and San Juan Mayor Cruz are the ones who are having to be bigger than HIM, attending to the needs of the people there. Sen. Chuck Schumer on 'Face the Nation' castigated Trump the Dotard for the "slow footed,  disorganized and inadequate " response,  which is exactly true.  It was too slow to help millions -  putting resources in the wrong areas and in the most inefficient ways.  It was also too feeble, requiring five times as many federal officials and deployed vastly more widely than in Houston or New Orleans after Katrina.   Massive military support was needed from the outset which this turkey, errrr "commander -in-chief" didn't process.

Yale professor Timothy Snyder in his book, 'On Tyranny', has written (p. 113):

"The president is a nationalist which is not at all the same thing as being a patriot. A nationalist encourages us to be our worst, and then tells us that we are the best.  A nationalist "though endlessly brooding on power, victory, defeat, revenge" wrote Orwell "tends to be uninterested  in what happens in the real world".


This is exactly what defines Dotard.  Every waking breath or rudimentary thought is contingent on who has power and who doesn't or who is victor and who is vanquished. Who merits revenge and who deserves reward.  Within his closed bubble of narcissism all Dotard could see in the wake of Maria's devastation is who would adulate him and who wouldn't.  San Juan's mayor Cruz merely called for needed assistance and she was seen as an enemy who needed to be defeated - as opposed to a leader of a U.S. territory with people every bit as much citizens as the white folk of Houston.


God forbid any major U.S. city with a majority black or brown population experience another natural disaster - or even man-made one.

Saturday, September 10, 2016

John Kasich Takes His Wrath Out On Atheists - After Campaign Pummeling By Trump

Image result for brane space, Atheism
KasichBookstoreNH
Ohio Guv John Kasich - above left - shoots his mouth off in a NH bookstore about Daniel Radcliffe being an atheist. Kasich obviously needs to pull his head out of his ass.

It looks to me like Ohio Gubernator John Kasich is suffering from a bit of Stockholm syndrome. Seems that all those punches along with the Reepo debate hostage taking by Trump have  taken their toll on him mentally.  In a recent bookstore appearance in downtown Exeter, NH - according to a report in The Washington Post-  he appears to have finally lost all his marbles.

Kasich was evidently on a tour of beautiful downtown Exeter with Chris Sununu in tow (the son of former Sen. John Sununu)  and he spotted a copy of one of the Harry Potter books. Immediately, Kasich's febrile and senile brain experienced a rare neuronal association and connected it to the "Harry Potter" movie actor Daniel Radcliffe.  In the next instant a minor brain quake erupted and Kasich,  after wiping some dribble from his chin, sputtered:

You know that Daniel has declared himself an atheist? I’m serious. What a weird thing. Why would a guy who has had all that success just, I mean, what the hell is wrong with him?”


Well, it appears not only is he a grade A asshole for that vapid blurtation, but also is unaware that atheists and "nones" (no religious affiliation) are the fastest growing group in the U.S.  on the religious-non-religious spectrum.  He also appears to have emanated a major brain fart with his failure to process that being an atheist has nada to do with success. Nothing. And on a per capita basis there are actually more successful atheists than Christians, like Kasich. This may well be because atheists operate according to reason and adhere to the rules of logic instead of shooting balderdash from the hip.

To reinforce the point further, the Post noted the growing list of "A-list" atheists including: Keira Knightley, Julianne Moore, Javier Bardem and Billy Joel, to name a few. Then there are the 7 out of 10 (estimated) physical scientists who have successfully published their research in peer-reviewed journals and even won Nobel Prizes (like  physicist Steven Weinberg).  As the Post author put it:

"Kasich might be doing a lot more head scratching or fist shaking at the TV"

In other words, this idiot is in denial at just how successful atheists are in multiple spheres, so there's certainly no reason for Daniel Radcliffe to hang his head. Rather, buttbrains like Kasich - who I once actually thought of as the only serious Reep candidate, fit the loser bill. I mean look how he got beaten by Trump, to a bloody pulp!

The Post also pointed out that Radcliffe has made no secret of his atheism, telling Esquire in a 2009 interview "I'm an atheist but I'm very relaxed about it. I don't preach my atheism:

In other words, it's very likely he's an implicit as opposed to explicit atheist. To refresh memories, the implicit atheist simply withholds belief in any kind of deity already on offer by the theist. (The explicit atheist, by contrast, rejects it outright.)  The explicit atheist is also more likely to be aggressive based on his or her attitude.

As a result of Kasich's juvenile outburst American Atheists President David Silverman is calling on Kasich to apologize and meet with atheists in his home state so he doesn’t say something offensive like that again.  The problem with that appeal is that it only works with reasonable, rational people. For a knuckle dragging ignoramus like Kasich it would be like getting an ape in a zoo to apologize for shooting his wad on passersby.  Frankly, he wouldn't know what the hell you were talking about.

In a letter sent to Kasich’s office and posted online, Silverman declared:
To state what should be obvious: There is nothing “wrong” with Mr. Radcliffe nor with the tens of millions of atheists in this country.
Atheists are members of your community. We are your firefighters, your police officers, your teachers, your doctors, and your coworkers. I have no doubt that atheists serve on your staff and volunteered for your presidential campaign. If you think you’ve never met an atheist, you’re wrong. 
I challenge you to sit down with a group of your atheist constituents. Talk to us about what we want from our government. Ask us why we’re atheists and what it means to us. You name the time and place and I’ll make it happen.

Again, very eloquent and it would be compelling if one was dealing with a rational or even semi-rational person, but Kasich is neither. (See the analogy given earlier). If anything, Kasich is such a class A asshole he'd just double down on his antagonism if the American Atheist prez pleads too much.

The bottom line is that dingbats like John Kasich don't give a rat's patootey whether atheists are part of their community, are successful or not.  In their tiny, misshapen world the exercise of our rights can never receive an imprimatur because atheists are not considered as equals.  Silverman could as well ask a pig or drunken ape to whistle "Dixie" and have more success.

Friday, March 4, 2016

Will Mitt's Anti-Trump Broadsides "Shake Some Sense" Into Trump Supporters?



"Here's what I know: Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud. He's playing the members of the American public for suckers. He gets a free ride to the White House and all we get is a lousy hat.....the bullying, the misogyny, the absurd third grade theatrics...is not the temperament of the stable, thoughtful person we need as leader." - Mitt Romney yesterday at Hinckley Institute

Former Reep Presidential candidate Mitt Romney  tore into The Donald yesterday morning leaving no insult unmentioned and indirectly calling down Trump supporters to halt their addiction to the guy. But will it work?  Will the Trumpy addicts be swayed by Mitt's 17 minute diatribe? Somehow, given nothing else has phased them, I doubt it.

Addressing a Republican National Committee (RNC) meeting in Salt Lake City, Utah, Romney opened his speech by drawing on Ronald Reagan’s framing of the 1964 election as “a time for choosing”. The 2016 election, he argued, posed a similar crossroads for the American people. The Mittster conceded:

I’m no Ronald Reagan, and this is a different moment in time, but I believe with all my heart and soul that we face another time of choosing – one that will have profound consequences for the Republican party and, more importantly, for our country,”

Make no mistake Romney’s speech lived up to all the hype, including lacerating almost every Trump invention, idea or speculation - from Trump University to closed (bankrupt)Trump casinos and everything in between.. Portions of it had already been released to stations (e.g. MSNBC) hours before he delivered it. On 'Morning Joe' it was noted that the purpose was to "shake up Trump supporters and get some sense into them".  

The speech itself marked an unprecedented moment in American politics, with a growing number of prominent Republicans now desperately seeking to stop in his tracks a candidate who increasingly resembles the presumptive nominee. Romney laid out a case that was in equal parts scathing and urgent, while stating that “the prospects for a safe and a prosperous future are greatly diminished” if Republicans were to nominate Trump.

Indeed, Trump's Tuesday victories even have the Europeans going ballistic and dredging up memories of another charismatic, bombastic demagogue from 80 years ago.

The alarm has even made its way to the front pages of Der Spiegel, with the red-lettered word ('Wahnsinn' or 'Crazy Man' ) at the bottom.


Although Romney did not offer an endorsement, he praised candidates Marco Rubio, John Kasich and Ted Cruz and essentially suggested voters should support each of the three and pave the way for a brokered convention. Countering the rabid enthusiasm of Trumpies, Romney declared:

One of these men should be our nominee,”

Noting the real estate mogul would precipitate another economic recession and weaken America’s standing overseas. Then adding as evidence for Trump's disqualification:

 “He creates scapegoats of Muslims and Mexican immigrants, he calls for the use of torture and for killing the innocent children and family members of terrorists. He cheers assaults on protesters. He applauds the prospect of twisting the constitution to limit first amendment freedom of the press. This is the very brand of anger that has led other nations into the abyss.”

Thursday’s speech was the first time Romney has delivered such comprehensive put down remarks on the state of the 2016 race. Romney weighed in on almost every would be pratfall from Trump’s debunked claim that “thousands” of Muslims in New Jersey celebrated the September 11 terrorist attacks to his mocking of Senator John McCain for being captured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, to the mockery of a NY Times disabled reporter,  e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2015/11/trumps-mocking-of-handicapped-reporter.html

Think of Donald Trump’s personal qualities, the bullying, the greed, the showing off, the misogyny, the absurd third-grade theatrics,” Romney said.

Romney’s appeal to reject Trump arrived less than 48 hours after the splenetic front runner picked up overwhelming victories on Super Tuesday, as Republicans in 11 states went to the polls. But this was not before other conservative media "powerhouses" -  including The Wall Street Journal  - had weighed in, e.g. with Trump-skewering columns by Brett Stephens and Holman Jenkins, Jr..

Brett Stephens in his 'Staring At The Conservative Gutter', wrote (after the KKK misstep):

"It would be terrible to think that the Left was right about the Right all these years. Nativist bigotries must not be allowed to become the animating spirit of the Republican Party. If Donald Trump becomes the candidate he will not win the Presidency but he will help vindicate the Left's ugly indictment. It will be left to decent conservatives to pick up the pieces".

Thereby implying anyone who votes for Trump is not a "decent conservative".

Holman Jenkins Jr. was even more blunt about Trump followers in his WSJ piece ('Trump Voters Need a Mirror', March 2, p. A15):

"To be honest and impolitic, the Trump voter smacks of a child who unleashes recriminations against mommy and daddy because the world is imperfect"

Adding:

"Until Trump and his fans show otherwise, he seems but the latest vessel of denial for voters who don't want responsibility. They want mommy and daddy"

Ouch! But columns like these two helped set the stage for Mitt Romney's lashing of Trump Thursday morning as well as the subtext  for his supporters to wake up from their agitated stupor. Which, let's face it, could also be fed by the desire for an emotional opposite to Obama's "no drama", Spockian, highly nuanced reactions and demeanor. (See: 'President Obama Created Donald Trump', WSJ, p. A13, today). This was an effect even moderate hack Joe Klein warned about in a TIME essay several years ago.

With the probability of a Trump nomination on the rise, the GOP establishment and its media have clearly been desperately in search of an alternative but left without a clear consensus candidate. At the same time, their columnists and spokespersons are incredulous people could actually be taking Trump seriously to run the country. The unspoken, unwritten subtext is 'What the hell are they drinking or smoking?'.  Even moderate media spokesperson(former anchor for NBC)  Tom Brokaw wondered Tuesday night if these supporters had lost touch with reality and didn't understand our checks and balances in the federal system.

"What if Trump can't deliver?" he asked. "What if our dispersed system of power prevents him from getting any of his promises done, like building the wall? What will they do?"

Good question! What indeed? Will they riot in the streets and screech how they were betrayed? Will they express severe buyer's remorse and never vote for anyone again - establishment or other?  But the fact is, Brokaw is correct, and they are all being set up for a massive letdown because the universe in which Trump could carry out his phantasmagorias is not the one that exists. The one we inhabit. . Because short of a takeover of government by Trump there is no way any of his claims to action can be manifest.

Romney didn't hesitate to tell the Hinckley site crowd of 500 that the party’s focus should be on defeating Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton,  “but a Trump nomination enables her victory”. (Well, not quite! At least one rep from Emily's List two weeks ago (on 'All In')  expressed fear and trepidation she would confront a "mad monkey with a gun" and one never knows what such a creature might do.)

Meanwhile, Romney himself, anticipating the Donald's reaction,  asked:

Will he talk about our policy differences or will he attack me with every imaginable low-road insult? This may tell you what you need to know about his temperament, his stability, and his suitability to be president.”

In fact, Trump referred in a speech to his endorsement of Mitt back in 2012 claiming "If I ordered Mitt to drop to his knees he would have".

So much for vindicating what Romney projected.

Sadly, none of these efforts is likely to have any effect at halting Trump's momentum. So long as his many followers want the macho "tough guy" or strong man to take all the bad guys down. So long as so many are addicted to this sort of brash approach Trump will continue on his road to the magic number of 1237 delegates - which if reached will commit those delegates to stick with him and not to bolt - say for Cruz or Kasich.

As Der Spiegel put it:

"Trump takes every opportunity in this campaign to portray his country as a down-and-out weakling. According to his strategy, when a nation's feeling of self-worth has hit rock bottom, it experiences a growing desire to overcome the "status quo" -- and for a strong man at the top."

SO long as so many believe the Trump narrative that the nation is a weakling, his coalition will continue to build on itself - and may even overturn Hillary's plans to make history. The only way to prevent that would be for every youthful Sanders' voter-supporter to throw his or lot in for HRC if and when Bernie departs.

Whether they actually will is another question.
See also:

Thursday, October 29, 2015

The Clash in Colorado - Only ONE Serious Candidate Stood Out In This Debate: John Kasich

Ben Carson and Ted Cruz after the debate.
"Damn, Cruz! Them questions was damn hard!"


When I read the Denver Post pre-debate story yesterday morning, concerning Ohio Guv John Kasich sending shivers down Democratic spines (if he emerged as the R-nominee, which let us admit is doubtful), I had to see for myself. I had to watch at least some of this latest clown cavalcade on CNBC to see who, if anyone, stood out as possessing presidential timbre. Well, they all failed to meet the standard except for Kasich.

The stand up moment came right at the outset when candidates were asked to give their primary weakness in 30 seconds or less. Kasich led off by not really addressing the question but instead pointing out the severe weaknesses of the others in terms of being realistic, especially with their tax-economic policies.

At that point, then again at a later interlude when he had to respond to Trump's misrepresentations about being in charge at Lehman Bros. in 2008, Kasich asserted:

"Folks, we gotta wake up! We cannot elect someone who doesn’t know how to do the job.”

He then torpedoed both the Trump and Carson tax plans as "delusional" - and even moderator John Harwood pointed out to the ever feisty Trump that his tax plan would only create even more mammoth deficits. As for Carson, his "tithing" tax plan was ridiculed as well, including by Kasich, though no one pulled Uncle Ben up on his ignorant remark about "taxing 15 percent of GDP" when in fact, he's proposing a flat tax on individuals. Doesn't he know the difference?

Marco Rubio, aka "the Cisco Kid" -   who the corporo-media touted as the "clear winner"-  was also exposed this morning by Steve Rattner on 'Morning Joe' as having an unworkable tax plan. To get a $2.4 trillion reduction in deficits, Rubio would have to spend $2.4 trillion. Hell, that's a worse balance than the "energy in vs. energy out" for fracking!  Rubio's only "win" came by showing he was a superior debater to the lethargic and out of tune Jeb - which we knew already. (Jeb needs to pack up his Bush bag and go home to mommy.)

Say one thing say the next, at least there was  a bit more illumination than in previous debates (though noise still dominated) as candidates were held accountable over what many economists have viewed as extreme tax and spending policies as well as conflicting promises on Social Security. (A favorite target of the extremist Right since the Social Security Law was passed in 1935, despite the fact most GOP voters depend on it to get by - especially in the South.)

Incredibly, Carson also later received supportive boos from the crowd after he was questioned on his links to a disgraced pharmaceutical company, then concluded his appearance by thanking fellow panelists “for not falling for the traps”.

Why anyone would boo the moderators on Carson's dumb behalf  for conflict of interest issues is beyond me. The guy is a moron, his tax plan was clearly exposed as airy fairy bull pockey - by two of the moderators as well as Kasich. And the gathered Reeptards ought to have been booing HIM when the links to the disgraced PhRMA company were brought out. The question as asked by Carl Quintanilla was:
This is a company called Mannatech, a maker of nutritional supplements, with which you had a 10-year relationship. They offered claims that they could cure autism, cancer, they paid $7 million to settle a deceptive marketing lawsuit in Texas, and yet your involvement continued. Why?
The little douchebag ought to have answered it because it was a deadly serious probe into the little fuck's background.  (Highlighting his support for quackery and mumbo jumbo if it earns him an extra buck).. But all he did was bristle and babble in the aftermath and the peanut-brained audience booed. Aren't you supposed to have at least an I.Q. of 100 to gain entry to a debate?

 But it only showed how out of touch with reality both the peanut gallery and their goofy "heroes" really are. As one Boulder construction worker put it - quoted in today's Denver Post, 'What a bunch of g**damned clowns!" Out of the mouths of real American workers! (Incredibly, students quoted in the same piece often gave the Reeptards a pass. One CU freshman actually said he "respected Carson for his political and scientific understanding". This kid's college admission needs to be rescinded and he ought to go back to kindergarten!)

But see, in this alternative universe of conservative bullshit,  reality has no place and truth is the first casualty. You can see it as a running thread in these idiotic Reepo debates, and even Paul Ryan - new House Speaker- conceded yesterday "Our party has lost its vision".  Yeah, and they did so in dispensing with reality and embracing a schizoid's vision. A vision wherein regulations are meaningless, women are the "enemy" of their "unborn babies" and you can spend as much as you want - especially on defense-  and still cut deficits.

The brainwashed crowds who vote and clamor for these useless clowns will look away from anything substantial  unless it's going after Obama.... or their primary foe that they call "Killary" - because they're terrified she will kill them next year in the general election - which she will . The only one who rose at all above this nonsense was Kasich. But given reality is not an attribute of the extremist Right, don't look for any of their bunch to see it.

The most hilarious aspect of last night's circus was how the tough questioning from CNBC moderators prompted Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, Ben Carson and others to unite against the television network, attacking them for bias. (Presumably that was based on the fact the network was not FOX  - which only the previous night featured a 23 min. "technical" delay for the first World Series game)

Teeing off on this "blame the refs" meme was Canuck Clown Ted Cruz's attack on the media when he blurted out:

“The questions that have been asked so far on this debate illustrate why the American people don’t trust the media,”

Then there was Mr. Chris "Crisco"  Christie bellyaching about a question concerning government regulation of Fantasy Football while ISIS was running loose.  Intimating the poor GOOPs got comic questions only.

But minutes after the debate ended, Carson complained about the "difficulty" of the questions while Democrats got "softball questions". So which is it? Maybe all the Reeps' perceptions are totally distorted so none of them can even agree on what they experience.

Cruz's  comment brought some of the biggest cheers of the night from the Colorado crowd. But again let us recall - as I noted in the last blog post- this was a cherry picked crowd where Reince Priebus literally had to comb Boulder for enough real conserrvos to balance the politico elites and media in the audience. Had the audience been truly representative Cruz, as well as Trump, Carson and most of the others would have been hooted off the stage.

The true fact is that the CNBC moderators dared ask challenging questions. These pretenders to the presidency weren’t mad because CNBC failed to do journalism correctly. They were mad because they apparently expected canned propaganda questions and did not get them.

All except Joh Kasich who at least presented sober solutions and had a moderate appeal. Again vindicating the DPost's take that he gave Dems the willies.

But see, the Reeptard extremists hate him because according to the WSJ piece yesterday (p. A4):

"He is a center Right Republican who is willing to defy conservative orthodoxy, use all levers of executive power and stick to his guns in the face of criticism - even from his own party."

In other words, the only realist on the GOP stage who might be a genuine contender and be able to defeat "Killary".   As the WSJ piece goes on:

"This has made some Democrats see him as a potentially strong general election candidate."

The takeaway from the night, delivered this morning by CNBC, after all the candidates carped about the moderators' questions:

"People who want to be President of the United States should be able to answer tough questions"

And that means questions beyond which those these Bozos were already prepared for, i.e. to give "canned" answers. If there was any fault with the CNBC moderators, it was the same as all the others thus far including on the FOX debate: No one is holding any of these guys to account in their wild, invalid claims or outright stupid remarks - such as Carson's against regulation ("I dunno why they got to regulate everything, I mean it's into everything"- well, maybe so your grand daughters don't get salmonella from ingesting 'Blue Bell' ice cream, dope!) Also, no questions were brought up regarding Carson's foolish statements comparing women who get abortions to slave holders (see previous post).

Anyway  the takeaway from this fiasco for me is that only one (at most)  of the ten showed the capacity to be a President : John Kasich. If this guy worries Demos, maybe the Reepos and their primary voters ought to take note!

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/william-rivers-pitt/64543/the-gop-debates-and-the-ghost-of-tom-joad

And:

http://www.salon.com/2015/10/29/the_inane_spectacle_of_the_gop_debate_cruz_the_showboating_creep_rubio_the_slick_operator_bush_the_desperate_flop/

Tuesday, September 1, 2015

"The Right Stuff"? How About Conservative Fairy Tales?

On a full, two-pages appearing in the WSJ 'Review (July 25-26, pp. C1- C2) one found the manifesto entitled 'The Right Stuff',  by Peter Berkowitz, a "senior fellow at the Hoover Institution". Since Herbert Hoover's policies were almost single-handedly responsible for starting the Great Depression, it behooves us to look at what one of his disciples has on offer - so that we might consider this balderdash for the nation's future.

Fortunately, much of the lengthy article is essential bollocks, basically a response to the recent Supreme Court decisions (on Obamacare and same sex marriage)  that "have Democrats celebrating and conservatives in a funk". So basically, two thirds of Berkowitz' extensive piece is a serving of conservo history, i.e.

"the conservative movement in the U.S. arose in the years after World War II  in response to the New Deal's enormous enlargement of the welfare state  and the Cold War threat of expansionist communism"

Of course, like most conservative takes, truth is the first casualty - and history ends up being highly selective - with no mention of the fact that the truly "expansionist" drive was motivated by the U.S.  Most of it can be traced to the document known as NSC-68 prepared by Paul Nitze of the National Security Council – completed by 1950. The document essentially contained the blueprint for unending strife and undeclared wars, all of which would be invoked on the basis of a zero tolerance threshold for foreigners’ misbehavior. The putative basis? To enable U.S. agitation, overthrow (or assassination) of democratically-elected leaders, e.g. Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954, 

 
 and large and small occupations (ranging from the few thousand troops in the Dominican Republic in 1965, to more than 200,000 in Iraq by 2006.)  

The motivating force of the document was clear in this regard:

“a defeat of free institutions anywhere is a defeat everywhere”

In other words, any place for which the U.S. even remotely construes a “defeat of free institutions” gives it license to intervene at will. This critical aspect is described thusly by Morris Berman[1]:

Nitze emphasized the importance of perception, arguing that how we were seen was as crucial as how militarily secure we actually were. This rapidly expanded the number of interests deemed relevant to national security”.

In effect, it provided the formula for unending war, and expansion of the capitalist system by force. Fortunately, not all of those brazen efforts panned out- as in the 1961 CIA bid to invade Cuba and Johnson's  Vietnam War - a barefaced effort to dominate Southeast Asia.


Most of the rest of Berkowitz article is an effort to offer palliatives to conservatives in the wake of their recent setbacks.  Thus they are reminded they are the special ones, the "upholders of individual freedom, equality under the law " and other bullshit. To those of us on the left, FDR's words ring most clear: "Necessitous men cannot be free men".  Thus, anyone in a condition of need is not free and any conservo that tells him to go pull himself up by his bootstraps is an idiot.

Yet there are packs of such idiots running freely around in the media spewing garbage in their columns, such as Conservatrix Kimberly Strassel (WSJ, 'The Compassion of John Kasich', Aug. 21, p. A13, who informs us that Kasich's Medicaid expansion in Ohio is misplaced and a case of "surrendering to the entitlement state". Jeebus, if she didn't actually say that, you couldn't make it up!  She also insists the better solution, is to "devolve power to the States" i.e. so they can use their own resources to assist the neediest, rather than the federal gov't. But this only shows how she, like most conservatives, is totally disconnected to reality. Because there is no assurance - not one bit or scintilla- that any state, especially a conservative Red one will do that (Kasich's being he obvious exception).


Back to Berkowtiz and his conservative ideations:

Incredibly, other setbacks - such as the removal of the Confederate flag from the SC State house grounds is revised and portrayed as "a sign of maturity" if you can believe it.  And besides, conservatives who treasure the Stars n' Bars and all it stands for can still fly the flags on private property.

But what really sticks in my craw (and I'm sure every other red-blooded leftist) is when Berkowitz insists with a straight face (p. C2) that:

"limited government allows individuals to take responsibility for themselves and their families and communities".

Yes, in an ideal world of limited corporate influence, that might be so. But not when corporate power and money can purchase political influence that undermines democracy and inveighs against the will  of the people as well as the general welfare. Then, "limited government" becomes exactly what the corporatocracy wants, a government too weak to protect the interests of its citizens against the array of private power. As FDR once put it:

"A democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than the democratic state itself. That in its essence is fascism: .”


Even conservative WSJ columnist William Gaston - in a WSJ column 6 weeks ago-  was  at least honest enough to acknowledge "equal opportunity in the U.S. is an aspiration not a fact". And that, in a nutshell, is what skewers Berkowitz' palsied thinking, as well as Kimberly Strassel's.  Thus, the problem with all conservative solutions is that they're based on an exaggerated assumption that ascribes more power to the majority of people than they actually possess.  Because if private power or corporations can buy off legislators and laws - by specious resort to money as "speech" - then the people become no better than invalids.  THIS is what the Left recognizes which the Right refuses to accept.

 The Right then is blinded by optimistic fairy tales that have no grounding in political or social  reality.  It proffers "limited government" but when that government is too limited to support its own citizens,  fascism prevails. Of course, this is exactly the outcome the Righties and their lot want!

 To see more intricate details of why limited government is the worst idea, certainly in respect of social support of the citizenry, see my recent book, The Elements of the Corporatocracy,
The Elements of the Corporatocracy
http://www.lulu.com/us/en/shop/philip-a-stahl/the-elements-of-the-corporatocracy/paperback/product-18649133.html

Thursday, August 13, 2015

WSJ's Gerald Seib Needs A Reality Adjustment


The Wall Street Journal's Gerald R. Seib now embodies the deaf, dumb and blind media tool so immersed in his own BS he can't even get reality correct. Sadly, with John Stewart no longer around to expose these conservo twerps and their misguided influence, someone else has to.. What I refer to is Seib's latest column ('Summer of Trump May End Up Helping GOP Rivals'. p. A4, Aug. 11) which is the biggest bunch of media malarkey since Sarah Palin was hailed as the huge "game changer"  asset for the GOP - before Katy Couric exposed her in 2008).

While Trump is definitely a crackpot, Seib's too myopic to see the rest of the GOP field is equal to or exceeding Trump on the crackpot spectrum. They may not bellow as much drivel - but their policy positions betray a bunch of psychos just as unhinged. As Hillary put it, while what Trump said ahout Megyn Kelly was "outrageous" what the other candidates are saying about women and denying them abortions - even in cases of rape and incest-  is equally outrageous. 

Let's see who Seib is praising and why he's daft.

Marco Rubio, aka the Cisco Kid -has a "fresh life story and a young face."

Uh no, Seib. Cisco is the usual right wing Cuban whiner (a 'dime a dozen' in Miami's  Little Havana),  with his own sob story of how "that big bad Fidel chased me family out with nothing, and we had to start with nothing in the U.S.....and my momma had to wash the neighbors' laundry all day long and I had to study by candle light". I will have more sympathy for punks like Rubio when his lot have more empathy for the 73 innocents murdered on Cubana Airlines Flight 455 off Barbados on Oct. 6, 1976. Blown up by Right wing Miami Cubans from Alpha 66 colluding with a Venezuelan rat with CIA links, Luis Carriles Posada

Rubio may have a young face but he also has an old solution for poor women who face death by medical complications rather than be able to get an abortion: Let them die!  Also, any young women impregnated by rape or incest under a Marco Rubio administration better not look for help from him or his lot!  You're better off leaving the country for Canada.

Rubio is also claimed to be "well schooled on national security matters" which goes to show how big an advantage it can be to have Alpha 66 lineage in one's background- especially when they were in the employ of the CIA. (Probably the DRE)

More mystifying even than Rubio, is Seib's selection of Ted Cruz and Ben Carson as "more sane outside conservative voices". Really?

Ted Cruz, let us bear in mind, is definitely not "sane", e.g.

Our end-of-the-world obsession is killing us: Climate denial and the apocalypse, GOP-style
 http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2015/03/ted-cruz-real-life-greg-stillson-from.html

He has all the hallmarks of an egomaniac and would love, if elected by enough morons, to usher in Armageddon and finally fulfill Biblical prophecy like the fictional nut ( Greg Stillson ) in 'The Dead Zone',

Carson isn't much better and is incompetent besides. To remind people who may have forgotten, Carson is the one who asserted anyone taking the AP  U.S. history course last year would "be ready to join ISIS".  Then, earlier this week on CBS Early Show, when asked about allowing abortion exceptions for mothers with medical complications (that might lead to their deaths if they gave birth), Carson said: "Oh, our medical advances have now taken care of things like that!". A total, bald -faced lie laden with ignorance.

Carson is also the bozo who's made basic mistakes  in various forums, including: suggesting the Baltic states are not part of NATO,  not knowing the main political parties in Israel and (no kidding!) believing Alan Greenspan had been Treasury Secretary instead of former Chairman of the Federal Reserve.  Any one of these bonehead errors would ordinarily disqualify a candidate as surely as Rick Perry (in 2012) failing to recall the DOE as one  of the main federal agencies.

If these two are the only "sane" alternatives the Reepos have to Trump, they could as well nominate the other Donald: Donald Duck. At least they'd gain in gravitas.

Oh, but let's not forget Scott Walker, because Seib hasn't. To Seib he's a "solid but conventional conservative". In other words, if you love your women barefoot and pregnant (especially after they've been raped) he's the guy for you. Also, if you want your university profs working with no tenure, and your unions all dissolved so that 52 -hour weeks become the norm along with unpaid overtime  - Scottie is also your guy.  This is a turkey who couldn't even complete college yet wants to lead the nation. How is he going to meet the exalted goals confronting the country, including getting its debt under control - as well as malignant inequality - if he couldn't meet the much more humble goal of completing the final term for a 4-year degree?

Do people really want to cheer a character who starts a 5 k race, is within 100 m of the finish line, then drops out?   Or a guy who is within 4 moves of checkmating his opponent then resigns?

Glaring by its absence was any mention of the sole sane person on the debate stage, John Kasich. Kasich was notable for his no-nonsense demeanor as he robustly defended Medicaid for the poor in his state as well as same sex relationships. Of course, his name may have been left out because most of the base that loved the names Seib did cite would be too "reep-tarded" to appreciate a candidate like Kasich. (Who now, by recent polls, has even African-Americans leaning more his way than Hillary's)

If Gerald Seib wants to be taken seriously on who the sane candidates are, he needs to leave out the screwballs. But, of course, he has to be able to recognize them first.

See also:

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2012/04/where-were-miamis-cubans-when-terrorist.html

And:

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2015/08/reepo-debate-more-fun-than-barrel-of.html