Nope. I've already said that George answered his own question when he asked where were all
the good people of conscience in government. He mentioned ,in Life Is Worth Losing, the people
who often end up assassinated: Jesus, Gandhi, Lincoln, JFK, RFK, MLK, Johm Lennon, Medgar Evers,
Malcolm X. Folks who talk about peace, love and doing good to one another. These folks RARELY
get elected to high office and those that do end up dead!
If you think that the people who didn't get elected would actually be different, you need
to watch this video again a few times.
20120123 : Their bread, our circus ( Recently, in the course of one evening in the Big Apple, President Barack Obama "hosted" three fundraisers ranging from $35,800 a head to $1,000 a head and raised $2.4 million - and that wasn't even close to 1% of the funds he will need for this election season. This reflects the power, needs, fears and desires of America's 1%, and how it has turned the rest of us from citizens into viewers. - Tom Engelhardt (Dec 15, )
"... No, the corporate ruling classes' endgame here is to reestablish neoliberal "normality," so we can get back to the War on Terror (or whatever they'll be calling it by then), and put this neo-nationalist revolt against neoliberalism episode behind us. To do that, they will need to install some sort of hopey-changey, Obama-like messiah, or at least somebody who can play the part of POTUS like a normal person and not sit around the Oval Office gobbling McDonald's and retweeting racist memes by random British fascists. ..."
According to the Chinese zodiac, 2017 has been the Year of the Rooster. Myself, I've decided
to designate it the Year of the Headless [neo]Liberal Chicken. I don't mean that to be insulting or,
all right, I guess I do, a little. But my heart goes out to [neo]Liberals, seriously. At this point,
the amount of utterly baseless, contradictory propaganda, mass hysteria, and just flat out
insanity the ruling classes have demanded they swallow is more than any human mind, no matter
how medicated, could possibly handle. Is it any wonder so many of them of lost it and started
seeing Nazis and Russians coming out of the woodwork? Just consider what the average liberal
has been forced to try to cognitively reconcile since the tragic events of last November
First came the overwhelming shock of Hillary Clinton's loss to Trump, a repulsive, word
salad-babbling buffoon with absolutely no political experience who the media had been
portraying to [neo]Liberals as the Second Coming of Adolf Hitler. This was a candidate, let's
recall, who jabbered about building a "beautiful wall" to protect us from the hordes of
"Mexican rapists" and other "bad hombres" who were invading America, and who had boasted about
grabbing women "by the pussy" like a prepubescent 6th grade boy. While he had served as a
perfect foil for Clinton, and had provided hours of entertainment in a comic book villain kind
of way, the prospect of a Donald Trump presidency was inconceivable in the minds of [neo]Liberals.
So, when it happened, it was like the Martians had invaded.
Mass hysteria gripped the nation. There was beaucoup wailing and gnashing of teeth. [neo]Liberals
began exhibiting irrational and, in some cases, rather disturbing behaviors. Many degenerated
into dissociative states and just sat there with their phones for hours obsessively reloading
the popular vote count, which Clinton had won, on FiveThirtyEight. Others festooned
themselves with safety pins and went out looking for defenseless minorities who they could
"demonstrate solidarity" with. Owen Jones flew in from London to join his colleague Steven
Thrasher, who was organizing a guerilla force to resist "
the normalization of Trump " and the global race war he was about to launch, which "not all
of us were going to get out of alive."
At that point, the media had been hammering hard on the Trump-is-Hitler narrative for
months, so they had to stick with that for a while. It had only been a few weeks, after all,
since The Wall Street
New York TimesThe Washington PostThe Guardian , and numerous other
establishment publications , had explained how Trump was using special fascist code words
like "global elites," "international banks," and "lobbyists" to signal his virulent hatred of
the Jews to the millions of Americans who, according to the media, were secretly Hitler-loving
This initial post-election propaganda was understandably somewhat awkward, as the plan had
been to be able to celebrate the "Triumph of Love over the Forces of Hate," and the demise of
the latest Hitlerian bogeyman. But this was the risk the ruling classes took when they chose to
go ahead and Hitlerize Trump, which they wouldn't have done if they'd thought for a moment that
he had a chance of actually winning the election. That's the tricky thing about Hitlerizing
people. You need to be able to kill them, eventually. If you don't, when they turn out not to
be Hitler, your narrative kind of falls apart, and the people you've fear-mongered into a
frenzy of frothing, self-righteous fake-Hitler-hatred end up feeling like a bunch of dupes
who'll believe anything the government tells them. This is why, normally, you only Hitlerize
foreign despots you can kill with impunity. This is Hitlerization 101 stuff, which the ruling
classes ignored in this case, which the left poor [neo]Liberals terrified that Trump was actually
going to start building Trump-branded death camps and rounding up the Jews.
Fortunately, just in the nick of time, the ruling classes and their media mouthpieces rolled
out the Russian Propaganda story. The Washington Post (whose owner's multimillion dollar
deal with the CIA, of course, has absolutely no effect on the quality of its professional
journalism) led the charge with
this McCarthyite smear job , legitimizing the baseless allegations of some random website
and a think tank staffed by charlatans like
this "Russia expert," who appears not to speak a word of Russian or have any other "Russia
expert" credentials, but is available both for television and Senate Intelligence Committee
appearances. Numerous similar smear pieces
followed. [neo]Liberals breathed a big sigh of relief that Hitler business had been getting kind of
scary. How long can you go, after all, with Hitler stumbling around the White House before
somebody has to go in there and shoot him?
In any event, by January, the media were playing down the Hitler stuff and going balls-out
on the "Russiagate" story. According to The Washington Post (which, let's remember, is a
serious newspaper, as opposed to a propaganda organ of the so-called US "Intelligence
Community"), not only had the Russians "hacked" the election, but they had
hacked the Vermont power grid ! Editorialists at The New York Times were declaring
that Trump "
had been appointed by Putin ," and that the USA was now "at war" with Russia. This was also
around the time when [neo]Liberals first learned of the
Trump-Russia Dossier , which detailed how Putin was blackmailing Trump with a video the FSB
had shot of Trump and a bunch of Russian hookers peeing on a bed in a Moscow hotel in which
Obama had allegedly slept.
This nonsense was reported completely straight-faced, and thus [neo]Liberals were forced to take
it seriously. Imagine the cognitive dissonance they suffered. It was like that scene in
1984 when the Party abruptly switches enemies, and the war with Eurasia becomes the war
with Eastasia. Suddenly, Trump wasn't Hitler anymore. Now he was a Russian sleeper agent who
Putin had been blackmailing into destroying democracy with this incriminating "golden showers"
video. Putin had presumably been "running" Trump since Trump's visit to Russia in 2013 to
hobnob with "Russia-linked" Russian businessmen and attend the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow.
During the ensuing partying, Trump must have gotten loaded on Diet Coke and gotten carried away
with those Russian hookers. Now, Putin had him by the short hairs and was forcing him to staff
his Manchurian cabinet with corporate CEOs and Goldman Sachs guys, who probably had also been
videotaped by the FSB in Moscow hotels paying hookers to pee on furniture, or performing
whatever other type of seditious, perverted kink they were into.
Ironically, the roll-out of this "Russiagate" hysteria was so successful that it peaked too
soon, and prematurely backlashed all over itself. By March, when Trump had not been arrested,
nor otherwise removed from office, [neo]Liberals, who by that time the corporate media had teased
into an incoherent, throbbing state of anticipation were well, rather disappointed. By April,
they were exhibiting all the hallmark symptoms of clinical psychosis. This mental breakdown was
due to the fact that the media pundits and government spooks who had been telling them that
Trump was Hitler, and then a Russian sleeper agent, were now telling them that he wasn't so
bad , because he'd pointlessly bombed a Syrian airstrip, and dropped a $314 million Massive
Ordnance Air Blast bomb on some alleged "terrorist caves" in Afghanistan.
As if [neo]Liberals' poor brains weren't rattled enough, the corporate media then switched back
to, first, the Russian Propaganda narrative (which they expanded into a global threat), then,
the Hitler stuff again, but this time Trump wasn't actually Hitler, because Putin was Hitler,
or at least he was fomenting Hitlerism throughout the West with his legions of fascist hacker
bots who were "influencing" unsuspecting consumers with their blitzkrieg of divisive "fake
news" stories. Oh, yeah, and now
Putin had also done Brexit , or Trump and Robert Mercer had, but they were working for
Putin, who had also hacked the
French election that he hadn't hacked , or whatever
this was no time to worry about what had or hadn't actually happened. The peace and prosperity
President Obama had reestablished throughout the West by incessantly bombing the Greater Middle
East and bailing out his pals at the Wall Street banks was being torn asunder by Vladimir
Putin, who at some point had apparently metamorphosized from a ruthless, former KGB autocrat
into a white supremacist megalomaniac.
Right on cue, on the weekend of August 11-12 in Charlottesville, Virginia,
where there had never been any history of racism , a "national gathering" of approximately
five hundred tiki torch-bearing neo-Nazis, Ku Klux Klan types, and other white supremacists,
many of them barking Nazi slogans, marched into the pages of history. Never before have so few
fascists owed so much to the mainstream media, which showered them with overwrought coverage,
triggering a national Nazi panic. [neo]Liberals poured into the streets, tearing down Confederate
monuments, and otherwise signaling their total intolerance of the racism they had tolerated
until a few days earlier.
People named after Robert E. Lee , and horses named after
General Lee's horse , went into hiding to until the panic subsided. This was wise, as by
then the so-called anti-fascists were showing up in force at anything resembling a right-wing
rally and stomping the living Hitler out of Nazis, and Trump supporters, and journalists, and
well, anyone they didn't think looked quite right. This totally preemptively self-defensive,
non-violent type of violent behavior, naturally, shocked and horrified [neo]Liberals, who are
strongly opposed to all forms of violence that aren't carried out by the US military, or the
police, or someone else wearing a uniform. Unsure as to whom they were supposed to condemn, the
Nazis or the Antifa terrorists, they turned for guidance to the corporate ruling classes, who
it was time to censor the Internet
This made about as much sense as any of the other nonsense they'd been spoonfed so far, so [neo]Liberals decided to get behind it, or at least look the other way while it happened. Facebook,
Google, Amazon, Twitter (and all the other corporations that control the Internet, the media,
Hollywood, the publishing industry, and every other means of representing "reality") surely
have people's best interests at heart. Plus, they're only censoring the Nazis, and the
terrorists, and the Russian "fake news" disseminators, and, OK, a lot of leftist publications, and
award-winning journalists , and anyone else espousing "divisive," anti-American, or
anti-corporate, "extremist" views.
Look, I know what you're probably thinking, but it isn't like [neo]Liberals don't actually care
about fundamental liberal values like freedom of the press and speech and all that. It's just
that they desperately need the Democrats to take back the House and the Senate next year, so
they can get on with impeaching Trump, and if they have to stand by while the corporations
suppress a little leftist dissent, or, you know, transform the entire Internet into a massive,
mind-numbing echo chamber of neo-McCarthyite corporate conformity well, sacrifices have to be
This can't go on forever, after all. This level of full-blown mass hysteria can only be
sustained for so long. It's all fine and good to be able to whip people up into a frenzied mob,
but at some point you need to have an endgame. The neoliberal ruling classes know this. Their
endgame is actually fairly simple. Their plan is to (a) make an example of Trump to discourage
any future billionaire idiots from screwing with their simulation of democracy, and (b)
demonize anyone deviating from neoliberal ideology as a fascist, racist, or anti-Semite, or
otherwise "abnormal" or "extremist." Their plan is not to incinerate the entire planet
in a war with Russia. We're not on the brink of World War III, despite how many Twitter likes
or Facebook shares it might get me to say that. Yes, eventually, they want to force Russia to
return to the kind of "cooperation" it engaged in during the 1990s, when it was run by an
incorrigible drunkard and the Goldman Sachs boys and their oligarch pals were looting the
country for all it was worth but that has little to do with all this.
No, the corporate ruling classes' endgame here is to reestablish neoliberal "normality,"
so we can get back to the War on Terror (or whatever they'll be calling it by then), and put
neo-nationalist revolt against neoliberalism episode behind us. To do that, they will need
to install some sort of hopey-changey, Obama-like messiah, or at least somebody who can play
the part of POTUS like a normal person and not sit around the Oval Office gobbling McDonald's
and retweeting racist memes by random British fascists.
The way things are going, that might take a while, but rest assured they'll get there
eventually. Now that Robert Mueller has proved that Trump colluded with Vladimir Putin by
obstructing an investigation by Comey into Michael Flynn's lying to the FBI about not colluding
with the Russian ambassador on behalf of Israel at Kushner's behest, the dominoes are surely
about to fall. Once they all have, and Donald Trump's head has been mounted on a spike on the
White House lawn as a warning to any other potential usurpers, all this Russia and Nazi
hysteria that has the poor [neo]Liberals running around like headless chickens will disappear.
Russia will go back to being Russia. The North American Nazi Menace, deprived of daily media
coverage, will go back to being a fringe phenomenon. [neo]Liberals will go back to ignoring politics
(except identity politics, naturally) and obediently serving the global capitalist ruling
elites that are destroying the planet, and the lives of millions of human beings, in order to
increase their profit margins. Sure, there'll be a brief emotional hangover, once the
adrenaline rush wears off and they look back at their tweets and Facebook posts, which in
hindsight might convey the impression that they spent the better part of a year parroting
whatever insane propaganda the corporate media pumped out at them, and otherwise behaving like
Americans but then, that's what the "delete" key is for. Join the debate on
Facebook More articles by: CJ HopkinsC. J. Hopkins is an
award-winning American playwright, novelist and satirist based in Berlin. His plays are
published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel,
ZONE 23 , is
published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org .
Hundreds of other princes and gentlemen were tortured, too, until they agreed to surrender their ill-gotten assets, 70% of all
they have. As I write, and as you read these lines, the torture goes on, and so far MBS has already milked his victims of
hundreds of billions $$ worth of cash and assets.
"An Extortion racket", you'll exclaim. Perhaps MBS watched The Godfather in his impressionable youth and was
impressed by efficiency of their methods. However, he has solved, or rather is in the process of solving, the problem of
Perhaps this is the method to be advised to Trump and Putin, as well as to other leaders? If the neoliberal dogma forbids
taxing, if the offshore are sacred, what remains for a diligent leader but a plush five-star hotel and a band of experienced
You are one of the very few critical journalists today willing to print objective measures
of the truth, while the MSM spins out of control under the guise of "protecting America" (and
their vital sources), while at the same time actually undermining the very principles of a
working democracy they sanctimoniously pretend to defend. It makes me nostalgic for the
McCarthy era, when we could safely satirize the Army-McCarthy Hearings (unless you were a
witness!). I offer the following as a retrospective of a lost era.:
Top-Ten Criteria for being a Putin Stooge, and a Chance at Winning A One Way Lottery
Ticket to the Gala Gitmo Hotel:
(1) Reading Consortium News, Truth Dig, The Real News Network, RT and Al Jeziera
(2) Drinking Starbucks and vodka at the Russian Tea Room with Russian tourists (with an
embedded FSS agent) in NYC.
(3) Meeting suspicious tour guides in Red Square who accept dollars for their historical
(4) Claiming to catch a cell phone photo of the Putin limousine passing through the
Kremlin Tower gate.
(4) Starting a joint venture with a Russian trading partner who sells grain to feed
Putin's stable of stallions.
(5) Catching the flu while being sneezed upon in Niagara Falls by a Russian violinist.
(6) Finding the hidden jewels in the Twelfth Chair were nothing but cut glass.
(7) Reading War and Peace on the Brighton Beach ferry.
(8) Playing the iPod version of Rachmaninoff's "Vespers" through ear buds while attending
mass in Dallas, TX..
(9) Water skiing on the Potomac flying a pennant saying "Wasn't Boris Good Enough?"
(10) Having audibly chuckled even once at items (1) -- (9).
The international organization for migration has published official data which shows that
every fourth prostitute in Europe is a citizen of Ukraine.
The article discusses pamphlets that are distributed to young Ukrainian girls/women advising
them on how to survive and flourish in new realities of life in the EU.
the Ukrainian labor market is being formed and is growing. Even if there is no other work
and none is expected, girls should know that Europe will take care of them. The younger
generation of Ukrainian schoolgirls will find out how to apply themselves If you are involved
in the sex business, then this brochure is for you," it is said in the introduction. "You have
chosen a very dangerous profession, but if you always follow these simple rules, then you will
get a chance to live a long life You shouldn't serve several clients alone, you should avoid
drunk clients, and also always to take payment in advance. And when you go to the client's
apartment, try to learn in what district of the city it is located, give preference to
It's okay if you're a hooker, and all you have to sell is yourself. You have chosen a
dangerous profession, but really the writing was on the wall, wasn't it, if only you'd had
sense to read it? And the economic calamity which has come to pass in your country is really
no concern of ours, while for our part we are not too upset at being offered the choice of
some of the most beautiful young women on the planet, who will do anything you say for a
handful of euros.
Here's to your bright new future in the EU. Incredible. I wonder if Poroshenko will tout
this statistic as another validation of Ukrainians' confidence in his leadership.
These tactics do not just suppress information. They enforce conformity at much
"... I am using the Orwellian verb "unperson" playfully, but I'm also trying to be precise. What's happening isn't censorship, technically, at least not in the majority of cases. While there are examples of classic censorship (e.g., in the UK, France, and Germany), apart from so-called "terrorist content," most governments aren't formally banning expressions of anti-corporatist dissent. This isn't Czechoslovakia, after all. This is global capitalism, where the repression of dissent is a little more subtle. The point of Google unpersoning CounterPunch (and probably many other publications) and Pulitzer Prize-winning journalists like Hedges is not to prevent them from publishing their work or otherwise render them invisible to readers. The goal is to delegitmize them, and thus decrease traffic to their websites and articles, and ultimately drive them out of business, if possible. ..."
"... Another objective of this non-censorship censorship is discouraging writers like myself from contributing to publications like CounterPunch, Truthdig, Alternet, Global Research, and any other publications the corporatocracy deems "illegitimate." Google unpersoning a writer like Hedges is a message to other non-ball-playing writers. The message is, "this could happen to you." This message is meant for other journalists, primarily, but it's also aimed at writers like myself who are making a living (to whatever degree) writing and selling what we think of as "literature." ..."
"... These tactics do not just suppress information. They enforce conformity at much deeper level. ..."
"... Chomsky explains how this system operates in What Makes Mainstream Media Mainstream . It isn't a question of censorship the system operates on rewards and punishments, financial and emotional coercion, and subtler forms of intimidation. Making examples of non-cooperators is a particularly effective tactic. Ask any one of the countless women whose careers have been destroyed by Harvey Weinstein, or anyone who's been to graduate school, or worked at a major corporation. ..."
"... C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23 , is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org . ..."
On November 30, 2016, presumably right at the stroke of midnight, Google Inc. unpersoned
CounterPunch. They didn't send out a press release or anything. They just quietly removed it
from the Google News aggregator. Not very many people noticed. This happened just as the "fake
news" hysteria was being unleashed by the corporate media, right around the time The Washington
this neo-McCarthyite smear piece vicariously accusing CounterPunch, and a number of other
publications, of being "peddlers of Russian propaganda." As I'm sure you'll recall, that
astounding piece of "journalism" (which The Post was promptly forced to disavow with an absurd
disclaimer but has refused to retract) was based on the claims of an anonymous website
apparently staffed by a couple of teenagers and a formerly rabidly anti-Communist, now rabidly
anti-Putin think tank. Little did most people know at the time that these were just the opening
salvos in what has turned out to be an all-out crackdown on any and all forms of vocal
opposition to the global corporate ruling classes and their attempts to quash the ongoing
nationalist backlash against their neoliberal agenda.
Almost a year later, things are much clearer. If you haven't been following this story
closely, and you care at all about freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and that kind of
stuff, you may want to take an hour or two and catch up a bit on what's been happening. I
offered a few examples of some of the measures governments and corporations have been taking to
stifle expressions of dissent in my latest
piece in CounterPunch , and there are many more detailed articles online, like this one by Andre
Damon from July, and this follow-up he published last
week (which reports that Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and author Chris Hedges has also
been unpersoned). Or, if you're the type of soul who only believes what corporations tell you,
and who automatically dismisses anything published by a Trotskyist website, here's
one from last December in The Guardian, and an
op-ed in The New York Times , both of which at least report what Google, Twitter, and
Facebook are up to. Or you could read this
piece by Robert Parry , who also has "legitimate" (i.e., corporate) credentials, and who
hasn't been unpersoned just yet, although I'm sure they'll get around to him eventually.
I am using the Orwellian verb "unperson" playfully, but I'm also trying to be precise.
What's happening isn't censorship, technically, at least not in the majority of cases. While
there are examples of classic censorship (e.g., in the UK, France, and Germany), apart from
so-called "terrorist content," most governments aren't formally banning expressions of
anti-corporatist dissent. This isn't Czechoslovakia, after all. This is global capitalism,
where the repression of dissent is a little more subtle. The point of Google unpersoning
CounterPunch (and probably many other publications) and Pulitzer Prize-winning journalists like
Hedges is not to prevent them from publishing their work or otherwise render them invisible to
readers. The goal is to delegitmize them, and thus decrease traffic to their websites and
articles, and ultimately drive them out of business, if possible.
Another objective of this non-censorship censorship is discouraging writers like myself
from contributing to publications like CounterPunch, Truthdig, Alternet, Global Research, and
any other publications the corporatocracy deems "illegitimate." Google unpersoning a writer
like Hedges is a message to other non-ball-playing writers. The message is, "this could happen
to you." This message is meant for other journalists, primarily, but it's also aimed at writers
like myself who are making a living (to whatever degree) writing and selling what we think of
Yes, as you've probably guessed by now, in addition to writing political satire, I am, as
rogue journalist Caitlin Johnstone so aptly put it once, an "elitist wanker." I've spent the
majority of my adult life writing stage plays and working in the theater, and it doesn't get
any more elitist than that. My plays are published by "establishment" publishers, have won a
few awards, and have been produced internationally. I recently published my "debut novel"
(which is what you call it if you're an elitist wanker) and am currently trying to promote and
sell it. I mention this, not to blow my little horn, but to the set the stage to try to
illustrate how these post-Orwellian intimidation tactics (i.e., unpersoning people from the
Internet) work. These tactics do not just suppress information. They enforce conformity at much
The depressing fact of the matter is, in our brave new Internet-dominated world,
corporations like Google, Twitter, and Facebook (not to mention Amazon), are, for elitist
wankers like me, in the immortal words of Colonel Kurz, "either friends or they are truly
enemies to be feared." If you are in the elitist wanker business, regardless of whether you're
Jonathan Franzen, Garth Risk Hallberg, Margaret Atwood, or some "mid-list" or "emerging"
author, there is no getting around these corporations. So it's kind of foolish, professionally
speaking, to write a bunch of essays that will piss them off, and then publish these essays in
CounterPunch. Literary agents advise against this. Other elitist literary wankers, once they
discover what you've been doing, will avoid you like the bubonic plague. Although it's
perfectly fine to write books and movies about fictional evil corporations, writing about how
real corporations are using their power to mold societies into self-policing virtual prisons of
politically-correct, authoritarian consumers is well, it's something that is just not done in
professional elitist wanker circles.
Normally, all this goes without saying, as these days most elitist wankers are trained how
to write, and read, and think, in MFA conformity factories, where they screen out any unstable
weirdos with unhealthy interests in political matters. This is to avoid embarrassing episodes
Pinter's Nobel Prize lecture (which, if you haven't read it, you probably should), and is
why so much of contemporary literature is so well-behaved and instantly forgettable. This
institutionalized screening system is also why the majority of journalists employed by
mainstream media outlets understand, without having to be told, what they are, and are not,
allowed to report. Chomsky explains how this system operates in What Makes Mainstream Media Mainstream . It isn't a
question of censorship the system operates on rewards and punishments, financial and emotional
coercion, and subtler forms of intimidation. Making examples of non-cooperators is a
particularly effective tactic. Ask any one of the countless women whose careers have been
destroyed by Harvey Weinstein, or anyone who's been to graduate school, or worked at a major
Or let me provide you with a personal example.
A couple weeks ago, I googled myself (which we elitist wankers are wont to do), and noticed
that two of my published books had disappeared from the "Knowledge Panel" that appears in the
upper right of the search results. I also noticed that the people "People Also Search For" in
the panel had changed. For years, consistently, the people you saw there had been a variety of
other elitist literary wankers and leftist types. Suddenly, they were all rather right-wing
types, people like Ilana Mercer and John Derbyshire, and other VDARE writers. So that was a
I set out to contact the Google Search specialists to inquire about this mysterious
development, and was directed to a series of unhelpful web pages directing me to other
unhelpful pages with little boxes where you can write and submit a complaint to Google, which
they will completely ignore. Being an elitist literary wanker, I also wrote to Google Books,
and exchanged a number of cordial emails with an entity (let's call her Ms. O'Brien) who
explained that, for "a variety of reasons," the "visibility" of my books (which had been
consistently visible for many years) was subject to change from day to day, and that,
regrettably, she couldn't assist me further, and that sending her additional cordial emails was
probably a pointless waste of time. Ms. O'Brien was also pleased to report that my books had
been restored to "visibility," which, of course, when I checked, they hadn't.
"Whatever," I told myself, "this is silly. It's probably just some IT thing, maybe Google
Books updating its records, or something." However, I was still perplexed by the "People Also
Search For" switcheroo, because it's kind of misleading to link my writing to that of a bunch
of serious right-wingers. Imagine, if you were a dystopian sci-fi fan, and you googled me to
check out my book and see what else I had written, and so on, and my Google "Knowledge Panel"
popped up and displayed all these far-right VDARE folks. Unless you're a far-right VDARE type
yourself, that might be a little bit of a turn-off.
At that point, I wondered if I was getting paranoid. Because Google Search runs on
algorithms, right? And my political satire and commentary is published, not only in
CounterPunch, but also in The Unz Review, where these far-right-wing types are also published.
Moreover, my pieces are often reposted by what appear to be "Russia-linked" websites, and
everyone knows that the Russians are all a bunch of white supremacists, right? On top of which,
it's not like I'm Stephen King here. I am hardly famous enough to warrant the attention of any
post-Orwellian corporate conspiracy to stigmatize anti-establishment dissent by manipulating
how authors are displayed on Google (i.e., subtly linking them to white supremacists,
anti-Semites, and others of that ilk).
So, okay, I reasoned, what probably happened was over the course of twenty-four hours, for
no logical reason whatsoever, all the folks who had been googling me (along with other leftist
and literary figures) suddenly stopped googling me, all at once, while, more or less at the
exact same time, hundreds of right-wingers started googling me (along with those white
supremacist types they had, theoretically, already been googling). That kind of makes sense
when you think about it, right? I mean, Google couldn't be doing this intentionally. It must
have been some sort of algorithm that detected this sudden, seismic shift in the demographic of
people googling me.
Or, I don't know, does that possibly sound like a desperate attempt to rationalize the
malicious behavior of an unaccountable, more or less god-like, global corporation that wields
the power of life and death over my book sales and profile on the Internet (a more or less
god-like global corporation that could do a lot of additional damage to my sales and reputation
with complete impunity once the piece you're reading is published)? Or am I simply getting
paranoid, and, in fact, I've developed a secret white supremacist fan base without my
knowledge? Only Google knows for sure.
Such are the conundrums elitist literary wankers have to face these days that is, those of
us wankers who haven't learned to keep our fucking mouths shut yet. Probably the safest course
of action, regardless of whether I'm being paranoid or Google does have me on some kind of
list, is to lay off the anti-corporatist essays, and definitely stop contributing to
CounterPunch, not to mention The Unz Review, and probably also give up the whole dystopian
satire novel thing, and ensure that my second novel conforms to the "normal" elitist wanker
rules (which every literary wanker knows, but which, technically, do not exist). Who knows, if
I play my cards right, maybe I can even sell the rights to Miramax, or okay, some other
Once that happens, I assume that Google will want to restore me to normal personhood, and
return my books to visibility, and I will ride off into the Hollywood sunset with the Clintons,
Clooneys, and Pichais, and maybe even Barack Obama himself, if he isn't off jet skiing with
Richard Branson, or having dinner with Jeff and MacKenzie Bezos, who just happen to live right
down the street, or hawking the TPP on television. By that time, CounterPunch and all those
other "illegitimate" publications will have been forced onto the dark web anyway, so I won't be
giving up all that much. I know, that sounds pretty cold and cynical, but my liberal friends
will understand I just hope all my new white supremacist fans will find it in their hearts to
C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and satirist based in
Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing
(USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23 , is
published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org .
Thank you for mustering the courage and then taking the time to spell out these outrages in a
straightforward, unemotional way. I've appreciated the humor that centers your other essays,
but there's not a damned thing funny about this.
But why are things as they are? With billions aplenty, our rulers must be driven by their
libido dominandi. We're left to wonder only whether they get off more on ostracizing the
Hopkinses, on buying the politicians, or on herding the sheep from bathrooms to statues to
... having spent $100,000 on Facebook ads, and unleashed a troll army to wrote Facebook
posts - which had a 0.004% change of being read - Putin then went for the kill, and assured
himself a Trump presidency by splurging another $4,700 for Google ads and creating an
additional 43 hours of video content. The rest is history.
Throughout What Happened , Clinton gives us a taste of her literary influences,
beginning each section, and each chapter, and sometimes inserting inside of chapters,
quotations from Harriet Tubman, Friedrich Nietzsche, A League of Their Own , Rainer
Maria Rilke, Eleanor Roosevelt, TS Eliot, George Bernard Shaw, Carl Sandburg, "a sign in my
house", Nora Ephron, Muriel Rukeyser, JM Barrie, Mary Ann Shaffer, Annie Barrows, Ralph Waldo
Emerson, Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, Flannery O'Connor, WB Yeats, "a Chinese proverb", "an African
proverb", Fyodor Dostoevsky, Robert Frost, John F. Kennedy, Nelson Mandela , Henry James, and Pope
John XIII. I do not know who any of those people are. It seems I've lost them along with every
other person in this book. But from the quotations, you can tell that each of them is an
advocate for kindness, perseverance, truth, and decency. You can see how each of them helped
shape Clinton and her thoughts.
After learning so much about Clinton, it is difficult to read her account of the campaign
itself when it arrives slightly more than halfway through the book. It is terrible to witness
the tragedy unfold. Clinton ran for president, she says early on, because she "thought I would
be good at the job." Others agree, including the current president, Barack Obama , who announces at her
convention that she is the most qualified candidate to ever run despite -- Clinton notes --
their disagreement on issues including environmental regulation and an unspecified conflict in
Syria (their respective positions are not detailed; however, my research indicates that Clinton
was widely believed to be "the most progressive candidate" in history, so one imagines that she
disapproved of President Obama's bellicose stance on the issue). But despite her
qualifications, or perhaps due to them, Clinton endures a cruelty and depth of opposition
unlike anything endured by a candidate for the presidency before her.
First, she faces a primary against a disruptive charlatan. Senator Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat, she
tells us, but a socialist attempting to "disrupt" the party. Sanders is at once nearly
identical to Clinton on the issues ("because we agreed on so much, Bernie couldn't make an
argument against me in this area on policy, so he had to resort to innuendo and impugning my
character," she writes) and hopelessly reactionary -- a man willing to compromise on Clinton's
key issues of gun violence and racial justice in order to give free "ponies", "magic abs", and
taxpayer-funded college education to rich children. Sanders' supporters are vicious -- Clinton
calls them "Bernie Bros" twice in her book -- and go so far as to boo her at the Democratic
National Convention. Sanders himself, despite campaigning for Clinton (something she graciously
"appreciated"), refused to endorse her for nearly a month after the end of their contest.
Despite Clinton's record and character, Sanders attacked her integrity even after the delegate
math is done. This shameless new anti-Clinton strategy "[paves] the way for Donald Trump's
'Crooked Hillary' campaign" during the general and does "lasting damage" to the party.
None of this compares to what comes next. In a section called "Frustration," Clinton reveals
that it was not only her Republican opponent who she was up against in the general election
last year. Beyond Trump, Clinton must contend with a news media that operates under special
"Clinton rules" designed to make all of her behavior appear nefarious, most notably a server
management issue during her time at the State Department. She is attacked by Republican
congressmen and Senators, who haul her before pointless special committees in order to score
cheap political points on TV. She is "knifed" by FBI director James Comey, whose release of a
damning and unprecedented letter only days before the election costs Clinton essential margins
in several states. Beyond all of this, Clinton faces an unprecedented espionage effort by a man
named Vladimir Putin. Putin, Clinton tells us, has a personal grudge against her born of her
previous work as Secretary of State and in order to keep her from the presidency, he orders
Russian intelligence services to attack her candidacy on all fronts.
The Russians seed propaganda through American social media networks. They steal internal
emails from her campaign and release them at the most damaging possible times. They hack voting
systems and even collaborate directly with members of Trump's campaign. This was an act of war,
Clinton writes, and one cannot help but sense an unspoken anger at President Obama, who knew
what was going on, but chose not to make a public declaration.
In other reviews of What Happened, I have seen the claim that Clinton refuses to take
responsibility for her loss. Perhaps this is in reference to some other book or statement long
since lost to my memory, because in this book, it simply isn't true. In nearly every chapter,
Clinton repeats some version of the idea that the blame for losing the 2016 election rests with
her alone. It is only that given everything else we learn -- given the "tribalism" of the
electorate, the vendetta of the Russians, the opposition that she, like all subversive figures,
faced from even her own state's secret police -- given all of those things and how all of those
things are invariably mentioned either immediately before or immediately after any moment when
Clinton takes responsibility for her defeat, given all of that it is difficult to escape the
impression that while she might take the blame, no reasonable person would put the blame on
Indeed the strangest element of What Happened is the widespread belief, both within and
without the Clinton campaign, that she would win. I can only take her word that this was widely
believed, but it is difficult to fathom. The Clinton I discovered in these pages was a radical.
From the moment she left her position as president of Wellesley's Republican club (a detail she
mentioned, much to my shock, in the book's final pages), Clinton fought relentlessly against
the entrenched, reactionary forces of her nation. As a young woman, she demonstrated against
the imperial war in Vietnam. As an attorney, she was on the front lines against Jim Crow. In
public service, she stood up not only to despots like Vladimir Putin, but to the most powerful
corporations in the United States, proposing redistributive taxes and "truly universal" health
care, even flirting with a guaranteed basic income funded by capital derivatives from
nationalized resource services.
Writing about the decline of American labor solidarity, Clinton writes that "being part of a
union is an important part of someone's personal identity. It helps shape the way you view the
world and think about politics. When that's gone, it means a lot of people stop identifying
primarily as workers -- and voting accordingly -- and start identifying and voting as white,
male, rural, or all of the above." This account of class-consciousness puts Clinton to the left
of even celebrated American essayist Ta-Nehisi Coates. How could anyone be naïve enough to
believe that her victory was guaranteed? She was a radical taking on the establishment and the
establishment is never more vicious than when it is protecting itself from a figure who has
proven herself willing and able to defeat them. For the Clinton of What Happened to win the
Presidency in a country like the United States would have been miraculous. Nothing in the
history I can remember suggests that this was ever likely.
"Our justice system is represented by a blind-folded woman holding a set of scales. Those
scales do not tip to the right or the left; they do not recognize wealth, power, or social
status. The impartiality of our justice system is the bedrock of our republic..."
"... If the Senate can 'assess,' so can I! I assess that Hollywood hottie Jenifer Lawrence is secretly in love with me! Although I can't prove this, all of my assessments point to this as being fact. ..."
"... Now, despite what the Russian propagandists will tell you, this recent outbreak of fascistic behavior has nothing whatsoever to do with these people's frustration with neoliberalism or the supranational Corporatocracy that has been expanding its global empire with total impunity for twenty-five years. And it definitely has nothing at all to do with supranational political unions, or the supersession of national sovereignty by corporate-concocted "free trade" agreements, or the relentless privatization of everything, or the fear that a lot of people have that their cultures are being gradually erased and replaced with a globalized, corporate-friendly, multicultural, market-based culture, which is merely a simulation of culture, and which contains no actual cultural values (because exchange value is its only operative value), but which sells the empty signifiers of their eviscerated cultural values back to them so they can wear their "identities" like designer brands as they hunch together in silence at Starbucks posting pictures of themselves on Facebook. ..."
"... No, this discontent with the political establishment, corporate elites, and the mainstream media has nothing to do with any of that. It's not like global Capitalism, following the collapse of the U.S.S.R. (its last external ideological adversary), has been restructuring the entire planet in accordance with its geopolitical interests, or doing away with national sovereignty, and other nationalistic concepts that no longer serve a useful purpose in a world where a single ideological system (one backed by the most fearsome military in history) reigns completely unopposed. If that were the case, well, it might behoove us to question whether this outbreak of Nazism, racism, and other forms of "hate," was somehow connected to that historical development and maybe even try to articulate some sort of leftist analysis of that. ..."
"... a world where a single ideology rules the planet unopposed from without ..."
"... Brexit is about Britons who want their country back, a movement indeed getting stronger and stronger in EU member states, but ignored by the ruling 'elites'. ..."
"... A lot of these so called "revolutions" are fomented by the elite only to be subverted and perverted by them in the end. They've had a lot of practice co-opting revolutions and independence movements. ..."
"... "Independence" is now so fashionable (as was Communism among the "elite" back in the '30s), that they are even teaching and fostering independence to kids in kindergarten here in the US. That strikes me as most amusing. Imagine "learning" independence in state run brainwashing factories. ..."
Well all right, let's review what happened, or at least the official version of what
happened. Not Hillary Clinton's version of what happened, which Jeffrey St. Clair so
incisively skewered , but the Corporatocracy's version of what happened, which overlaps
with but is even more ridiculous than Clinton's ridiculous version. To do that, we need to
harken back to the peaceful Summer of 2016, (a/k/a the
"Summer of Fear" ), when the United States of America was still a shiny city upon a hill
whose beacon light guided freedom-loving people, the Nazis were still just a bunch of ass
clowns meeting in each other's mother's garages, and Russia was, well Russia was Russia.
Back then, as I'm sure you'll recall, Western democracy, was still primarily being menaced
by the lone
wolf terrorists, for absolutely no conceivable reason, apart from the terrorists' fanatical
desire to brutally murder all non-believers. The global Russo-Nazi Axis had not yet reared its
ugly head. President Obama, who, during his tenure, had single-handedly restored America to the
peaceful, prosperous, progressive paradise it had been before George W. Bush screwed it up, was
on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon slow
jamming home the TPP . The Wall Street banks had risen from the ashes of the 2008 financial
crisis, and were buying back all the foreclosed homes of the people they had fleeced with
subprime mortgages. American workers were enjoying the freedom and flexibility of the new gig
economy. Electioneering in the United States was underway, but it was early days. It was
already clear that Donald Trump was literally
the Second Coming of Hitler , but no one was terribly worried about him yet. The Republican
Party was in a shambles. Neither Trump nor any of the other contenders had any chance of
winning in November. Nor did Sanders, who had been defeated, fair and square, in the Democratic
primaries, mostly because of
his racist statements and crazy, quasi-Communist ideas. Basically, everything was hunky
dory. Yes, it was going to be terribly sad to have to bid farewell to Obama, who had bailed out
all those bankrupt Americans the Wall Street banks had taken to the cleaners, ended all of Bush
and Cheney's wars, closed down Guantanamo, and just generally served as a multicultural messiah
figure to affluent consumers throughout the free world, but Hope-and-Change was going to
continue. The talking heads were all in agreement Hillary Clinton was going to be President,
and there was nothing anyone could do about it.
Little did we know at the time that an epidemic of Russo-Nazism had been festering just
beneath the surface of freedom-loving Western societies like some neo-fascist sebaceous cyst.
Apparently, millions of theretofore more or less normal citizens throughout the West had been
infected with a virulent strain of Russo-Nazi-engineered virus, because they simultaneously
began exhibiting the hallmark symptoms of what we now know as White Supremacist Behavioral
Disorder, or Fascist Oppositional Disorder (the folks who update the DSM are still arguing over
the official name). It started with the Brexit referendum, spread to America with the election
of Trump, and there have been a rash of outbreaks in Europe, like
the one we're currently experiencing in Germany . These fascistic symptoms have mostly
manifest as people refusing to vote as instructed, and expressing oppressive views on the
Internet, but there have also been more serious crimes, including several assaults and murders
perpetrated by white supremacists (which, of course, never happened when Obama was President,
because the Nazis hadn't been "emboldened" yet).
Now, despite what the Russian propagandists will tell you, this recent outbreak of
fascistic behavior has nothing whatsoever to do with these people's frustration with
neoliberalism or the supranational Corporatocracy that has been expanding its global empire
with total impunity for twenty-five years. And it definitely has nothing at all to do with
supranational political unions, or the supersession of national sovereignty by
corporate-concocted "free trade" agreements, or the relentless privatization of everything, or
the fear that a lot of people have that their cultures are being gradually erased and replaced
with a globalized, corporate-friendly, multicultural, market-based culture, which is merely a
simulation of culture, and which contains no actual cultural values (because exchange value is
its only operative value), but which sells the empty signifiers of their eviscerated cultural
values back to them so they can wear their "identities" like designer brands as they hunch
together in silence at Starbucks posting pictures of themselves on Facebook.
No, this discontent with the political establishment, corporate elites, and the
mainstream media has nothing to do with any of that. It's not like global Capitalism, following
the collapse of the U.S.S.R. (its last external ideological adversary), has been restructuring
the entire planet in accordance with its geopolitical interests, or doing away with national
sovereignty, and other nationalistic concepts that no longer serve a useful purpose in a world
where a single ideological system (one backed by the most fearsome military in history) reigns
completely unopposed. If that were the case, well, it might behoove us to question whether this
outbreak of Nazism, racism, and other forms of "hate," was somehow connected to that historical
development and maybe even try to articulate some sort of leftist analysis of that.
This hypothetical leftist analysis might want to focus on how Capitalism is fundamentally
opposed to Despotism, and is essentially a value-decoding machine which renders everything and
everyone it touches essentially valueless interchangeable commodities whose worth is determined
by market forces, rather than by societies and cultures, or religions, or other despotic
systems (wherein values are established and enforced arbitrarily, by the despot, the church, or
the ruling party, or by a group of people who share an affinity and decide they want to live a
certain way). This is where it would get sort of tricky, because it (i.e., this hypothetical
analysis) would have to delve into the history of Capitalism, and how it evolved out of
medieval Despotism, and how it has been decoding despotic values for something like five
hundred years. This historical delving (which would probably be too long for people to read on
their phones) would demonstrate how Capitalism has been an essentially progressive force in
terms of getting us out of Despotism (which, for most folks, wasn't very much fun) by fomenting
bourgeois revolutions and imposing some semblance of democracy on societies. It would follow
Capitalism's inexorable advance all the way up to the Twentieth Century, in which its final
external ideological adversary, fake Communism, suddenly imploded, delivering us to the world
we now live in a world where a single ideology rules the planet unopposed from without
, and where any opposition to that global ideology can only be internal, or insurgent, in
nature (e.g, terrorism, extremism, and so on). Being a hypothetical leftist analysis,
it would, at this point, need to stress that, despite the fact that Capitalism helped deliver
us from Despotism, and improved the state of society generally (compared to most societies that
preceded it), we nonetheless would like to transcend it, or evolve out of it toward some type
of society where people, and everything else, including the biosphere we live in, are not
interchangeable, valueless commodities exchanged by members of a global corporatocracy who have
no essential values, or beliefs, or principles, other than the worship of money. After having
covered all that, we might want to offer more a nuanced view of the current neo-nationalist
reaction to the Corporatocracy's ongoing efforts to restructure and privatize the rest of the
planet. Not that we would support this reaction, or in any way refrain from calling
neo-nationalism what it is (i.e., reactionary, despotic, and doomed), but this nuanced view
we'd hypothetically offer, by analyzing the larger sociopolitical and historical forces at
play, might help us to see the way forward more clearly, and who knows, maybe eventually
propose some kind of credible leftist alternative to the "global neoliberalism vs.
neo-nationalism" double bind we appear to be hopelessly stuck in at the moment.
Luckily, we don't have to do that (i.e., articulate such a leftist analysis of any such
larger historical forces). Because there is no corporatocracy not really. That's just a fake
word the Russians made up and are spreading around on the Internet to distract us while the
Nazis take over. No, the logical explanation for Trump, Brexit, and anything else that
threatens the expansion of global Capitalism, and the freedom, democracy, and prosperity it
offers, is that millions of people across the world, all at once, for no apparent reason, woke
up one day full-blown fascists and started looking around for repulsive demagogues to swear
fanatical allegiance to. Yes, that makes a lot more sense than all that complicated stuff about
history and hegemonic ideological systems, which is probably just Russian propaganda anyway, in
which case there is absolutely no reason to read any boring year-old pieces, like this one in TheEuropeanFinancialReview , or this report by
Corporate Watch , from way back in the year 2000, about the rise of global corporate
So, apologies for wasting your time with all that pseudo-Marxian gobbledygook. Let's just
pretend this never happened, and get back to more important matters, like statistically proving
that Donald Trump got elected President because of racism, misogyny, transphobia, xenophobia,
or some other type of behavioral disorder, and pulling down Confederate statues, or kneeling
during the National Anthem, or whatever happens to be trending this week. Oh, yeah, and
debating punching Nazis, or people wearing MAGA hats. We definitely need to sort all that out
before we can move ahead with helping the Corporatocracy remove Trump from office, or at least
ensure he remains surrounded by their loyal generals, CEOs, and Goldman Sachs guys until the
next election. Whatever we do, let's not get distracted by that stuff I just distracted you
with. I know, it's tempting, but, given what's at stake, we need to maintain our laser focus on
issues related to identity politics, or else well, you know, the Nazis win.
C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and satirist based in
Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing
(USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23 , is
published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant. He can reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org .
Yesterday evening on RT a USA lady, as usual forgot the name, spoke about the USA. In a
matter of fact tone she said things like 'they (Deep State) have got him (Trump) in the
They, Deep State again, are now wondering if they will continue to try to control the
world, or if they should stop the attempt, and retreat into the USA.
Also as matter of fact she said 'the CIA has always been the instrument of Deep State, from
Kenndy to Nine Eleven'.
Another statement was 'no president ever was in control'.
How USA citizens continue to believe they live in a democracy, I cannot understand.
Yesterday the intentions of the new Dutch government were made public, alas most Dutch
also dot not see that the Netherlands since 2005 no longer is a democracy, just a province of
Brexit is about Britons who want their country back, a movement indeed getting
stronger and stronger in EU member states, but ignored by the ruling 'elites'.
No doubt many do want their country back, but what concerns me is that all of a sudden we
have the concept of "independence" plastered all over the place. Such concepts don't get
promoted unless the ruling elites see ways to turn those sentiments to their favor.
A lot of these so called "revolutions" are fomented by the elite only to be subverted
and perverted by them in the end. They've had a lot of practice co-opting revolutions and
independence movements. (And everything else.)
"Independence" is now so fashionable (as was Communism among the "elite" back in the '30s),
that they are even teaching and fostering independence to kids in kindergarten here in the
US. That strikes me as most amusing. Imagine "learning" independence in state run
"Now, despite what the Russian propagandists will tell you, this recent outbreak of
fascistic behavior has nothing whatsoever to do with these people's frustration with
neoliberalism or the supranational Corporatocracy that has been expanding its global empire
with total impunity for twenty-five years. And it definitely has nothing at all to do with
supranational political unions, or the supersession of national sovereignty by
corporate-concocted "free trade" agreements, or the relentless privatization of everything,
or the fear that a lot of people have that their cultures are being gradually erased and
replaced with a globalized, corporate-friendly, multicultural, market-based culture, which
is merely a simulation of culture, and which contains no actual cultural values (because
exchange value is its only operative value), but which sells the empty signifiers of their
eviscerated cultural values back to them so they can wear their "identities" like designer
brands as they hunch together in silence at Starbucks posting pictures of themselves on
Very impressed with this article, never really paid attention to CJ's articles but that is
"... One possible explanation would simply be that they have all gone nuts. But since this cannot possibly be the case, this leaves just one other explanation: Russiagate itself is a clever but sinister hoax intended to make it look like our political and media class have lost their marbles, therefore undermining our democracy, our values and our way of life ..."
The Russians may have developed the capability to create elaborate hoaxes that turn the US
into a laughing stock in the eyes of outsiders Russell O'Phobe
For almost a year, Russia's meddling in last year's election, along with collusion with the
Trump campaign, have dominated the political and media landscape. But an explosive new
classified report produced by US intelligence may be about to blow apart the narrative, and
reveal an even bigger story that has been missed in all the commentary so far.
The report was set up to try to answer two questions: firstly, why is it that after nearly a
year, there still hasn't been a single piece of hard evidence to prove either the hacking or
the collusion? And secondly, given this lack of credible evidence, how is it that the US media
and political classes have been talking about nothing else for months and months without any
sign of letting it go, to the point of giving the impression of being obsessed with the
The report, which was signed off by all 17 agencies ! that's the DIA, CIA, FBI and NSA !
reaches a conclusion which is nothing short of sensational:
"If there hasn't actually been any hard evidence presented of meddling or collusion, we
must ask the question of how and why the entire political and media class have been talking
about nothing else for months.
One possible explanation would simply be that they have all gone nuts. But since this
cannot possibly be the case, this leaves just one other explanation: Russiagate itself is a
clever but sinister hoax intended to make it look like our political and media class have
lost their marbles, therefore undermining our democracy, our values and our way of life."
Ahh, but Obama was a peace nerd by Democratic Standards. Clinton almost started WWIII. LBJ bombed
the shit out of Vietnam. Truman dropped two atomic bombs on surrendering Japan, allegedly to scare
the shit out of Stalin. Carter was a one term wimp. Democrats are just as war hungry as Republicans,
but they lucked out with Iraq being a Republican issue, and so tried to get as many political
points as possible from it. Obama's Foreign Policy wasn't popular with the Democratic Leadership,
but it energized the youth voters, so they stayed silent. Under that context, Trump is indeed
Truman used atomic bombs to bully Russia out of Japan and Western Berlin. LBJ fought by proxy
against Russia in Vietnam. Clinton ordered a war with Russia over Kosovo. Obama was the outlier.
Also, it certainly helped his candidacy against McCain, and the Democrats in the midterms. After
Obama was reelected, it was Arab Spring, I mean business as usual. What did Trump do? Lobbed a
few missiles at the Syrians, and shot down a single plane. Just one?! What a softy! The DNC Leadership
needs to realize that the World isn't in the 1990s anymore, but I doubt that they will, and that's
an issue that will cost them the 2018 midterms.
"... I really hope Russia has learned its lesson. It does no good to talk with Washington, as it only and always means Russia harm. Despite the popular aphorism, "Jaw, jaw is better than war, war", there is no reason Russia must choose one. Any overtures by Washington – including and especially to re-open the deconfliction channel in Syria – should be met with polite non-commitment, and a vague promise to look at it, then nothing. ..."
Americans (in Washington and in the think tanks) see themselves as Lucy in Charles Shultz's "Peanuts"
comic strip, and the Russians as Charlie Brown. No matter how many times the USA has lied to
Russia, disparaged it, lied about it, cheated it .when America says, "Hey, let's play
football! I'll hold it, and you come running up and kick it!" Russia will still fall for the old
dodge, and come running and try to kick it, only to have it snatched away at the last second so
it can fall on its ass.
I really hope Russia has learned its lesson. It does no good to talk with Washington, as
it only and always means Russia harm. Despite the popular aphorism, "Jaw, jaw is better than war,
war", there is no reason Russia must choose one. Any overtures by Washington – including and especially
to re-open the deconfliction channel in Syria – should be met with polite non-commitment, and
a vague promise to look at it, then nothing.
I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: `Two vast and trunkless cankles of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear -
"My name is Ozywomandias, queen of queens:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
back in March that the President throw this Russia stuff right back in the elites' smug weasel
faces by making the Russian ambassador an honored guest at all cabinet meetings. In the same spirit
of defiance, I now tender a further suggestion.
Mr. President, you are in need of a new FBI Director. Please consider appointing Russian ambassador
Sergey Ivanovich Kislyak
to this position.
Ambassador Kislyak is a genial and worldly fellow you should have no trouble getting along with.
As a former diplomatic functionary of the U.S.S.R., I'm sure he is well acquainted with intelligence
procedures and protocols. An ideal candidate!
You'd probably have to grant him U.S. citizenship; but I believe that can be done on an expedited
basis by a simple Act of Congress.
The upside for you would be that it would drive the opposition into shrieking, moon-howling madness.
The downside for our country would be nothing at all.
In defense of Obama making $400K while Clinton only made $225K
he was actually able to *GET ELECTED*.. She took all her bribes up front then lost to Trump
with a 2-1 money advantage and the press completely in her pocket. Truly pathetic. He should get
WAY more than 2x what she does. HE ACTUALLY DELIVERED SOMETHING TO HIS BENEFACTORS. If she had
any shame - which she obviously doesn't - she'd disappear forever. And we'd all be the better
Hillary, Bill, and Chelsea are three of the most embarrassing Americans to have ever lived.
If you think I'm being too harsh, ask yourself why the (D) party they built for 30 years prefers
fascism to democratic socialism.
Whether fair or not, it's not difficult to look at Wall Street paying $400,000 to Obama
as a reward for [not prosecuting anyone on Wall Street for the crash].
Well, something that seems fairer , if not inarguable, is that if President Obama
had prosecuted people on Wall Street, demanded Pecora investigation-style hearings, or,
y'know, acted generally in the public interest, Wall Street would not be shelling out
$400,000 to hear his views on anything.
To view Obama during his presidency as not being constrained under those circumstances
seems, to me, to be a kind of willful obliviousness.
Oh Lord, it's happening–the remanufacture of Trump by the Establishment. During the campaign,
Trump and the Basilisk had nothing in common but their hair dye. Now, almost daily, he looks more
He gets embarrassing. Regarding the alleged gassing in Syria, quoth Donald:
"When you kill innocent children, innocent babies - babies, little babies - with a chemical gas
that crosses many, many lines, beyond a red line. And I will tell you, that attack on children
yesterday had a big impact on me my attitude toward Syria and Assad has changed very much."
God almighty. Who wrote this–a middle school girl with C's in English, or the President of the
United States? Did he retire to his bedroom for a good cry?
Apparently he ordered his missile strike without bothering to find out what happened. The usual
suspects are driving him like a sports car.
The election was a choice between fetor and a lunatic. We chose the lunatic. Whether this was
better than the alternative, we will never know, but Trump is going from bad to worse, or as the
Mexicans say, de Guatemala a Guatepeor.
Does he believe this stuff? Is he naive enough to think that there was something unusually
horrible about the attack? Horrible, yes, but not in the least unusual. Do you know what everyday,
boring artillery does to children? Five-hundred-pound bombs? Hellfire rockets? Daily Mr. Trump's
military and his allies daily drop shrapnel-producing explosives on people, cities, towns, adults,
children, weddings and goatherds in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. Good draft-dodger that he
was, he probably has never seen any of this. Good psychopath that he may be, he may not care.
This whole gas-attack business smells to high heaven. It looks nicely calculated to force him
to attack Assad. Gas was important: Killing babies, little babies with explosives is so routine that
no one cares, but we have been programmed to shudder at the thought of Gas!
Actually artillery has killed several orders of magnitude more people, but never mind.
Targeting children was a nice touch. Definitely a PR bonus. So Donald goes into his Poor-widdle-fings
weep, while Americans weekly kill more children in three to seven countries, depending on the date.
Is the man consciously a liar? Hasn't got sense enough to think before operating his mouth? Actually
believes what he says when he says it?
Glance at a small part of the record and focus on his changing his tune, not on whether you agree
with a particular policy. Erratic, erratic, erratic. He was going to run out the illegals within
two years, absurd but he said it. Going to put high tariffs on Mexican goods. Didn't. On Chinese
goods. Isn't. Tear up the Iran treaty. Didn't. Declare China a currency-manipulator. Isn't. Ban Muslims.
Hasn't. Promote good relations with Russia. Isn't. Get the US out of Syria. Ha. Make NATO pay for
itself. Isn't. The man has the steely determination one associates with bean curd. You cannot trust
anything the man says.
Having been reprogrammed as a good neocon, bombing places he promised to get out of, looking for
a fight with Russia, he is now butting heads with Fat Thing in North Korea. He his said things closely
resembling, "We have run out of strategic patience with the North. If nobody else will take care
of it, we will." Grrrr. Bowwow. Woof.
The problem with growly ultimata made for television is that somebody has to back down–that is,
lose face and credibility. If Trump had quietly told Fat Thing, "If you crazy bastards scrap your
nuke program, we will drop the sanctions," it might have worked. But no. Negotiations would imply
weakness. Thus an ultimatum.
So now either (a) Fat Thing knuckles under, humiliating himself and possibly endangering his grasp
on power or (b) Trump blinks in a humiliating display of the Empire's impotence, possibly endangering
his grasp on power.
Kim Jong Il, or Il Sung Jong, or whatever the the hell the latest one of them is called, shows
not the slightest sign of backing down. So does the Donald start an utterly unpredictable war, as
usual in somebody else's country, or does he weasel off, muttering, and hope nobody notices?
Fred's Third Law of International Relations: Never butt heads with a country that has a missile
named the No Dong.
Many of us favored Trump, slightly daft though he was, because he wasn't yet Hillary, wasn't yet
a neocon robot, and didn't want war with every country he had heard of, apparently meaning a good
half dozen. At least he said he didn't, not yet having been told that he did. In particular, he didn't
want war with Russia. But when the neocons control the media and Congress, they can convince a naive
public of anything and, apparently, the President.
Why is the Hillarification of Trump important? The necessary prior question: What is the greatest
threat to the neocons' American Empire? Answer: The ongoing integration of Eurasia under Chinese
hegemony. The key countries in this are China, Iran, and Russia. (Isn't it curious that, apart from
the momentary distraction of North Korea, these countries have been the focus of New York's hostility?)
In particular if Russia and, through it, China develop large and very profitable trade with Europe,
there goes NATO and with it the Empire.
Thus the eeeeeeeeeeek! furor about Russia as existential threat and so on. Thus sending
a few troops to Baltic countries to "deter" Russia. This was theater. The idea that a thousand garrison
troops can stop the Russian army, which hasn't gone silly as ours has, on its doorstep is loony.
Hillary was on board with the Russia hysteria and the globalization and the immigration and so
on. Trump could have screwed the whole pooch by getting along with Russia, so he had to be reconfigured.
And was. A work in progress, but going well.
Too much is being asked of him. One man cannot overcome the combined hostility of the media, the
political establishment, the neocons, the myriad other special interests that he has threatened.
Mass immigration is a done deal. China develops and America, already developed, cannot keep up. The
country disintegrates socially. Washington, always depending on war and its threat, faces a new world
in which trade is the weapon, and doesn't know what to do. The culture courses. The world changes.
Yet if only Trump showed some sign of knowing what he is doing, and could remember from day to
day, if only he realized that wars are more easily started than predicted, if only he were not becoming
an unbalanced Hillary.
"... This is the 100% true story of the #SyriaStrikes, and if you support sites like The Corbett Report that question it in any way you are a moonbeam fake news tyrant-loving hippy pinko Russian agent and should commit ritual suicide immediately. ..."
On the morning of April 4th 2017, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, on the verge of a military
victory against the terrorist insurgency in his country and on the eve of peace talks that would
secure his position as president, decided to use chemical weapons
he didn't have against a target of no military significance in front of as many cameras as
possible to cross the one red line that would insure his own government's downfall.
Without presenting a shred of evidence, President Donald Trump boldly launched a military strike
against Shayrat airfield because "national security interest," promising to help the "beautiful
children" (*offer does not apply to babies in
Pakistan , or basically anywhere else).
Throughout the world people rejoice as a horrible secular regime in the Middle East is replaced
by yet another peace-loving band of ragtag human rights campaigners and
beheaders motivated by a desire to subdue the armies of Rome in an apocalyptic confrontation
in Dabiq. (*
actual ISIS belief )
The mainstream media
unquestioningly asserts that the story is true because the US government says so, but that's
OK because we all know the msm is full of unbiased truthtellers and dig hard to get the raw facts
on every story. (" beauty
of our weapons ")
Even members of congress think the story is
a load of hogwash ,
but that's OK because they're probably crazy.
This is the 100% true story of the #SyriaStrikes, and if you support sites like The Corbett
Report that question it in any way you are a moonbeam fake news tyrant-loving hippy pinko Russian
agent and should commit ritual suicide immediately.
If you love your country and/or liberty, NASCAR, supermodels, TV, water slides or your mother
you will not question this story in any way. Ever.
With the Russian election hacking scandal having gone from the merely strange, to the bizarre,
to the ironic, to the McCarthyist, and most recently, jumping the patently absurd shark - as of last
night, anyone who is against Hillary is "influenced
by Russia" according to a former Clinton advisor - Russia decided to have some fun at the expense
of US paranoia.
On Saturday, the ministry posted the following audio file of the "new" automated telephone switchboard
message for Russian embassies.
"You have reached the Russian embassy, your call is very important to us. To arrange a call from
a Russian diplomat to your political opponent, press 1. To use the services of Russian hackers press
2. To request election interference, press 3 and wait until the next election campaign. Please note
that all calls are recorded for quality improvement and training purposes."
Russian MFA developed automated voicemail system - please listen (Russian,
then English) and tell us your opinion. Feedback appreciated!
And just to make it clear, it is April 1: as AP observes for the countless spy agencies, and congressional
committees still trying to explain how Moscow subliminally influenced millions of Americans to vote
for Trump instead of Hillary, a ministry officer confirmed that the post was a joke.
What does Russia do that the U.S. doesn't? Spy on it's people? Engage in state sponsored assassination?
Invade sovereign nations? Oh, I know what makes you angry! They don't allow homos access to children.
Yeah, only scumbags keep their children safe. S/
In particular, there is a popular anecdote about an American man proving the benefits
of freedom of speech to a Russian guy. The American claims he can safely go to the
White House and shout out "Screw you, Ronald Reagan!" The Soviet guy indifferently
replies: "So what? I can go to the Kremlin and yell 'Screw you, Ronald Reagan!' too."
Another well-known joke describes how various Soviet leaders responded to a
situation where a train they were travelling in suddenly stops. Vladimir Lenin
suggests uniting all workers and peasants and asking them to build a new road. Joseph
Stalin orders the train drivers shot. Nikita Khrushchev rehabilitates the executed
ones, orders that the rails be removed from behind the train and put in front of it.
And Leonid Brezhnev draws the curtains and starts swinging from side to side,
imitating the train's movement.
"Communism is an unscientific doctrine because it was not initially tested
on dogs," claims another political joke.
In another joke poking fun at the permanent shortages in stores, a man comes
into a shop and asks "You wouldn't happen to have fish, would you?" The shop
assistant replies, "comrade, you've got it wrong! This is a butcher's shop - here we
wouldn't happen to have meat. There is a fish shop across the road, that's where they
wouldn't happen to have fish!"
Finally we get Pence in control and he can carry on where Obama left off and
Hillary couldn't start, WWIII with Russia.... I so want to see what a first
strike looks like and the aftermath of what Russia will do to North America.
Attacking Russia will be the best show on TV, all the fake MSM news will have
to cover the fallout in North America in real time, awesome stuff....
WASHINGTON-Stopping and turning around as he made his way across the South Lawn after hearing
the unmanned aerial vehicle hovering just feet behind him, outgoing President Barack Obama tearfully
shooed away a loyal MQ-9 Reaper drone attempting to follow him out of the White House, sources
"Go on now-get out of here!" said the former commander-in-chief, his lower lip
trembling and his eyes welling with tears as he affected a stern tone of voice in an attempt to
scare off the faithful hunter-killer drone that had spent the past eight years obediently at his
"You can't come with me anymore, you got that? Can't you see this is for your own good?
Now scram. What are you waiting for? Go!" At press time, a heartbroken Obama had thrown a rock
in the drone's direction, causing the unmanned aerial vehicle to flee into the sky, where it paused
to look back one last time at its old master before flying off toward a Yemeni tribal wedding.
Here's 10 ways to spot a *real* Russian Spy in America:
1) Superior use of the English language, with a thick accent, failure to use articles such as
'the' and 'a' – such as 'take shower' instead of 'going to take a shower.' Russian Language
is far more complex but more logical and efficient in use of letters, speech, and writing.
Russian natives who master English typically have a large vocabulary, and will use proper tenses
and complex grammatical structures because they studied it, and will likely leave out slang such
as 'you know' and 'like.' (Until of course, they live here for 10 years)
2) Never smiling. Russians do not smile unless they are laughing at a joke, and maybe in
some rare cases when something funny happens. Even in this case, their dark sense of humor
is something they enjoy on the inside. It's not polite to walk around Moscow smiling.
If you do, someone may call the police (as if you have gone mad).
3) Seems to be rude – never says 'please' or 'thank you' – Russians do not have a concept of why
you should say 'thank you' to a stranger who just took $50 from you for your groceries. How
has this person really helped you or brightened your day? Isn't it their job? Should
you say 'thank you for doing your job' as if it's a miracle?
4) Does not wear shoes in his home, he has a foyer where when he enters his house takes off all
coats, scarves, hats, shoes and other 'outdoor' wear and puts on fuzzy house slippers or just wears
5) Constantly pays with physical cash. Although some Americans do this anyway who are not
necessarily Russian – nearly ALL Russians use 100% physical Rubles for everything from paying rent,
health insurance, doctors visits, buying a car, buying groceries, or investing. The electronic
economy hasn't taken hold in Russia – and partly because they are 'paranoid' that if they put their
money in a bank, the bank will seize it or bankrupt.
6) Never will open a door for a stranger, or move out of the way if you are in his walking vector,
in fact he may knock over any passersby like bowling pins if they are in the way; and certainly will
never say 'excuse me.'
7) Always well dressed, even to go grocery shopping – maybe keeps a pocket comb even if his hair
is only 2 cm long. Russians don't have a concept of wearing sweat suits or pajamas to the grocery
store. When they go out even if just to run to the corner store for a milk.
8) Wary to use air conditioner. In Russia very few buildings have A/C – in the summer months
when it's hot, it is still cool at night, when most open windows and enjoy a nice breeze. Modern
buildings of course have the conveniences of A/C but those who are older or who grew up in older
buildings do not have A/C – only heat. Therefore, they aren't used to cranking up the A/C year
round like the blue hairs in Sunny Florida. If they are hot they are more likely to take a
walk or open the windows.
9) Not likely to find Russians in paid public events unless they are formal. Russia has
a well-developed public system of parks and other free public use systems and they aren't used to
paying a few dollars to enter a public park, see Christmas lights, or $1 to view through binoculars
along side the highway. Paying $250 for theater tickets is different – they aren't cheap people,
they are just not used to being nickeled and dimed when outside their homes, because in Russia it's
10) Strange tippers. In Russia they don't use the 'tipping' system, if you eat in a café
or bar you may leave your spare change for example, if the bill is $9.50 you may leave the additional
$.50 – or if you have a few extra dollars you may leave it – or not. The majority of cafes,
restaurants, bars, and other establishments only expect tips from tourists. And if a Russian
does leave a tip, it's likely to be very small (not 10%!!).
There you have it! There are many cultural differences between USA and Russia, although
there are too many similarities. In this series of articles, we're spreading the facts about
Russia – the great unknown Bear.
"... What we ordinary folk think of as "American" interests are those interests as expressed by an entrenched foreign policy establishment to which the price of admission isn't only graduate studies in an expensive university. No, you have to walk within the lines. There's nothing as old under the sun as "group-think". ..."
"... he served a purpose when he diverged from long established consensus and said that maybe, just maybe, getting on with the Russians might not be that hard. Or that NATO is an out-dated, dead-weight non-alliance of the unwilling. Or that border-less trade ruined heartland America. ..."
The way things are supposed to work on this planet is like this: in the United States, the power
structures (public and private) decide what they want the rest of the world to do. They communicate
their wishes through official and unofficial channels, expecting automatic cooperation. If cooperation
is not immediately forthcoming, they apply political, financial and economic pressure. If that still
doesn't produce the intended effect, they attempt regime change through a color revolution or a military
coup, or organize and finance an insurgency leading to terrorist attacks and civil war in the recalcitrant
nation. If that still doesn't work, they bomb the country back to the stone age. This is the way
it worked in the 1990s and the 2000s, but as of late a new dynamic has emerged.
In the beginning it was centered on Russia, but the phenomenon has since spread around the world
and is about to engulf the United States itself. It works like this: the United States decides what
it wants Russia to do and communicates its wishes, expecting automatic cooperation. Russia says "Nyet."
The United States then runs through all of the above steps up to but not including the bombing campaign,
from which it is deterred by Russia's nuclear deterrent. The answer remains "Nyet." One could perhaps
imagine that some smart person within the US power structure would pipe up and say: "Based on the
evidence before us, dictating our terms to Russia doesn't work; let's try negotiating with Russia
in good faith as equals." And then everybody else would slap their heads and say, "Wow! That's brilliant!
Why didn't we think of that?" But instead that person would be fired that very same day because,
you see, American global hegemony is nonnegotiable. And so what happens instead is that the Americans
act baffled, regroup and try again, making for quite an amusing spectacle.
The whole Edward Snowden imbroglio was particularly fun to watch. The US demanded his extradition.
The Russians said: "Nyet, our constitution forbids it." And then, hilariously, some voices in the
West demanded in response that Russia change its constitution! The response, requiring no translation,
was "Xa-xa-xa-xa-xa!" Less funny is the impasse over Syria: the Americans have been continuously
demanding that Russia go along with their plan to overthrow Bashar Assad. The unchanging Russian
response has been: "Nyet, the Syrians get to decide on their leadership, not Russia, and not the
US." Each time they hear it, the Americans scratch their heads and try again. John Kerry was just
recently in Moscow, holding a marathon "negotiating session" with Putin and Lavrov. Above is a photo
of Kerry talking to Putin and Lavrov in Moscow a week or so ago and their facial expressions are
hard to misread. There's Kerry, with his back to the camera, babbling away as per usual. Lavrov's
face says: "I can't believe I have to sit here and listen to this nonsense again." Putin's face says:
"Oh the poor idiot, he can't bring himself to understand that we're just going to say 'nyet' again."
Kerry flew home with yet another "nyet."
What's worse, other countries are now getting into the act. The Americans told the Brits exactly
how to vote, and yet the Brits said "nyet" and voted for Brexit. The Americans told the Europeans
to accept the horrendous corporate power grab that is the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership
(TTIP), and the French said "nyet, it shall not pass." The US organized yet another military coup
in Turkey to replace Erdoǧan with somebody who won't try to play nice with Russia, and the Turks
said "nyet" to that too. And now, horror of horrors, there is Donald Trump saying "nyet" to all sorts
of things-NATO, offshoring American jobs, letting in a flood of migrants, globalization, weapons
for Ukrainian Nazis, free trade
The corrosive psychological effect of "nyet" on the American hegemonic psyche cannot be underestimated.
If you are supposed to think and act like a hegemon, but only the thinking part still works, then
the result is cognitive dissonance. If your job is to bully nations around, and the nations can no
longer be bullied, then your job becomes a joke, and you turn into a mental patient. The resulting
madness has recently produced quite an interesting symptom: some number of US State Department staffers
signed a letter, which was promptly leaked, calling for a bombing campaign against Syria in order
to overthrow Bashar Assad. These are diplomats. Diplomacy is the art of avoiding war by talking.
Diplomats who call for war are not being exactly diplomatic. You could say that they are incompetent
diplomats, but that wouldn't go far enough (most of the competent diplomats left the service during
the second Bush administration, many of them in disgust over having to lie about the rationale for
the Iraq war). The truth is, they are sick, deranged non-diplomatic warmongers. Such is the power
of this one simple Russian word that they have quite literally lost their minds.
But it would be unfair to single out the State Department. It is as if the entire American body
politic has been infected by a putrid miasma. It permeates all things and makes life miserable. In
spite of the mounting problems, most other things in the US are still somewhat manageable, but this
one thing-the draining away of the ability to bully the whole world-ruins everything. It's mid-summer,
the nation is at the beach. The beach blanket is moth-eaten and threadbare, the beach umbrella has
holes in it, the soft drinks in the cooler are laced with nasty chemicals and the summer reading
is boring and then there is a dead whale decomposing nearby, whose name is "Nyet." It just ruins
the whole ambiance!
The media chattering heads and the establishment politicos are at this point painfully aware of
this problem, and their predictable reaction is to blame it on what they perceive as its ultimate
source: Russia, conveniently personified by Putin. "If you aren't voting for Clinton, you are voting
for Putin" is one recently minted political trope. Another is that Trump is Putin's agent. Any public
figure that declines to take a pro-establishment stance is automatically labeled "Putin's useful
idiot." Taken at face value, such claims are preposterous. But there is a deeper explanation for
them: what ties them all together is the power of "nyet." A vote for Sanders is a "nyet" vote: the
Democratic establishment produced a candidate and told people to vote for her, and most of the young
people said "nyet." Same thing with Trump: the Republican establishment trotted out its Seven Dwarfs
and told people to vote for any one of them, and yet most of the disenfranchised working-class white
people said "nyet" and voted for Snow White the outsider.
It is a hopeful sign that people throughout the Washington-dominated world are discovering the
power of "nyet." The establishment may still look spiffy on the outside, but under the shiny new
paint there hides a rotten hull, with water coming in though every open seam. A sufficiently resounding
"nyet" will probably be enough to cause it to founder, suddenly making room for some very necessary
changes. When that happens, please remember to thank Russia or, if you insist, Putin.
NowhereMan said... Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 7:13:00 AM EDT
Beautiful! I'm going to start using that word in conversation now just to gauge people's
reactions. Nyet!!! I have one particularly stuffy friend who's just baffled by the Trump
phenomenon. He's an old school GOP conservative at heart who's chagrined that he's had to
abandon the grand old party in favor of HRC and can't understand for the life of him why the
"dirt people" are so enamored with Trump and Sanders. I just laugh and tell him that they're
abandoning the Dems for the same reasons that he's embracing them.
The rich and the near rich (which seems to include just about everybody these days, if only in
their imaginations) here in the US all suffer from fundamental attribution bias - the idea
that their own exceptionalism is why they are doing well - rather than realizing that it's all
mostly just the luck of the draw - or even worse - their own willingness to carry corporate
water like the good little Nazi's they are that has allowed them to temporarily advance their
station in life.
Fortunately for us all, the sun is setting on America's empire as we speak, and fevered dreams
of US hegemony for the rest of time will be short lived indeed, although homo sapiens' time
might be limited as well. If history keeps recording in the aftermath, US nuclear enabled
hegemony will be but a brief blip on the historical radar, and like the legend of Atlantis
before us, we'll be remembered chiefly as a society gone mad with our technologies, who
aspired to reach out and touch the face of god, but instead settled for embracing our many
inner devils. We won't be missed.
Happy Unicorn said... Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 9:26:00 AM EDT
A vote for Trump is a vote for Putin? Wouldn't THAT be nice!
Dave Stockton said... Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 9:36:00 AM EDT
This whole, "a vote against Hillary is a vote for Putin", is the best thing that could have
happened this election. The US population will now have a debate and get to vote on whether we
truly want to start World War Three. Hopefully the powers that be will be surprised by the
Unknown said... Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 12:23:00 PM EDT
Putin recently made fun of Lavrov, that he is becoming like Gromyko....
...and Gromyko was called Mr. NYET. :-)
Vyse Legendaire said... Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 12:37:00 PM EDT
I hope someone would volunteer to design a 'Nyet!' T-shirt on teepublic for advocates to
show their unity to the cause.
Shawn Sincoski said... Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 4:44:00 PM EDT
I really hope that the next time the TBTF banks need a handout, somebody, somewhere reacts
with a 'NFW' that resonates with the other plebes. Such a powerful word. But I am doubtful
that such an event will occur. With all that is going on with Hillary the house should be on
fire by now, but it is not (I am not advocating Trump by disparaging HRC). I suspect that the
coming American experience will be unique and (dis)proportionate to their apathy.
Cortes said... Tuesday, July 26, 2016 at 9:01:00 PM EDT
Herbert Marcuse: The first word of freedom is "No"
Irene Parousis said... Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 6:58:00 AM EDT
Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 12:12:00 AM EDT
There is a minor twist: "The corrosive psychological effect of "nyet" on the American
hegemonic psyche cannot be underestimated". Probably GWB's "misunderestimated" left some local
linguistic traume in your brain popping up in your otherwise perfect comment. I guess you
meant "cannot be overestimated". Nevermind, you message is clear and convincing anyway :-)
Mister Roboto said... Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 8:07:00 AM EDT
This sums up why all the usual poppycock and folderol about why I need to vote for Hillary
that always succeeded in getting under my intellectual skin in the past is now just the mere
noise of screeching cats outside the window to me: There just comes a point where, if you have
any integrity at all, you have to say, "Nyet!"
Thursday, July 28, 2016 at 5:42:00 AM EDT
At some point, voting for a major party candidate is just throwing away your vote.
Thursday, July 28, 2016 at 7:11:00 AM EDT
I always enjoy Dmitry's blogs and the fact that he pushes the Russian perspective, as a relief
from the Russophobic drivel put out by the mainstream. However, a word of caution to the wise.
Obama, Kerry, Clinton, Trump et al. are, in fact, extremely unfunny. Charlie Chaplin lampooned
the funny little man with the moustache in the Great Dictator, xa! xa! xa! The truth came out
later. Do not be afraid of Neocon America, but please remember these are dangerous people. Be
Thursday, July 28, 2016 at 10:55:00 AM EDT
And sad because Brasil didn't say NYET to the coup planted here by USA.
Thursday, July 28, 2016 at 1:02:00 PM EDT
"Putin recently made fun of Lavrov, that he is becoming like Gromyko....
...and Gromyko was called Mr. NYET. :-)"
Even better, Lavrov was subsequently quoted in the press as saying "don't make me say the four
What a tag team!
Friday, July 29, 2016 at 9:20:00 AM EDT
I really believe that you have hit the crux of the issue, the Neocon psychopaths are besides
themselves over the Nyets, and they find themselves to be a once powerful now toothless lion,
the are being laughed at, even by the American people.
I hope so because the worst of the bunch is Mrs. Clinton, she is just a crazy and stupid enough
to burn it all down, perhaps the only thing that would prevent her from doing so is that this
would interfere with her Diabolical Narcissistic need to be seen as the Kleptocrat she is and
to get away with being the biggest grifter in American history.
Turkey shows that they can't even organize a proper coup any more, even when they have a major
base in the country of the government to be compromised. The NeoCons must be so disappointed.
This failed coup was probably also was a big disappointment to those Fed Banksters who were
counting on looting the Bank if Turkey's 500 or so Tonnes of gold, as they did with Ukraine.
Friday, July 29, 2016 at 12:53:00 PM EDT
Leon Panetta sez "we know how to do this" despite an exuberant flourishing of evidence to the
contrary. But there's a glimmer of hope, even if it comes from a way down the ranks, because
there's a Col Bacevitch who begs to differ and sez "with all due respect, we DON'T know how to
You ask, know how to do WHAT exactly? Well, the topic at issue in a PBS panel discussion was
destroying the Islamic State. But knowing how to do it or NOT knowing how to do it could refer
equally to a series of monumental American foreign policy muffs. How could it be, that America
with all its military force, screws up so mightily and predictably? Because it's as Mr Orlov
asserts, there's a lot of NYETS out there and the American foreign policy establishment can't
But what they most crucially can't fathom is that those damn furriners have their own
interests at heart just like the Americans have their own interests. Americans from the street
level to the highest echelons view the world through Americentric lens resulting in
ludicrously distorted fun-house views of the world.
For example, why doesn't the Iranian see things the way Americans want him to? Why is it
always "nyet" coming out of Teheran? Why are Iranians so belligerent? Americans seemingly
can't comprehend that Iran is an ancient imperial power whose roots go back millennia, right
to the origins of civilization. But could it possibly be that Iranian concerns have got more
to do with goings-on in their geographic locale and pretty much nothing to do with the United
States? And that the Iranian is highly irritated that Americans stick their noses into matters
that concern Americans only tangentially or not at all? Could it be that the Iranian has his
own life pathways in age-old places that Americans know nothing about? Could it be that an
Iranian is educated in his own traditions in ancient academies that far pre-date anything on
American soil? You can replace the words "Iranian" and "Iran" with "Chinese" and "China" or
"Japanese" and "Japan" or dozens of other places and societies including "Russian" and
"Russia". American incomprehension goes deep.
Maybe some of the world is Washington-dominated. But maybe some this domination is more
apparent than real. Maybe it only seems Washington-dominated because in many of these places
there's a concordance of interests with the United States. But in most of the globe the
interests of Americans are not the same as those of the locals. And America has not got the
will nor the reach to make it otherwise.
Happy Unicorn said...
Roger: "But in most of the globe the interests of Americans are not the same as those of the
Most of the globe, including America itself! The interests of the Americans you're talking
about are usually not the same as mine or anyone's that I know ("the locals" in America). I
suspect the people of the USA who aren't brainwashed would have a lot in common with everybody
else in the world, because the first colony of any would-be empire (colony 0, let's say) is
always the country it originated from. More and more of us are saying nyet too, though the
utterance usually takes the less exotic form also enumerated by Dmitry awhile back: "No,
because we hate you."
Friday, July 29, 2016 at 3:03:00 PM EDT
Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 7:22:00 AM EDT
In good wronglish:
There's America, Americans, USA.
And, in some point of our decolonized memory, there's Pacha Mama, our Mother Earth, the name
given to our land by the older people.
Not by chance, the unique country in Pacha Mama continents that have a pre-colonial language
as its official - Paraguay's Guarani - was the initial focus of this antidemocratic wave
attacking our countries.
We, the united states of...? What?
"Pacha Mama" is our best nyet!
Not anymore south and central americas, south and central "americans". Pacha Mama is our real
continents' name! We are The United States of Pacha Mama!
When mentioning people from brazil, angentine, chile, bolivia, peru paraguay
colombiavenezuelahaiti,surinamepanamacubamexico and so, please call us Pachamamists. That'
what we are.
Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 11:27:00 AM EDT
HappyUnicorn, of course you're right.
What we ordinary folk think of as "American" interests are those interests as expressed by an
entrenched foreign policy establishment to which the price of admission isn't only graduate
studies in an expensive university. No, you have to walk within the lines. There's nothing as
old under the sun as "group-think".
The lines are long established. Just think of it: globalization, off-shoring millions of jobs,
on-shoring millions of dirt-poor immigrants, legal and otherwise. Nothing warms the cockles of
the oligarch's heart like a desperate underclass.
I know Trump is a buffoon. But he served a purpose when he diverged from long established
consensus and said that maybe, just maybe, getting on with the Russians might not be that
hard. Or that NATO is an out-dated, dead-weight non-alliance of the unwilling. Or that
border-less trade ruined heartland America.
You saw the venomous reaction. A lot of people staked a career on the status-quo. Is the
best-before expired as Trump suggested? I'll bet that if it hadn't been a blustering clown
that raised it, many more people on the street would agree.
Some regional interests are historic and easily visible for example, along the Mason-Dixon
line. But even on either side of that old divide I think that the disparity is more an
artifact of opposing elites determined to not get along. Why don't they get along? Well,
there's a country to loot. You need distractions and diversions while pension funds and
treasuries are emptied.
And so we're off chasing our tails on burning problems like gender neutral washrooms.
Brilliant, don't you think? Kudos to the Obama regime for that one. And so it's God fearin',
gun packin' "conservative" versus enlightened, high-minded "progressive". What a joke, what a
con. Yet, predictably, we fell for it. You name it, school prayer, abortion, evolution, and
now washrooms, we fall for it, we always do.
Robert T. said...
Saturday, July 30, 2016 at 1:52:00 PM EDT
It would be very nice if someone could write a piece on what life in Russia, in all its
levels, is really like nowadays. I suspect that it is not just "nyet" that terrifies the
Empire, but rather what Russia herself is now increasingly coming to represent.
A lot of people, myself included, had been brought up thinking that Russia, while indeed a
superpower, isn't and cannot be on the same page as the US. But now here are reports saying
that a good and strong leader has pulled Russia out of the rut, and made things better. What's
more, this leader did it in a manner that seems antithetical to the Empire. And what's even
better is that this new Russia can't be easily rocked, like how the other countries had been
rocked and thrown into chaos. The Empire therefore is at its wit's end. If people from other
parts of the Earth, especially in those many places where democracy has failed miserably,
begin to see that there is indeed an alternative to the empirical system, won't they then
start to follow Russia's footsteps?
Headsails said... Tuesday, August 2, 2016 at 2:07:00 AM EDT
Just like a spoiled rotten child that needs to learn some manners. It needs to learn the
meaning of no. But in this case, instead of a spankng they would be chain ganged for life.
Brain Parasite Gonna Eatcha!
I've been experiencing some difficulties with commenting on the current political situation in the
US, because it's been a little too funny, whereas this is a very serious blog. But I have decided
that I must try my best. Now, these are serious matters, so as you read this, please refrain from
any and all levity and mirth.
You may have heard by now that the Russians stole the US presidential election; if it wasn't for
them, Hillary Clinton would have been president-elect, but because of their meddling we are now stuck
with Donald Trump and his 1001 oligarchs running the federal government for the next four years.
There are two ways to approach this question. One is to take the accusation of Russian hacking
of the US elections at face value, and we will certainly do that. But first let's try another way,
because it's quicker. Let's consider the accusation itself as a symptom of some unrelated disorder.
This is often the best way forward. Suppose a person walks into a doctor's office, and says, "Doctor,
I believe I have schizophrenium poisoning." Should the doctor summon the hazmat team, or check for
And so let's first consider that this "Russians did it" refrain we keep hearing is a symptom of
something else, of which Russians are not the cause. My working hypothesis is that this behavior
is being caused by a brain parasite. Yes, this may seem outlandish at first, but as we'll see later
the theory that the Russians stole the election is no less outlandish.
Brain parasites are known to alter the behavior of the organisms they infest in a variety of subtle
ways. For instance, Toxicoplasma gondii alters the behavior of rodents, causing them to lose
fear of cats and to become attracted to the smell of cat urine, making it easy for the cats to catch
them. It also alters the behavior of humans, causing them to lavish excessive affection on cats and
to compulsively download photographs of cute kittens playing with yarn.
My hypothesis is that this particular brain parasite was specifically bioengineered by the US
to make those it infects hate Russia. I suspect that the neurological trigger it uses is Putin's
face, which the parasite somehow wires into the visual cortex. This virus was first unleashed on
the unsuspecting Ukrainians, where its effect was plain to see. This historically Russian, majority
Russian-speaking, culturally Russian and religiously Russian Orthodox region suddenly erupted in
an epidemic of Russophobia. The Ukraine cut economic ties with Russia, sending its economy into a
tailspin, and started a war with its eastern regions, which were quite recently part of Russia and
wish to become part of Russia again.
So far so good: the American bioengineers who created this virus achieved the effect they wanted,
turning a Russian region into an anti-Russian region. But as happens so often with biological agents,
it turned out to be hard to keep under control. Its next victims turned out to be NATO and the Pentagon,
whose leadership started compulsively uttering the phrase "Russian aggression" in a manner suggestive
of Tourette's Syndrome, entirely undeterred by the complete absence of evidence of any such aggression
that they could present for objective analysis. They, along with the by now fit-to-be-tied Ukrainians,
kept prattling on about "Russian invasion," waving about decades-old pictures of Russian tanks they
downloaded from their friends on Facebook.
From there the brain parasite spread to the White House, the Clinton presidential campaign, the
Democratic National Committee, and its attendant press corps, who are now all chattering away about
"Russian hacking." The few knowledgeable voices who point out that there is absolutely no hard evidence
of any such "Russian hacking" are being drowned out by the Bedlam din of the rest.
This, to me, seems like the simplest explanation that fits the facts. But to be fair and balanced,
let us also examine the other perspective: that claims of "Russian hacking" should be taken at face
value. The first difficulty we encounter is that what is being termed "Russian hacking" is not hacks
but leaks. Hacks occur where some unauthorized party breaks into a server and steals data. Leaks
occur where an insider-a "whistleblower"-violates rules of secrecy and/or confidentiality in order
to release into the public domain evidence of wrongdoing. In this case, evidence of leaking is prima
facie: Was the data in question evidence of wrongdoing? Yes. Was it released into the public domain?
Yes. Has the identity of said leaker or leakers remained secret? Yes, with good reason.
But this does not rule out hacking, because what a leaker can do, a hacker can also do, although
with difficulty. Leakers have it easy: you see evidence of wrongdoing, take umbrage at it, copy it
onto a thumb drive, smuggle it off premises, and upload it to Wikileaks through a public wifi hotspot
from an old laptop you bought off Craislist and then smashed. But what's a poor hacker to do? You
hack into server after server, running the risk of getting caught each time, only to find that the
servers contain minutes of public meetings, old press releases, backups of public web sites and-incriminating
evidence!-a mother lode of pictures of fluffy kittens playing with yarn downloaded by a secretary
afflicted with Toxicoplasma gondii .
The solution, of course, is to create something that's worth hacking, or leaking, but this is
a much harder problem. What the Russians had to do, then, was take the incorruptible, squeaky-clean
goody-two-shoes faithful public servant Hillary Clinton, infiltrate the Clinton Foundation, Hillary's
presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee, and somehow manipulate them all into
doing things that, when leaked (or hacked) would reliably turn the electorate against Clinton. Yes
Sir, Tovarishch Putin!
Those Russians sure are clever! They managed to turn the DNC into an anti-Bernie Sanders operation,
depriving him of electoral votes through a variety of underhanded practices while appealing to anti-Semitic
sentiments in certain parts of the country. They managed to manipulate Donna Brazile into handing
presidential debate questions to the Clinton campaign. They even managed to convince certain Ukrainian
oligarchs and Saudi princes to bestow millions upon the Clinton foundation in exchange for certain
future foreign policy concessions. The list of these leak-worthy Russian subterfuges goes on and
on But who can stop them?
And so clearly the Russians had to first corrupt the Clinton Foundation, the Clinton Presidential
campaign and the Democratic National Committee, just in order to render them hackworthy. But here
we have a problem. You see, if you can hack into a server, so can everyone else. Suppose you leave
your front door unlocked and swinging in the breeze, and long thereafter stuff goes missing. Of course
you can blame the neighbor you happen to like least, but then why would anyone believe you? Anybody
could have walked through that door and taken your shit. And so it is hard to do anything beyond
lobbing empty accusations at Russia as far as hacking is concerned; but the charge of corrupting
the incorruptible Hillary Clinton is another matter entirely.
Because here the ultimate Russian achievement was in getting Hillary Clinton to refer to over
half of her electorate as "a basket of deplorables," and this was no mean feat. It takes a superpower
to orchestrate a political blunder of this magnitude. This she did in front of an LGBT audience in
New York. Now, Hillary is no spring chicken when it comes to national politics: she's been through
quite a few federal elections, and she has enough experience to know that pissing off over half of
your electorate in one fell swoop is not a particularly smart thing to do. Obviously, she was somehow
hypnotized into uttering these words no doubt by a hyperintelligent space-based Russian operative.
The Russian covert operation into subverting American democracy started with the Russians sending
an agent into the hitherto unexplored hinter regions of America, to see what they are like. Hunched
over his desk, Putin whipped out a map of the US and a crayon, and lightly shaded in an area south
of the Mason-Dixon line, west of New York and Pennsylvania, and east of the Rockies.
Let me come clean. I have split loyalties. I have spent most of my life hobnobbing with transnational
elites on the East Coast, but I have also spent quite a few years working for a very large midwestern
agricultural equipment company, and a very large midwestern printing company, so I know the culture
of the land quite well. I am sure that what this Russian agent reported back is that the land is
thickly settled with white people of Anglo-Irish, Scottish, German and Slavic extraction, that they
are macho, that their women (for it is quite a male-centric culture) tend to vote same way as the
men for the sake of domestic tranquility, that they don't much like dark-skinned people or gays,
and that plenty of them view the East Coast and California as dens of iniquity and corruption, if
not modern-day Sodoms and Gomorras.
And what if Vladimir Putin read this report, and issued this order: "Get Clinton to piss them
all off." And so it was done: unbeknownst to her, using nefarious means, Hillary was programmed,
under hypnosis, to utter the phrase "a basket of deplorables." A Russian operative hiding in the
audience of LGBT activists flashed a sign triggering the program in Hillary's overworked brain, and
the rest is history. If that's what actually happened, then Putin should be pronounced Special Ops
Officer of the Year, while all the other "world leaders" should quietly sneak out the back entrance,
sit down on the ground in the garden and eat some dirt, then puke it up into their hands and rub
it into their eyes while wailing, because how on earth can they possibly ever hope to beat that?
Or we can just go back to my brain parasite theory. Doesn't it seem a whole lot more sane now?
Not only is it much simpler and more believable, but it also has certain predictive merits that the
"Russian hacking" theory lacks. You see, when there is parasitism involved, there is rarely just
one symptom. Usually, there is a whole cluster of symptoms. And so, just for the sake of comparison,
let's look at what has happened to the Ukraine since it was infected with the Ukrainian Brain Parasite,
and compare that to what is happening to the US now that the parasite has spread here too.
1. The Ukraine is ruled by an oligarch-Petro Poroshenko, the "candy king"-along with a clique
of other oligarchs who have been handed regional governorships and government ministries. And now
the US is about to be ruled by an oligarch-Trump, the "casino king"-along with a clique of other
oligarchs, from ExxonMobile to Goldman Sachs.
2. The Ukraine has repudiated its trade agreements with Russia, sending its economy into free-fall.
And now Trump is promising to repudiate, and perhaps renegotiate, a variety of trade agreements.
For a country that has run huge structural trade deficits for decades and pays for them by constantly
issuing debt this is not going to be easy or safe.
3. The Ukraine has been subjected to not one but two Color Revolutions, promoted by none other
than that odious oligarch George Soros. The US is now facing its own Color Revolution-the Purple
Revolution-paid for by that same Soros, with the goal of overturning the results of the presidential
election and derailing the inauguration of Donald Trump through a variety of increasingly desperate
ploys including paid-for demonstrations, vote recounts and attempts to manipulate the Electoral College.
4. For a couple of years now the Ukraine has been mired in a bloody and futile civil war. To this
day the Ukrainian troops (with NATO support) are lobbing missiles into civilian districts in the
east of the country, and getting decimated in return. So far, Trump's victory seems to have appeased
the "deplorables," but should the Purple Revolution succeed, the US may also see major social unrest,
possibly escalating into a civil war.
The Ukrainian Brain Parasite has devastated the Ukraine. It is by now too far gone for much of
anything to be done about it. All of the best people have left, mostly for Russia, and all that's
left is a rotten, hollow shell. But does it have to end this way for the US? I hope not!
There are, as I see it, two possibilities. One is to view those who are pushing the "Russian hacking"
or "Russian aggression" story as political adversaries. Another is to view them as temporarily mentally
ill. Yes, their brains are infected with the Ukrainian Brain Parasite, but that just means that their
opinions are to be disregarded-until they feel better. And since this particular brain parasite specifically
influences social behavior, if we refuse to reward that behavior with positive reinforcement-by acknowledging
it-we will suppress its most debilitating symptoms, eventually forcing the parasite to evolve toward
a more benign form. As with many infectious diseases, the fight against them starts with improved
hygiene-in this case, mental hygiene. And so that is my prescription: when you see someone going
on about "Russian hacking" or "Russian aggression" be merciful and charitable toward them as individuals,
because they are temporarily incapacitated, but do not acknowledge their mad ranting, and instead
try to coax them into learning to control it.
Companies used to pull their trucks off the road, or allow driver
discretion to pull over, in bad weather. Not so much any more. Because
corporate profits 2 people died.
Dec 17, 2016 12:12 PM
This just in from Fake Nuuuz Central:
Thanks for this– a much-needed Onion-esque satirical dig at the Globe/Post/NYT trifecta of
garbage. To base a headline on information gleaned from anonymous sources and unnamed officials
in secret meetings with unpublished agendas seems the most dangerous type of fake news there is.
The death of irony was greatly exaggerated, if you ask me.
... Anyway, concerned by number of supposedly educated friends(Clinton supporters) being
taken in by this fake news/Russian ties thing. They've lost their heads and there's no discussing
it with them, they are convinced. Where does it end? Na zdorovie!
It's going to be a surprise and happen when everyone least expects it. Sneak attack by moose
and skwirral. Anyway, concerned by number of supposedly educated friends(Clinton supporters) being
taken in by this fake news/Russian ties thing. They've lost their heads and there's no discussing
it with them, they are convinced. Where does it end? Na zdorovie!
Sec. 501. Committee to counter active measures by the State of Israel to exert covert
influence over peoples and governments.
(a)Definitions - In this section:
Active measures by the State of Israel to exert covert influence. The
term active measures by Israel to exert covert influence means activities
intended to influence a person or government that are carried out in coordination with,
or at the behest of, political leaders or the security services of the State of Israel
and the role of Israel has been hidden or not acknowledged publicly,
including the following:
(A)Establishment or funding of a front group.
(D)Disinformation and forgeries.
(E)Funding agents of influence.
(F)Incitement and offensive counterintelligence.
Appropriate committees of Congress
The term appropriate committees of Congress means
(A)the congressional intelligence committees;
(B)the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate;
(C)the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of
There is established within the executive branch an interagency committee to counter active
measures by the State of Israel to exert covert influence.
Each head of an agency or department of the United States Government set out under subparagraph
(B) shall appoint one member of the committee established by subsection (b) from among
officials of such agency or department who occupy a position that is required to be appointed
by the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate.
(B)Head of an agency or department
The head of an agency or department of the United States Government set out under this
subparagraph are the following:
(i)The Director of National Intelligence.
(ii)The Secretary of State.
(iii)The Secretary of Defense.
(iv)The Secretary of the Treasury.
(v)The Attorney General.
(vi)The Secretary of Energy.
(vii)The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
(viii)The head of any other agency or department of the United States Government designated
by the President for purposes of this section.
The committee shall meet on a regular basis.
The duties of the committee established by subsection (b) shall be as follows:
(1)To counter active measures by Israel to exert covert influence, including
by exposing falsehoods, agents of influence, corruption, human rights abuses, terrorism,
and assassinations carried out by the security services or political elites of the State of Israel or their proxies.
(2)Such other duties as the President may designate for purposes of this section.
(g)Budget request [...]
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter,
and consistent with the protection of intelligence sources and methods, the committee established
by subsection (b) shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report describing
steps being taken by the committee to counter active measures by Israel to
exert covert influence.
Each report under paragraph (1) shall include a summary of the following:
(A)Active measures by Israel to exert covert influence during the previous
year, including significant incidents and notable trends.
(B)Key initiatives of the committee.
(C)Implementation of the committee's initiatives by the heads of the agencies and departments
of the United States Government specified in subsection (c)(1)(B).
(D)Analysis of the success of such initiatives.
(E)Changes to such initiatives from the previous year.
Separate reporting requirement
The requirement to submit an annual report under paragraph (1) is in addition to any other
reporting requirements with respect to Israel .
502.Limitation on travel of accredited diplomats and consulars of the State of Israel in
the United States from their diplomatic post
(a)Appropriate committees of Congress defined
In this section, the term appropriate committees of Congress means-
1. the congressional intelligence committees;
2. the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate; and
3. the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.
(b)Quarterly limitation on travel distance Accredited diplomatic personnel and consulars of
the State of Israel in the United States may not be permitted to travel a distance
in excess of 25 miles from their diplomatic post in the United States in a calendar quarter
unless, on or before the last day of the preceding calendar quarter, the Director of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation has certified in writing to the appropriate committees of Congress
that during the preceding calendar quarter the Bureau did not identify any violations by accredited
diplomatic personnel and consulars of the State of Israel of applicable requirements
to notify the United States Government in connection with travel by such diplomatic personnel
and consulars of a distance in excess of 25 miles from their diplomatic post in the United
OK - I lied a little. The text of the bill is as reads above, but I have substituted the text
the State of Israel and Israel in place of the original text: the
Russian Federation and Russia . You see, some countries are more equal
than others. (Apologies to all the U.S. readers that thought "Well, it's about damn time!"
[Dec 06, 2016] Obama invented a new psychedelic drug: a mixture of Hopium and Ballonium...
ALEPPO, Syria - In the midst of sectarian violence that has overtaken Syria for more than five
years, nine-year-old Asil Kassab is shocked by the defeat of Democratic presidential candidate
"I am so unhappy that a woman was not elected President," Asil said, briefly ducking as a bomb
from an American MQ-1 Predator drone leveled the hospital behind her. "Hillary Clinton is truly a
role model for young girls like me. I was so hoping that she'd be the one to order the drone
strike that would inevitably end my life."
Despite Clinton's support for regime change in Syria, leading to what is arguably one of the
greatest humanitarian crises of the early century, Kassab surprisingly says she holds no ill
"I don't put much stock in the misogynist agenda of American politics," said Kassab, who, like
many children, cannot remember a time before the war that has killed 400,000 people, including
her family, and created over 4.7 million refugees. "People will always criticize her because she
is a woman in a man's world; One who has the audacity to run for President."
"It is sexism that motivates her critics, plain and simple," she added. "It is sexism, and
racism, that caused her to lose the election!"
More about Clinton and the Washington establishment than
Trump. Just as Brexit was about Wasteminster's Elitists
and not the EU. I saw wonderfully funny cartoons sent to
me by my American friends, the best one said:
Voting for an independent is like eating a salad,
it's the right thing to do, but will it really make
much difference. Voting for Trump is like eating a
spicy, greasy Burrito, fun at first, but then you have
to digest it. Voting for Clinton is like eating the
fork, and only a complete moron would do that.
It is January 20th, 2017. President Donald J. Trump is presiding over his very first meeting with
his national security team.
Trump : We must destroy ISIS immediately. No delays.
CIA : We cannot do that, sir. We created them.
Trump : The Democrats created them.
CIA : We created ISIS, sir. You need them or else you would lose funding from the natural gas lobby.
Trump : Stop funding Pakistan. Let India deal with them.
CIA : We can't do that.
Trump : Why is that?
CIA : India will cut Balochistan out of Pak.
Trump : I don't care.
CIA : India will have peace in Kashmir. They will stop buying our weapons. They will become a superpower.
We have to fund Pakistan to keep India busy in Kashmir.
Trump : But you have to destroy the Taliban.
CIA : Sir, we can't do that. We created the Taliban to keep Russia in check during the 80s. Now they
are keeping Pakistan busy and away from their nukes.
Trump : We have to destroy terror sponsoring regimes in the Middle East. Let us start with the
Pentagon : Sir, we can't do that. We created those regimes because we wanted their oil. We can't
have democracy there, otherwise their people will get that oil - and we cannot let their people own
Trump : Then, let us invade Iran.
Pentagon : We cannot do that either, sir.
Trump : Why not?
CIA : We are talking to them, sir.
Trump : What? Why?
CIA : We want our Stealth Drones back. If we attack them, Russia will obliterate us as they did to
our buddy ISIS in Syria. Besides we need Iran to keep Israel in check.
Trump : Then let us invade Iraq again.
CIA : Sir, our friends (ISIS) are already occupying 1/3rd of Iraq.
Trump : Why not the whole of Iraq?
CIA : We need the Shi'ite govt of Iraq to keep ISIS in check.
Trump : I am banning Muslims from entering the US.
Homeland Security : We can't do that.
Trump : Why not?
Homeland Security : Then our own population will stop fearing terrorism and be harder to control.
Trump : I am deporting all illegal immigrants to south of the border.
Border patrol : You can't do that, sir.
Trump : Why not?
Border patrol : If they're gone, who will build the wall?
Trump : I am banning H1B visas.
USCIS : You cannot do that.
Trump : Why?
Chief of Staff : If you do so, we'll have to outsource White House operations to Bangalore. Which
is in India.
Trump (sweating profusely by now): What the hell should I do as President???
CIA : Enjoy the White House, sir! We'll take care of the rest!
It's only been three days, oh, worthy of Quirites, from the moment that the Epicurean Trumparamp
was elected as the new king of Parthia, but one might think that instead the depths of Hades were
unleashed upon the world and that an unstoppable stream most incredible monsters poured out of
Messengers convey that in the Parthian kingdom reigns mourning, though by no means among all
of the subjects – the heart-rending screams and rolling in the dust, while scratching one's face
with the nails is popular exclusively among the adherents of the king Abamarak and his chosen
Illariya, the priestess of the temple of the Giant Golden Toad – all sorts of Greeks (in both
senses of the word), painted buffoons, owners of amphitheatres and Nubians each of whom Illariya
promised free distribution of bread and five silver coins from the treasury. It is interesting
that here in Rome takes place exactly the same thing –capital dwelling useless loafers and Judean
owners of galleries with indecent murals, all wrapped in a black cloaks and shedding fiery tears,
realizing that the flow of Parthian gold into their mad undertakings might soon dry up.
What is happening in the Umbria defies any description. The local savages made countless sacrifices
to the good deity Peremogiks, daubing it in tasty pig fat and even proclaiming it a kinsman to
the Golden Toad. But, as it appears to be, the dreadful witch Gan'ba called forth the black forces
and summoned the sinister demon Zradiks, who plunged the Umbrians into utter despair. Witnesses
say, that the grieving barbarians gorged themselves on peas, trying to scare Zradiks off with
most powerful spell known to Umbria – the blowing of trhe Black Winds – that's why after hearing
the news from Parthia the sky over the city Kuyavis was colored with multicolored fire lanes,
and some Umbrians as a result flew up to the Moon and do not know now how to return back… And
it's not only because the priestess Illariya did not become the queen – they began to realize
that rich, but cost-wise Trumparamp, now won't give Umbria even a broken copper, especially after
the local leaders slandered him with unspeakable words and even splashed the statue of Trumparamp's
genius with pig's dung!
But how did it happen that the priestess of the Giant Golden Toad was denied the throne of
Parthia? And it wasn't even due to the story about the clay tablets – Illariya sent secret dispatches
using ordinary slave, and not purposely trained guard, making Parthian judges to begin an inquiry
of the matter. The last straw was the story of the Greek Pipisyandr, husband of one of the younger
priestesses, who assisted Illariya: this Pipisyandr became infamous for his habit of nightly break
ins into the houses of Parthian matrons and even innocent girls, whom he revealed his "riches"
of questionable value, and also ran away, filling neighborhoods with sinister laughter – all of
which, of course, caused considerable outrage. Perhaps this is the first and only time in history
when the king's elections were decided by someone's phallus!
The storm that broke out, however, does not abate day after day, and the Quirites in the Forum
only shrug never before a new king of Parthia caused this kind of whirlwind, streams of tears
and wailing chorus. Let's see what will happen next.
(1) Illariya was specifically instructed by KIng Abamarak to enscribe her clay tablets using
the secret cypher known as "Caesar's 4-letter shift". And to attach them to the legs of specially
trained evasive pigeons. Yet in her arrogance and contempt for her Nubian overlord, she enscribed
her instructions in cleartext and sent them in the hands of ordinary house slaves; and
(2) Pipisyandr was even better known for making impressions in clay of his enormous phallus, then
sending such impressions to the matrons of Rome, but verify at least he did attach these clay
phalluses to the legs of sturdy pigeons, which is what they called "tweeting" or "cooing" the
Gaius Anonymus most notably omits (although inquisitive quirites remind him in comments beneath
this news-scroll) that Illariya and the wife of Pipisyandr might have engaged in the sapphic pleasures
of the flesh. This sad fact forced the spurned husband to steal some clay tablets with sensetive
data and plant his phallos unto them – without clearing what's been written on these tablets.
Thus the general public of Parthia became partial to the most scandalous exposure of secrets of
But has it also not been whispered among patricians and plebeians alike – though few dare breathe
the rumour openly – that Illariya's husband also made regular visits to a legendary island of
nymphs said to be owned by Galfridus Eburstanius?
And verily the scandal reached into the inner workings of the Vestal Virgin network. Malicious
plebeians gossip that Illariya's husband, Bubbus Primus, who disguised himself with cloaked hood,
also went under the alias of "Bigus Dickus" as he penetrated into the Vestal sanctum, a holy place
where technically males are not allowed.
But those rules are only for plebeians.
Also Gaius Anonymous omits to say that the most senior Parthian judge Iacobus Brianus Comnenus
twice declared that the investigations begun against Illariya for her use of personal slaves instead
of government messengers to transact government business had no merit, against the wishes of his
fellow judges and their clerks, scribes and centurions, that Illariya now blames IBC for her loss
in the elections, and that the judges may now be preparing to dethrone IBC himself and to reopen
their investigations against Illariya.
Presenting...the Clinton IT Department! This has not been an especially ennobling election.
Or a rewarding one. Or even entertaining. Pretty much everything about 2016 has been boorish and
grotesque. But finally it is time to laugh.
This has not been an especially ennobling election. Or a rewarding one. Or even entertaining.
Pretty much everything about 2016 has been boorish and grotesque. But finally it is time to laugh.
Ladies and gentlemen, I present the Clinton IT department.
Over the weekend we finally found out how Clinton campaign honcho John Podesta's emails were hacked.
But first a couple disclaimers:
1) Yes, it's unpleasant to munch on the fruit of the poisoned tree. But this isn't a court of
law and you can't just ignore information that's dragged into the public domain.
2) We're all vulnerable to hackers. Even if you're a security nut who uses VPNs and special email
encryption protocols, you can be hacked. The only real security is the anonymity of the herd. Once
a hacker targets you, specifically, you're toast.
I'm a pretty tech-savvy guy and if the Chinese decided to hack my emails tonight, you'd have everything
I've ever written posted to Wikileaks before the sun was up tomorrow.
But that is … not John Podesta's situation.
What happened was this: On March 19, Podesta got what looked--kind of, sort of--like an email
from Google's Gmail team. The email claimed that someone from the Ukraine had tried to hack into
Podesta's Gmail account and that he needed to change his password immediately.
This is what's called a "phishing" scam, where hackers send legitimate-looking emails that, when
you click on the links inside them, actually take you someplace dangerous. In Podesta's case, there
was a link that the email told him to click in order to change his password.
This was not an especially good bit of phishing.
Go have a look yourself. The email calls Podesta by his first name. It uses bit.ly as a link
shortener. Heck, the subject line is the preposterous "*someone has your password*". Why would Google
say "someone has your password?" They wouldn't. They'd say that there had been log-in attempts that
failed two-step authentication, maybe. Or that the account had been compromised, perhaps. If you've
spent any time using email over the last decade, you know exactly how these account security emails
And what's more, you know that you never click on the link in the email. If you get a notice from
your email provider or your bank or anyone who holds sensitive information of yours saying that your
account has been compromised, you leave the email, open your web browser, type in the URL of the
website, and then manually open your account information. Again, let me emphasize: You never click
on the link in the email!
But what makes this story so priceless isn't that John Podesta got fooled by an fourth-rate phishing
scam. After all, he's just the guy who's going to be running Hillary Clinton's administration. What
does he know about tech? And Podesta, to his credit, knew what he didn't know: He emailed the Clinton
IT help desk and said, Hey, is this email legit?
And the Clinton tech team's response was: Hell yes!
No, really. Here's what they said: One member of the team responded to Podesta by saying "The
gmail one is REAL." Another answered by saying "This is a legitimate email. John needs to change
his password immediately."
It's like the Clinton IT department is run by 90-year-old grandmothers. I half-expect the next
Wikileaks dump to have an email from one Clinton techie to another asking for help setting their
As the other guy likes to say, "only the best people."
3. How will you address the problem of homelessness in this country?
Rebuild the nation's infrastructure to better conceal those living
Provide them with gainful employment opportunities as ship ballast
Instruct the U.S. Mint to use small coins as vectors for a potent new virus
All of the above
He doesn't seem to be sniffing so much today … so there goes one idea. I think you NEED a shot
of Jack Daniels every time Hillary laughs derisively after a Trump answer. As for beer chugs,
every time Trump repeats himself within 2 sentences?
As soon as the first batch of
Democratic Party emails were leaked in the Summer of 2016,
the Blue Team started churning out Cold War propaganda,
blaming it all on Russia while ignoring the damning
contents of the emails. With each new leak of exposing
information, the media hysteria about Russia continues to
grow. If Donald Trump were to respond to his criticism
like Hillary Clinton does, it might sound something like
The press is rightfully ignoring and
discrediting ludicrous conspiracy theories! If the press is unjust in
dismissing these outlandish claims about the emails 'scandal' and
Bill's supposed rape 'victims', then why do so many people still
choose to consume these media outlets? Are you accusing the majority
of Americans of being gullible and misinformed? That seems like a
pretty wild and unfair accusation!
Accredited Book Review – Stronger Together by Hillary Clinton
14, 2016 11:54 AM
I could laugh at the sarcasm MDB spouts
off if it wasn't for the fact that
everyday I come into contact with
someone who actually believes it. I know
to some I appear a bit defeatist, but it
comes from the knowledge that around
half of our population really IS with
Hillary. Nothing you can say will change
their minds and they are effectively
those who will spy for the state any
chance they get. While I still have
hope, from where I sit, we are divided
beyond repair, and it's all been part of
Telling several members of the investment bank's board of directors how they had to check her out
whenever they get a chance, Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein was overheard Monday describing to
friends how incredible it is to see Hillary Clinton live.
"You can forget any recordings you've heard of Hillary, because they don't even compare to the
experience of seeing her in person," said Blankfein, who excitedly recounted the first time he saw
the Democratic presidential nominee in a small, intimate venue back in 2013, noting how he was instantly
captivated by what he was hearing and found himself nodding along throughout the 90-minute solo performance.
Russian research team which claimed to have detected signs of intelligent life in
Washington has now discovered the life there not to be quite so intelligent after
A Russian spokesman, who wishes to remain anonymous, told our Moscow science
correspondent -who also wishes to remain anonymous- that the Washington atmosphere
has been poisoned by huge clouds of putrid hot air belching from the corporate media.
He explained that such a hostile environment makes it almost impossible for
intelligent life to survive, let alone evolve a sustainable culture. The Russian team
believes there may still be small pockets of intelligent life elsewhere on the North
American continent but without the necessary conditions they need to thrive they are
destined to disappear without trace.
Speaking off the record, the Russian spokesman, who asked us not to disclose his
identity, added that hopes of finding intelligent life in London, Paris, Berlin and
other Western European locations, where it might be expected to flourish, are fading
fast. Though it is believed intelligent life once existed in Occiental Europe, an
atmosphere suitable for the maintenance of such life has all but evaporated.
Mr. Galifianakis then briefly interrupted the interview to play a campaign commercial for Mr.
Trump, claiming the billionaire businessman was the show's top sponsor. He then wrapped up the
exchange by telling Mrs. Clinton the two should stay in touch.
"What's the best way to reach you? Email?" he said.
The real question is whether the email are authentic or not. They are.
Neoliberal propaganda honchos just decided to use a smoke screen to conceal this
fact using Russia as a bogeyman.
Russian might be guilty of many things, but in no way it is
responsible for corruption of DNC and this subversive actions/covert operations
used for installing Hillary Clinton as a candidate from the Democratic Party. .
"... Is it OK to cheat, lie and deceive - as Clintons and DNC did - and then defend themselves by saying that "nobody would know, if it wasn't for those damn Russians"? Even the idea is preposterous: how we find out about this corruption is irrelevant, the point is there was corruption and cheating. ..."
"... So the DNC is trying to Blame Russia for their own corrupt actions. ..."
"... [Under Clintons] democracy has become conspiracy ..."
"... Are you constipated? Blame it on Russia. ..."
"... Oh and blaming Russia for revealing the truth. The truth was not attacked, but who revealed the truth is suddenly the bad guy. So desperate and out of sorts. :) ..."
"... There's no proof, besides an unsourced article in the Washington Post form 'security experts', that Russia had anything to do with this. What we do know is that immediately after the leaks became public various news outlets produced obviously planted hit pieces claiming some kind of collusion between the Trump campaign and Putin, and again with precisely zero evidence as back up. It's gob smacking that the Clinton campaign would risk an international incident with a nuclear power to cover for their shitty behaviour, but then again it's Hillary Clinton so perhaps not. ..."
"... It may indeed be Russian hackers who gained access to the emails which confirm the DNC was all along in the tank for Clinton, and was actively placing a thumb on the scale from day one in the primary process. ..."
"... But the bottom line here is that if the DNC had not so conspired, there would be no emails to leak, now would there? For Mook and others to now be placing blame on the hackers, rather than on those who produced the embarrassing material that the hackers exposed, is diversionary and inexcusable. ..."
"... The funniest thing is, they don't even deny the authenticity of the emails. Basically, DNC says that someone is guilty of revealing the truth. You can hardly stoop any lower. Blaming Russia is just a cherry on the cake. ..."
"... How nice to have an eternal scapegoat: TheRussiansAreComing!TheRussiansAreComing! This will obviously be RodHam's theme as President. Perhaps to the point of annihilation. Neo-Conne! ..."
"... My biggest issue with Hillary from the start has been her continued nonchalance when it comes to matters of national security. She acts as if she is above the need to keep sensitive information safe from potential enemies, both foreign and domestic. That's a pretty scary attitude coming from someone who is likely to be this nation's next leader. ..."
"... It's amazing. Caught red handed and still deflecting. Take responsibility for Christ sak ..."
"... ".....Several of the emails released indicate that the officials, including Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, grew increasingly agitated with Clinton's rival, Bernie Sanders, and his campaign as the primary season advanced, in one instance even floating bringing up Sanders' religion to try and minimize his support. ..."
"... The more interesting part is that this blame is just a distraction from the larger issue, that the entire political system is corrupted and broken. This is just business as usual, only this instance was revealed. ..."
I honestly can't wait for when the pro-clinron commentors arrive. I can
see it now "this doesn't matter if you vote 3rd party you're voting for
trump." It won't matter that this is all the fault of the DNC, it will be
on us. I'm calling it now ;)
Is it OK to cheat, lie and deceive - as Clintons and DNC did - and then
defend themselves by saying that "nobody would know, if it wasn't for those
damn Russians"? Even the idea is preposterous: how we find out about this
corruption is irrelevant, the point is there was corruption and cheating.
Interestingly, this is a favorite defense of all authoritarians. They
always claim that if it benefits the "enemy", it is ok to suppress it. Stalin
had a concept of "objectively aiding the enemy" - it meant that maybe the
person was not a conscious traitor, but his/her actions helped the enemy
- and that was enough. Is Guardian and Clintons now marching down this road
of extreme "us versus them" ideology?
What's is next? Will Clintons ban Bernie from speaking because it would
"aid Trump"? (and by extension in their paranoid thinking, it would aid
"Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook said on Sunday that "experts are telling
us that Russian state actors broke into the DNC, stole these emails, [and
are] releasing these emails for the purpose of helping Donald Trump."
So the DNC is trying to Blame Russia for their own corrupt actions.
Another reason on the list as to why I won't be voting for Hillary. Why
did DNC act very anti-democratic?
A vote for Hillary is a vote for continued corruption.
Rather than blaming they ought to be taking responsibility for their own
words. But they'd have to be adults with integrity to do that. The tragedy
and travesty of it is the willful, routine, nonchalant effort to subvert
the Constitution and the will of the people. These kinds of machinations
have always gone on within both parties and should always be exposed. The
SuperPACS, the dark money, the secret maneuverings, the totally broken primary
system, all designed to stop our having our say. People elsewhere often
wonder about "our" choices for the White House. Now they can see how much
of that free choice has been wrested away over time, and how imperative
it is that we ordinary people start working on positive change within the
elective system. In my opinion all the DNC participants should lose their
jobs and be made to cool their heels in jail a while, because without consequences
we may as well just burn the Constitution and Bill of Rights right now and
be done with it, for all the respect these documents are given by our politicians.
What a revolting mess it all is on both sides, with ordinary people the
losers, as always.
There's no proof, besides an unsourced article in the Washington Post form
'security experts', that Russia had anything to do with this. What we do
know is that immediately after the leaks became public various news outlets
produced obviously planted hit pieces claiming some kind of collusion between
the Trump campaign and Putin, and again with precisely zero evidence as
back up. It's gob smacking that the Clinton campaign would risk an international
incident with a nuclear power to cover for their shitty behaviour, but then
again it's Hillary Clinton so perhaps not.
A big part of the problem is that Debbie Wasserman Schultz (DWS) is still
in her position. If the Democratic Party place a value on performance, she
should have been fired after the 2014 mid-terms.
Part of the problem is that the DNC is too closely aligned with the interests
of one political family. Competence and other considerations count for a
lot less than loyalty. DWS kept her position because of the ties to Clinton
and Clintons donors, not because she did a good job and grew the party.
The opposite has happened.
Frankly, Obama bears some degree of responsibility for this because he's
the one who canned Howard Dean, who actually had a track record of success
at winning elections and growing the party through two election cycles.
Instead Obama replaced him with a guy like Tim Kaine, who wasn't up to the
task either. Dean also did a good job of navigating the very difficult 2008
election. Kaine and DWS did poorly in the capacity as DNC Chair.
As president, Obama has done a lot right. But his neglect of the DNC
is part of his legacy, and it isn't a good one.
That's nice that those damn Russians 'stole' their email. However, those
damn Russians didn't write them. I dislike and distrust Hillary and DWS
more now that I did a week ago, and that takes some doing. Hillary is Nixon.
Paranoid. Dishonest. Devious.
Kaine is in the same boat as Clinton on the TPP - the Good Ship Hypocrite.
Both hope like hell that TPP gets passed in the lame duck so they can make
a show of being against it to gain some progressive cred. If Obama and his
colleagues Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan can't get TPP done before his term
ends, Clinton and Kaine's reservations re TPP will disappear faster than
a snowflake in July. It's like Clinton's about face on the Keystone pipeline
- she got a heads up from Obama that he wasn't going to approve it anyway,
so she came out against it.
Very true, and Hillary was happy to support the violent Honduras coup of
an elected government and still very much supports that new violent regime.
And the new regime is very friendly to western big corporate 'interests'.
Of course. Hillary is old-school.
Doesn't matter who did it, the Russians, Anonymous, Edward Snowden. The
point is that the DNC is revealed as partisan and rigged. In addition to
minimizing her role at the convention, I believe Wasserman Schultz should
be dumped from any position of leadership, along with other DNC leaders.
No wonder people are fed up with politics as usual.
"Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook said on Sunday that "experts are telling
us that Russian state actors broke into the DNC, stole these emails, [and
are] releasing these emails for the purpose of helping Donald Trump."
And Mook is the expert who whispered that lie in his own ear.
Great photo, Mook the Spook, her lover, a few bigtime aids. They got
caught like Nixon's plumbers at Watergate. So they would like to blame the
Russians for their writing calumnies and antiSemitic slanders against Sanders.
They look pretty stupid!
Mook said on Sunday that "experts are telling us that Russian state
actors broke into the DNC, stole these emails, [and are] releasing these
emails for the purpose of helping Donald Trump."
It may indeed be Russian hackers who gained access to the emails which confirm
the DNC was all along in the tank for Clinton, and was actively placing
a thumb on the scale from day one in the primary process.
Sanders knew it, and we as his supporters also knew it and made reference
to that very issue repeatedly in countless comment threads here at the Guardian
But the bottom line here is that if the DNC had not so conspired,
there would be no emails to leak, now would there?
For Mook and others to now be placing blame on the hackers, rather than
on those who produced the embarrassing material that the hackers exposed,
is diversionary and inexcusable.
The Clinton campaign is moving closer and closer to blowing this election
completely and allowing the most dangerous candidacy I've ever seen in my
lifetime actually win this thing.
They've already selected a VP pick which effectively thumbs their nose
at the very progressives whose enthusiasm they will need at the voting booths,
and now here they are trying to deflect blame for unconscionable skullduggery
in the primary process onto foreign actors.
Debbie Wassermann Schultz should have been fired long ago, so blatant and
obvious were her shenanigans.
This kind of tone-deaf ineptitude could see all of us paying an unimaginable
price in November. All it will take at this point is a few more mass shootings
(at which we here in the US have a particular talent) to feed into Trump's
narrative and we'll all be waking up in January in a country we don't even
The funniest thing is, they don't even deny the authenticity of the
emails. Basically, DNC says that someone is guilty of revealing the truth.
You can hardly stoop any lower. Blaming Russia is just a cherry on the cake.
Just saw Bernie on CNN basically saying the Nr1 priority is to defeat D.
Trump, then keep fighting the good fight from within the Democratic Party
trying to reform it from within.
A big thing he misses here that the top honcho Mrs Hillary Clinton is one
of the main reasons of what the Democratic Party has become. She will be
a huge obstruction to anything resembling reform. You might as well pack
up and go 3rd party and show the Dems that way what American voters want.
4 years of Trump might actually be a lot better to shake up the corrupt
DNC then 4-8 years of Hillary and who knows how many years of Republicans
2 follow (and believe me, Hillary will do a lot of damage to the democratic
If they'd backed off, allowed their MSM protectors to bury the story, this
whole thing would have died down in a week. A few angry Bernie Bros notwithstanding
there's nothing in the emails that we didn't know already. Yes the DNC and
the Hillary Clinton campaign were one and the same....shock! Yes sections
of the corporate owned media are colluding with the Democratic Party....wowsers!!
But no, they couldn't help themselves. Now we've got the Democratic nominee
for the Presidency alleging, with zero proof, that her opponent is engaged
in a conspiracy to commit criminal acts with a foreign power! Seriously
who thought this was a good idea?
My biggest issue with Hillary from the start has been her continued nonchalance
when it comes to matters of national security. She acts as if she is above
the need to keep sensitive information safe from potential enemies, both
foreign and domestic. That's a pretty scary attitude coming from someone
who is likely to be this nation's next leader.
Putin ate my homework (TM). What Debbie and the gang did is worse, much worse than this sorry article
tries to portray. For example, what sort of Democratic Party tries to use Bearnie's religion
agsinst him ?!?
".....Several of the emails released indicate that the officials, including
Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, grew increasingly agitated with Clinton's
rival, Bernie Sanders, and his campaign as the primary season advanced,
in one instance even floating bringing up Sanders' religion to try and minimize
****"It might may [sic] no difference, but for KY and WA can we get someone
to ask his belief," Brad Marshall, CFO of DNC, wrote in an email on May
5, 2016. "Does he believe in God. He had skated on saying he has a Jewish
I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with
my peeps. My southern baptist peeps woudl draw a big difference between
a Jew and an atheist."****
"Amy Dacey, CEO of the DNC, subsequently responded "AMEN," according
to the email"
The more interesting part is that this blame is just a distraction from
the larger issue, that the entire political system is corrupted and broken.
This is just business as usual, only this instance was revealed.
Has anyone here worked, I mean truly worked in the pre-election process,
behind the scenes, witnessing the dirty business that is gathering electoral
votes during caucuses and primaries? It is a total sham. It is where under-the-table
deals are made for promised loyalties to certain candidates, where those
that have the most, bribe others to vote a certain way, where quid pro quo
rules over democracy or a candidates stance on issues and/or policies. It
is where future cabinet positions are secured, based on allegiance to party
hierarchy and strong-arming. Your vote means nothing, only a small select
group determines candidates, and ultimately the president.
DNC Chair Wasserman is just one cog in a massive political machine, one
run rampantly out of control. And this happens on both sides, among both
parties. It is where the personal selfish love of money, power, and fame
outstrip the will of the people.
Long live hackers for keeping a check on an obviously corrupted system.
The mainstream media isn't doing their jobs anymore, someone has to. The
media have merely become the pretorian band for the super class, those elite
that truly control this country from behind the scenes, pulling the puppet
strings attached to the soulless politicians.
We are again presented with two candidates whom have each proven their
desire to negate the will of the nation, for purely selfish reasons. Neither
is truly qualified for this office.
"There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought
to trust no [hu]man living with the power to endanger the public liberty".
"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more
corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters"
Is that Huma in a blue dress under the Resolute desk?
Pairadimes d Here2Go •Aug 27, 2016 9:14 PM
Ramirez is a genius.
zeronetwork d debtor of last resort •Aug 27, 2016 8:15 PM
The thought process Donald has started is not going to fade very soon. Still
few weeks before election. I am sure Donald got some more cards in his sleeve.
are we there yet •Aug 27, 2016 8:36 PM
I have a solution for Hillary's in-continuance and mobility declining problems.
The chair behind the presidents desk should be a wheelchair with a bedpan.
Otherwise the term 'campaign trail' will take on a whole new meaning.
During a campaign rally in Nevada, US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton spoke about the
dangers of right-wing forces in power, as well as about problems of racism.
"Clinton noted that her rival Donald Trump supported the policies of Russian President Vladimir
Putin. As for relations with Russia, the views of Donald Trump come contrary to the views of all
American presidents, from "Truman to Reagan."
"He talks casually of abandoning our NATO allies, recognizing Russia's annexation of Crimea,
giving the Kremlin a free hand in eastern Europe. American presidents from Truman, to Reagan,
to Bush, to Clinton, to Obama have rejected the kind of approach Trump is taking on Russia. And
we should, too," Clinton said.
"Vladimir Putin is the grand-godfather of this global brand of extreme nationalism.", Hillary
Clinton said, (while standing in front of a gigantic American Flag, without a trace of Irony detectable
in her voice).
Posted by: Shillary | Aug 26, 2016 5:22:34 PM | 50
Yep. Dangerously stupid.
Superficial and self-absorbed Hollywoodishness; the polar opposite of self-aware.
Shillary @50 -- Hillary Clinton is completely devoid of any sense of irony or humour. She's a
complete emotional and, I would add, intellectual dud. She seems to be a good lawyer, though ---
in the US lawyers as far as the eye can see.
[Aug 27, 2016] "Oh, so you don't have soul either?!
Hillary has also stated publicly that "Putin has no soul" (to which
Putin replied "at least I have a brain):
titled "Hillary Clinton's Liberal Elite Summer Tour," begins with an image of an airplane bearing
Clinton's logo. A voiceover resembling an announcement from a flight attendant names some of the
stops on Clinton's schedule, including Los Angeles, Beverly Hills and Martha's Vineyard.
"Please use caution in opening the overhead bins, as Hillary's baggage may have shifted during
flight," the "flight attendant" says as the ad ends.
Clinton spent her weekend on Martha's Vineyard and held a fundraiser in Nantucket. On Tuesday,
Clinton is headlining a $33,400-per-guest event being hosted by Justin Timberlake and his wife, actress
"Hillary Clinton claims she's running to be a champion for 'everyday Americans,' but her busy
week of fundraisers with her friends in the wealthy liberal elite show who she's really fighting
for," RNC Chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement. "Rather than visit flood-ravaged Louisiana
or end her more than 250-day streak without a press conference, she's taking her private jet from
coast to coast raking in piles of campaign cash to fund her status quo campaign.
"Donald Trump is the candidate of true change in this election, and he is leading a grassroots
movement to put an end to business as usual in Washington and make a difference in the lives of all
NBC news poll
shows that 72 percent of registered Republicans still aren't
sure whether Barack Obama was born in the United States. It wasn't clear from
the poll data how many Republicans consider Hawai'i part of the US. Let's cut
them a break and assume that most of them recognize the legitimacy of the
Islands of Aloha.
I'm a little sympathetic to their theory. In fact, I'm "all in" for a US
President who was secretly born on the African continent. But don't you think
the Kenyans could have come up with a better plant than Obama?
I wonder for how many of them Slick Willie was a patron ;-).
"... According to the National Task Force on Prostitution , it's estimated that
well over 1 million people in the U.S. have worked as prostitutes - or roughly 1
percent of American women. If this campaign is a success, that could translate into
some serious voting power. ..."
"Everyday Americans need a champion," Hillary Clinton proclaimed in her
YouTube video. "And I want to be that champion."
Yes, few were surprised when Hilary Clinton announced her campaign for
the 2016 U.S. presidential race, but many were surprised by some of her
early supporters. Since that announcement, the lovable ladies of Nevada's
renowned Moonlite Bunny Ranch have come out in support of our former first
lady in a serious, potentially large-scale campaign called "Hookers for
Hillary." These Everyday Americans have chosen their candidate.
... ... ...
Bunny Ranch owner Dennis Hof agrees. "With Obamacare the girls were able
to buy good health insurance and without it they weren't able to. Since
Day One when I bought the brothel in 1992 no legal prostitute could get
health insurance," says Hof.
the National Task Force on Prostitution, it's estimated that well over
1 million people in the U.S. have worked as prostitutes - or roughly 1 percent
of American women. If this campaign is a success, that could translate into
some serious voting power.
The following is a leaked transcript of Hillary Clinton's first speech to Goldman Sachs delivered
on 6/04/2013. Two other speeches are also rumored to be in circulation awaiting publication.
This is the full transcript. Secretary Clinton received $225,000 for this speech. The speech has
not been confirmed or authenticated.
CLINTON: Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you
very much, Lloyd [Blankfein], and thanks to everyone at Goldman Sachs for welcoming me today. I'm
delighted to be back among friends, colleagues, collaborators, supporters, kindred spirits…
Let me jump right in. You know, over the past few months, there have been popular concerns about
an economy that still isn't delivering for the majority of Americans. It's not "delivering" the way
that they feel it should, that they feel entitled to. Most Americans that you speak to, speak a populist
rhetoric that claims it is stacked for those at the top, that those of you here have it too good.
But we know the hopes that the little people have for their future - things like school, job,
food, clothing on their backs– all of those little things would not be possible without your leadership
and innovation. Since the time of the Medicis, even before, and the financing of the first joint
stock companies in the transatlantic slave trade, we know that finance and banking is what makes
capitalist economy not just grow but tick…
Previous generations of Americans built this economy and a middle class on a collective illusion:
that they do productive work, this creates wealth, and that this builds the economy. We all know
how misguided that is. We know that it's really due to your investing, credit, and economic stewardship,
that they have been able to work at all, that they are able to put food on their tables. It's due
to you and other banking, trading, investment houses that we have an economy that works at all. You
are why we are a truly 21st century economic power.
You, Lloyd, and your colleagues, have been instrumental in that. People say you are overpaid or
even parasitic, parasites on the economic body, and they quote a long line of seemingly "unethical
behavior". They equate with you everything that is wrong and immoral with Capitalism, they charge
that you have acted ruthlessly and unethically, "rigging every major market bubble since the Great
But I-contrary to populist, hysterical demonizing–firmly believe that what you do is essential
and critical: you help allocate our investment, direct our economic development, hedge risks, and
create power, policies, and alliances in ways that make our country stronger, richer, more powerful,
more innovative, competitive, and yes, more "democratic". You underwrite our elections and our political
process-taking on the huge cost of enabling democratic dialogue at its biggest, broadest capacity.
Your tireless work adds true value, and without you, we would still be struggling helplessly against
industrial powerhouses in Asia and across the world trying to compete with them on the level of industry,
technology, innovation, and hard work, at which they would beat us hands down. It's your financial
innovation, your speculative tools, which allow us new ways of creating value without sweat or struggle,
that gives us the competitive advantage. It's this vision, this technological innovation, this financial
wizardry, this is what makes America great and powerful.
For decades, people have argued that if we give more wealth to those at top by cutting taxes and
letting you and other corporations write the own rules, it will trickle down, it will trickle down
to everyone else. And it has! My speech here is an example!
(Cackles, Waves Check)
But seriously, I believe that the work of
Goldman Sachs is critical for us, and without you, America would be a faint shadow of its current
greatness. Your work in innovating finance, in creating new sources of wealth and investment, your
tireless efforts stimulating the creation of new financial instruments, in lobbying politicians,
in monopolizing the treasury and cabinet, in setting and binding the parameters of financial regulation
that allows fluidity and flexibility in investment and speculation, this allows us to create wealth-almost
out of thin air. It's this alchemy, this genius, this Midas touch-which is one of the most under-appreciated
and under-acknowledged contributions in modern economic history.
It's fair to say that you have transformed the solid, clunky, friction-laiden trading of traditional
commodity speculation into responsive, intelligent, liquid flows, that have vaporized every barrier
and transformed into an expansive, responsive, endlessly expanding gas that fills every atom of our
productive economic space that generates immeasurable value everywhere it goes, and everything it
touches. Who cares that it's a little chaotic or "unethical"? That it seems tied to every financial
scandal and crisis and economic catastrophe in history? Not me. "Creative Destruction" is all part
of the game, and you are masters of it.
Some will say that you are simply parasitic on those who labor at menial physical production-these
are people who still subscribe to 18 Century notions of value production–and that you skim off profit
without doing anything meaningful or of value. Those people are misguided: we know that if money
never sleeps, that's because you keep it awake! You have-if I may use a metaphor–injected money with
caffeine, Adderal, crack, meth, with LSD so that it can dance the crazy dance and grow a crazy thousand
psychedelic feet tall in a rainbow minute! Money was a lazy b*tch, until you put it to
work! And look how it works! Look how it grows! Materializes out of nowhere!
(Waves check again, dances, cackles).
Some people have said that it was your irresponsible financial engineering, risk-taking, and profit-seeking,
that led to the 2008 crash; that you shorted your own toxic mortgages in the most brazen securities
fraud in financial history, dynamiting and imploding the global economy; and that the exorbitant
bonuses paid from tax payer money, the financial bailouts, the non-prosecutions created moral hazard,
rewarded avarice, incompetence, corruption and vice. You and I know it is nothing of the sort. As
leaders, innovators, captains of finance, you will always be subject of the jealous resentment, the
petty tantrums of the unwashed masses, the insolvent, the irresponsible, the invidious, the losers.
They will envy you, your successes, they will despise you, but they secretly want to be like you!
As you know, my husband tried very hard to change the culture of this misbegotten underclass,
by kicking them off the government teat, by poisoning their milk with harsh, bitter regulation, and
by disciplining them with the most arbitrary, racist, punitive, devastating criminal laws in US history,
laws which Richard Nixon, the Southern strategists, the slave catchers, could only have dreamed of.
He also passed NAFTA, which told them in no uncertain terms that they needed to discipline themselves
as workers, and learn to be competitive in the global sweatshop, or face certain extinction. But
they have not learned their lesson.
The effects prove themself. Under President Clinton - I like the sound of that!- America saw the
longest, most prodigious reaming of the undesirable classes in our history, putting them firmly in
their places. And they loved it! He felt their pain! And relished it! Because he was inflicting it!
And I will too!
Now today - today, another capitalist crisis looms, bigger and more dangerous than 2008, and again
we hear sentimental cries for populist reform. I believe we have to stave off these demands to reform
the banking and the financial system, and restructure the economy more equitably. You can't build
an economy without the smart people-the Titans and Gods of Finance-like you–to direct the economy,
and for the smart people to do their work, you need to be rewarded for your efforts, and you need
a free hand to exercise your brilliance.
Books like "The Spirit Level" and organizations working for equality, certain politicians, spew a
ridiculous myth of populism and the benefits of equality. But the fact is, we can't create profitable
businesses without exploitation, and we can't grow the economy without speculation and inequality,
and we certainly can't boost our economy into the stratosphere without allowing you to exercise your
amazing financial intelligence and acumen in fiscal number-crunching, speculation, numbers-running
Just think of this: can you imagine a football game without gambling? It would be dull, mind-numbing-who
would watch steroid-addled jocks rut and slam into each other mindlessly without having put down
money on the outcome? Who would pay the huge salaries for these vapid idiots? It's only because you
have bet on the outcome that people become excited about the sport: it becomes life-and-death-thrilling!
It becomes paint-your-face-get-shit-faced exciting! Act-stupid-exciting! That's what you do: you
add excitement, thrill, value, and enthusiasm to the dull, dirty job of growing the economy, you
make the game exciting, sexy, which draws more money into the game, the casino, that expands the
excitement, grows the customer base, develops the economy, and that's priceless! You speculate, stimulate,
titillate, dynamize, satyriasize the entire economy! I am such a fan! Go Goldman Sachs!
(Does little cheerleading number, complete with hand gestures)
Let's tell the truth: America is struggling-despite the endless fabrication about "the recovery"–
because we are not yet running the way we should. Banks are still over regulated. It's over-regulation
that creates financial catastrophe! Despite your huge paychecks and squirreled away assets, I know
that you are worried: worried that some "socialist" demagogue might come along and confiscate it
all and put you all in jail. With president Obama, you were in good hands: he's one of us. (Good
thing you ponied up $981K for his campaign). He took good care of you, had your back, covered your
financial rear. But populist sentiment is rising up again, more strongly than before, and the unwashed
masses are full of resentment, anger, jealousy. They are angry that they don't have jobs, that they
are in debt, that they can't scrape a living together, even though they are working, 2,3,4 jobs to
put shelter over their heads. That their children are starving. That they cannot see a light at the
end of the tunnel. They are angry about the 100 million people driven into the brink of starvation
and the global food riots that they claim you caused with your commodity futures speculation. The
$5Trillion of value lost from the markets that they claim you collapsed. The millions who lost their
homes and are now on the verge of homelessness. The trillions funneled to you in loans, write-offs,
bribes to keep the system going. Even when I was working for Barry (Goldwater), I felt that same
irrational resentment. Now it's at an all time high. Irresponsible single mothers, uneducated immigrants,
lead-drinking ghetto-strutters, homeless, crying, babies, starving senior citizens, obnoxious, entitled
African Americans who object to having bullets pumped into their bodies by police: all these people
are angry, entitled, and making noise, and they are endangering our democracy and economy, our greatness.
I hear this everywhere I go. A single mother, with three children-wants to go to college, find
enjoyable, well-paid work and also enjoy the emotional luxuries of motherhood-all at the same time.
Everyone feels entitled to everything. She even wants housing. Now even I couldn't do all these things,
despite my incredible privilege and intelligence. But they want it all, now. Three children?
A grandmother, playing with children-it makes her happy like a cow, but she still feels entitled
to be paid. Because she wants to feed her drug habit, she wants to sell them for more money….she
wants it all!
A student, with an unmarketable degree in women's studies, specializing in medieval feminist villanelles,
wants debt forgiveness, and a high-paid job putting her non-existent skills analyzing romance language
texts to use and profit in a rewarding cause. She also wants a pony, a sensitive but dominant lover,
a villa on the Riviera, and World Peace!
Millions of working sad-sack Americans have similar fantasies. They want more money.
More pay. Decent wages for hard work. They think it grows on trees. They think that money will grow
and nuzzle up to them in their sleep, when they have no money-appeal. They think they can tax Other
People's Money to get what they want. They don't realize Money has to be jacked up the ass, stuck
in the veins with meth, dragged out and pimped to make more! You have figured out how to make your
money work, turned it into a profit-generating prostitute! The future expected earnings of
a profit-generating prostitute! That you've shorted! These people, idiots, all of them, they expect
money to come to them! Without Scheming! Without reaming others! By working hard and being good!
Like puppies and ponies! Like flowers after a downpour! Like the lilies of the valley! Like
utopian visions of a drug-addled socialist!
Wages need to be kept down, and people just need to work harder. Damn harder. At least as hard
as Bill worked to keep Haiti down.
We must lower incomes for low-value working schmucks, so they give up on any notions of a middle-class
life. But more than that, we must reduce the slick, unsustainable bigotry of expectation: the profit-sucking
cage of entitlement, expectation, and imagination. We must drive income down steadily and siphon
that surplus wealth to you, the captains of finance, so that we can build a strong economy that is
innovative, powerful, that acknowledges and rewards your acumen…
And that will be my mission, from the first day I am president to the last. I…
I will get up every day thinking about you, the hard-working Wizards of Finance, Lords of Capital,
Economic Giants of Innovation, Noble Titans that make us strong and powerful!
I came from a petit-bourgeois family with a drapery business that exploited workers to give me
good middle-class life, a first-class education, and my incorrigibly elitist beliefs. It put me on
third base, instead of striking out. As I try to steal home, I will be thinking about all the Wall
Street bankers that I represented in New York and the "advice" that they gave me, and I will work
with them-for you– to give them the maximum freedom to do what's best for them. Because what's best
for Wall Street is what's best for the US. What's best for Goldman Sachs is what's best for the planet.
I promise to take on this challenge against the clamoring, whining, agitating babies demanding for
major changes in our economy and the global economy, demanding for equity and justice. These demands
are stupid beyond belief.
As you know, advances in financial technology and global trade have created new areas of commercial
activity and opened new markets for our exports. Too often policy wonks want to resort to protectionist
measures because they don't realize that these treaties are designed to suck wealth out of the third
world and suck it into your portfolios. These people suffer from a lack of big-picture thinking.
They believe that they are still going to be building widgets in a factory if it were not for the
1 billion Chinese stealing their jobs. They don't understand that we are sucking the lifeblood out
of both of the Chinese and all workers-the vampire squid with the blood funnel-creating value, wealth,
Today's marketplace focuses on the short-term, instantaneous financial trading, and short-term
earnings reports, and that's just how it should be. Those who are struggling need to rent out their
living rooms, garages, bathrooms, dog houses, sell trinkets on EBay, sell themselves, their time
and their bodies in the gig economy. All of this creates exciting, dynamic extra wealth, which should
go to you, the geniuses of the universe, because you are the ones driving this with your investments,
speculations, deregulation, policy capture, and of course outright bribes. There's no problem that
a little more liberalization and deregulation can't make better!
This week it's the Democrats, with their tired-looking cast-members repeating lines that
sounded hokey the first time in between guest appearances by beloved celebrities all hoping the
networks won't cancel. They've got the script and they've got the stars, but they're still trying
to find the right narrative arc, because the American public's disbelief is rapidly losing
suspension. This is not politics, not as I know it at home. This is something else. This is
There is a certain look that I've been sharing with other visiting foreign journalists this week
and it is just that - a look, sometimes with the hands spread in a horrified half shrug, because
sometimes there are just no words, even when there have to be, you know, because that's how we
How to possibly express the choreographed insanity of this brassy, breadless circus? How are we
meant to actually communicate like human beings when we are trapped here, sweating on the floor
of the dream factory as they hand out buttons and baseball caps plastered with empty slogans? It
reminds me, more than anything else, of a music festival, down to the overpriced snacks, the
complicated entry system, the constant impression that the weather is trying to kill you, and the
way that normal rules are suspended as we pretend, briefly, that another world is possible.
Specifically, world where the political process is simple and unsaleable, and strong leaders can
change things for the better. A world where hope is feasible and our votes matter and we all go,
as Philip Larkin once said, down the long slide to happiness, endlessly.
... ... ...
This is not practical politics. This is pure pageantry, pure mythmaking in a nation that has
always survived by singing a song of itself. A nation of three hundred million souls and half a
billion guns torn apart by violence and uncertainty, held together by pomp and circumstance and
precious little else. What is on show at the conventions is very different from the politics that
exist, day to day, month to month, as a material force in people's material lives. The
conventions are a bubble universe where we all, press and public and PR people and random
rain-soaked flunkies, try to float on suspension-strings of disbelief. We know we're being lied
to. Those complaining about the lies have missed the point.
... ... ...
Here's the story the Democrats are selling. They cannot persuade America, or the world, that
liberalism is plausible, that change will come in a way that makes a meaningful difference to
millions of lives; what they are offering, in practical terms, is the vestige of democracy
against the certainty of dictatorship. They are offering things not getting quite so much worse
quite so fast. That's a hard sell.
I'm Hillary goddamn Clinton. I'm a political prodigy, have been since I was 16. I have an insane
network of powerful friends. I'm willing to spend the next eight years catching shit on all sides,
all so I can fix this fucking country for you. And all you little bitches need to do is get off your
asses one goddamn day in November.
"Oh but what about your eeeemaaaaillls???" Shut the fuck up. Seriously, shut the fuck up and listen
for one fucking second...
But you know what? I don't fucking care. If I gave two shits about the haters I would've dropped
the game decades ago.
A Hillary Clinton parody account on Medium wrote what the real Hillary Clinton has wanted to say
for a long time in an article titled "Let
Me Remind You Fuckers Who I Am." Here's a sample:
What the fuck is your problem, America??
I'm Hillary goddamn Clinton. I'm a political prodigy, have been since I was 16. I have an insane
network of powerful friends. I'm willing to spend the next eight years catching shit on all sides,
all so I can fix this fucking country for you. And all you little bitches need to do is get off
your asses one goddamn day in November.
"Oh but what about your eeeemaaaaillls???" Shut the fuck up. Seriously, shut the fuck up and
listen for one fucking second.
Here's all you need to know about me:
1. In 1992, I said I was proud to have followed my career instead of baking cookies.
US Ambassador to Russia John Tefft it was real pain to wake up this morning. A horrible headache,
dry mouse and feeling like a herd of frightened wild Mustangs run over him...
He suddenly remembered that the last evening everything looked so well: after coming home from the Bolshoi theater,
he drank just four shots of whiskey, looked for a while out his window on evening Moscow streets,
and then went to bed with a sense of duty well performed.
However, at 2 a.m. Tefft was awakened by a phone call on closed government line. It was Secretary
of State John Kerry, who unfortunately managed to broke his leg a few days before while skiing,
and now was forced to pay more attention to his regular duties. In the way he greeted him
John instantly recognized a hidden mocking
, beneath which was hidden the real irritation. Which happened recently more and more often...
-- Listen Tefft, are you feeling all right to be Moscow?, and Tefft immediately felt in the voice
of his boss signs of a real storm.
"I think," Kerry decided to answered the question himself, " that you feel bad, if not very bad... As I was told that you've gained as much as two kilograms in three months..."
Tefft realized that he has just two options: either to answer these rhetorical questions, or continue
to listen and hope to wait out this storm. The Ambassador chose the latter.
Meanwhile Kerry continued:
-- I get the impression that you became a complete slacker. Look at Jeffrey Payette in Ukraine.
That's an example of a real diplomat. And unlike you he did managed to organized a coup d'état the last year? Beautiful job -- And
then pushed for civil war in Eastern Ukraine. Can you match any of those achievements Tefft? Of course, I understand
that prior to 2013, it was you, who prepared the ground for all this in Ukraine, but it was Jeffrey who got
Tefft continued to be humbly silent, and Kerry became even hotter:
-- BTW do you remember that you main task was to organize mass protests in Russia and unite the
opposition movement under strong leaders, which can assume the power. That's why we send you to this country. Where are
the results, I ask you? Where is the democratization of Russia? Why you just wasting money of American taxpayers? Why there are zero result
so far, I ask you ?
When we realize that it's really difficult to stage mass protests in Moscow, you were instructed to organize the
triumphal sequence of mass protests in other major cities of Russia. Money were allocated
accordingly. And what came of it? What did you achieve so far?
Tefft attempted to insert a word in the speech of the Secretary of State:
-- Look, John, everything work according to plan, all allocated funds are already transferred
to our recipients and supporters...
-- You are joking , -- immediately interrupted Kerry -- I understand that they got money.
But it looks like that was it... For example important for us "Lustration" movement died out
on the wine
After that Tefft heard some strange sounds in the tube probably belonging to a woman. He assumed that it was
iether Hillary or Victoria Nuland, who entered
-- And what about complete fiasco with he visit of Kasyanov to Novosibirsk? -- it was clear that
Kerry suddenly became more vicious -- "You should probably know that we paid for at least
ten thousands of opponents of the current Russian regime to meet him. Where were they?
-- And Kasyanov himself... Oh my God -- Even by his appearance it's clear that he had it enough,
and the only thing he wants is to return to Moscow. Were was his fighting sprit for which we pay
so much money? And what nonsense was he was blabbing? He was giver the script. Can he read?
Why his only praise Novosibirsk was like: "The roads here are just as bad. And the faces in
residents are even more sullen then in Moscow..."? And this man wants people to vote for him,
right ? He came, he was kicked in the teeth and he left without a fight... A great leader of
protest movement, nothing to say... Why he did not speak about brilliant perspectives of Russia in
case of victory of the RPR - Parnas? After all Ukrainians did believed that they will have a bright
future together with the EU and NATO? Do you think they are much dumber then Siberians? And
why he begin to complain about the rake, which somebody threw under his car back in 2008 and
pretend that this was an attempt on his life. He was in the armored car, this idiot!
-- Enough is enough.. Tell Kasyanov to get another round of training ASAP and he should never
deviate from the taking points we wrote for him.. Now the principle of cooperation changes to: first
results - then money. No results, no money. Please convey this message to him.
-- and similar blunder with Alexei Navalny visit to Novosibirsk? We agreed and discussed that
after eggs stones will be used to hit him. Were all those pre-paid stones disappeared? What happened?
Why only eggs were used? Where are the stones, Tefft? I ask you again, where are all the prepaid
stones? Where are bruises and injuries on our hero? How we can present him as the victim of a brutal
regime without any injuries? How we can organize the outrage of the world community with just eggs.
This your blunder undermines our efforts in further tightening of sanctions against Russia...
-- John, -- timidly dared to say Tefft, -- everything was organized perfectly well. The only problem
was too heavy traffic and traffic jams in Novosibirsk. It was due to jams our guys did not get stones
-- Yes, but they got the money in time, right John? - sarcastically remarked Kerry, So please
shut up and just listen...
-- If you decided to promote Russian democratic opposition in Siberia then perform this competently
and effectively as you obviously can. Like you did in Western Ukraine, after all. And if you
are unable even to provide normal numbers of protesters, please at least submit fake photos
with thousands of Novosibirsk residents in the queue willing to vote for the opposition... Or I need
to explain to you how this is done?
-- And please ensure that the number opposition press reported were very close and multiplied
by at least ten. Not like in the last case when one source reported 1104 opposition voters
and the other reported 2580. Not only those numbers are just ridiculously small, they differ
from each other way too much!
And finally, why Novosibirsk leaders of newly united RPR-Parnas party already managed to quarrel among
themselves and started to accuse each other of massive fraud. Is this about who gets our money?
Greedy bustards. Please take care about this issue and explain those jerks how they should behave.
In short, Tefft, if you don't make right conclusions, we probably will soon transfer you
to some African country. The one were there are still cannibals... All the best."
After such a conversation Tefft quickly finished the bottle. A now
this gloomy Moscow morning is upon him again and something needs to be done with all this disappearing
and lying Russian opposition who like to take money but can't produce the desired results. He cursed
his job and opened the second the bottle of whisky.
"I am starting to behave like a real Russian"
he melancholically observed and poured the first short. He instantly felt better. And somewhat proud
about this idea about becoming Russian. He drunk the second shot and thought "F*$% Kerry, if you
sucker come here I will find some ketchup to greet you". Go to hell. And poured the third shot almost immediately.
20 years ago, America was very pleased about how the elections had gone in Russia
But now it is the other way around. At granny Hillary's HQ they have become so hysterical
over the topic "Russian is manipulating our elections and pushing for Trump" that even McFaul
has become indignant:
TECH SUPPORT: Hi, Secretary Clinton? I'm Liz, from tech support.
Your assistant said that you needed help getting Outlook on your phone?
SECRETARY OF STATE HILLARY RODHAM
CLINTON: Oh, hi. Great. Come on in.
TECH: This shouldn't take too long. Are you working on a Blackberry or an iPhone?
CLINTON: God, who knows. I have so many devices these days.
TECH: Really? How many?
TECH: That shouldn't be a problem. So let's get Outlook fired up here. O.K. Hmm.
It looks like you haven't set up an account yet?
CLINTON: I've been using my firstname.lastname@example.org address.
TECH: Most State Department employees prefer to use a state.gov address.
CLINTON: I don't know that I would describe my role here as "employee."
TECH: Right. Well, it's sort of a best-practice thing. We can make sure that all
your correspondence is secure this way, and it'll make it easier to comply with FOIA
CLINTON: Why would there be a FOIA request?
TECH: You're right. There won't be. But I like to say you can never be too careful.
CLINTON: I guess. Liz, between you and me, I'm not really a big e-mailer. I pretty
much only use it for stuff like planning Chelsea's wedding and chatting with my yoga instructor about
whether we should impose sanctions on Iran.
TECH: It's still good to get this set up. Go ahead and connect your device to the
CLINTON: . . .
TECH: You can use that U.S.B. portal.
CLINTON: . . .
TECH: Here, it's just this cord. O.K., I'm noticing that you have a lot of documents
just saved to your desktop. It's really safer to save them directly on the State Department server.
CLINTON: I'll be sure to do that.
TECH: That way they're password-protected. And again, FOIA.
CLINTON: I'm less worried about that than you are.
TECH: You're the boss! O.K., next go to "Settings."
CLINTON: . . .
TECH: It looks like a little gear symbol.
CLINTON: Oh! There it is.
TECH: Then to go to "General."
CLINTON: . . .
TECH: . . .
CLINTON: . . .
TECH: It's down next to-
CLINTON: I got it, all right? Jesus.
TECH: Follow the prompt for e-mail.
CLINTON: I'm not seeing it.
TECH: It's right there next-
CLINTON: Please don't point. I'll never learn that way.
TECH: O.K., sorry. Keep scrolling.
CLINTON: Is it under Bluetooth? What is Bluetooth?
TECH: No, it's-
CLINTON: Do I need to be in Dropbox?
TECH: What? No. Just click e-mail.
CLINTON: Got it!
TECH: Great. Let's get you rolling with a username and a password. Feel free to
really be creative here. Some people use their pets' names, or the name of their high school.
CLINTON: How about just "password"?
TECH: That's sort of not ideal.
CLINTON: O.K., how about "Benghazi"?
TECH: Perfect. It's hard to spell and it doesn't have any special significance.
CLINTON: So I'm done?
TECH: Not quite, but we're close. Now input your username and password.
CLINTON: I am. It's not accepting "Benghazi."
TECH: Hmm. That's O.K. This is a known issue. Let's try "retrieve password."
CLINTON: I'm hitting it but nothing's happening.
TECH: Do you mind if I take over?
CLINTON: Fine. But I won't learn.
TECH: Here's the problem. It needs a number. Can we do a different password? Maybe
"MrsPrez16"? That's good, right?
CLINTON: That's terrible, but I don't care.
TECH: Hey, Madam Secretary, I get that this is frustrating. Believe me. Just remember
that we're on the same team here.
CLINTON: Sorry. UGH. I put in "MrsPrez16" and it's rejecting that too!
TECH: You know, it's probably because you're not using a trusted wifi network.
O.K., go back to Settings.
CLINTON: You know what, I'm just going to stick with my personal account. No one
is going to care.
TECH: You're probably right. Honestly, this system is so clunky; I've been forwarding
stuff to my Gmail since 2006.
CLINTON: Can you get me set up with a Gmail?
TECH: I'm really not supposed to.
CLINTON: Fine. But while you're here, could you help me change my Facebook picture?
I want to use this one.
TECH: Oh, nice! You look so badass texting while wearing sunglasses.
CLINTON: I know.
TECH: Meme alert!
TECH: Girl, I'll probably make that my profile picture, too. Or at least
my Twitter avatar.
CLINTON: Please don't call me "girl."
TECH: It just makes you look like such a tech-savvy, feminist icon.
CLINTON: I am that.
TECH: Totally. O.K., here you go. It's all set. And don't worry about the e-mail
Just reaching out again. Did you get my last few e-mails? Since you haven't replied, I worry that
they might have ended up in your spam folder. Do you know how to check that? I can have my campaign's
digital director send you instructions. Anyway, I would love to say hi, or grab coffee, or whatever,
if you have time. I'm around. Just let me know when/where works for you! Have jet; will travel! LOL.
... ... ...
What is going on?
I'm going fucking crazy over here. I think we both know that I've gone above and beyond to reach
out to you and be your friend and invite you to cool shit and just be there for you, but I feel like
you're taking our relationship totally for granted. I saw you donated fifty dollars after my last
e-mail, but, honestly, that just made me feel used. I wish you'd never entered your e-mail address
into my campaign Listserv.
So I'm writing one last time to say Go to Hell, Bess. And please don't forget to text HRC to 33422016
to get real-time updates from the trail!
As I was just driving home and worrying about all the stuff going on in my life, my family's
lives, my friends' lives, and what's happening in Washington, Moscow, Ukraine, the Middle East,
Hillary Clinton's scandals, Jeb, Trump, Fox News, the downgrading of our military, the terrorists
infiltrating our border, the illegals, the refugees, and how our country is rapidly losing its
sanity and its Christianity, I saw a yard sign that said:
Out of curiosity and desperation, I called the number.
A Mexican showed up with a lawnmower.
Over the last six months, GOP leaders have watched helpless as the Republican presidential
race has transformed from the usual loveable farce into a terrifying prequel to Mad Max: Fury
Road as tangerine reality show host
Donald Trump gained, attained and retained frontrunner status. With only a few months left
before the Republican National Convention, party luminaries, bigwigs and eminences grises have
come up with a secret blueprint for how to stop the New York business mogul from becoming their
candidate. Exclusive to the Guardian, here is their 10-point plan:
Change the Republican party rules so that all presidential candidates must disclose the
length of their fingers prior to receiving the nomination. Trump will drop out of the race by
the end of the day.
Leave a trail of spray tan canisters and ground beef leading from the door of his
penthouse to a barge about to set off for the Far East.
Lure him into a space shuttle by telling him there's a photograph of his daughter Ivanka
in a bikini onboard and then blast him into orbit.
Attach a $5 bill to a greased pig's back and set it loose backstage before his next
campaign stop. He'll chase that thing until he's out of breath, and miss the speech, which,
due to his inhumanly hectic campaign schedule will have the cumulative knock-on effect of
making him miss the next day's speech, then the next morning's chummy appearance by telephone
with his pals on Morning Joe, then the next four primaries, and before you know it he's missed
the convention and is safely back to being an appalling but harmless reality TV star.
Force Trump to spend as much as five minutes with one of his own supporters.
Remind him that the White House executive residence is a paltry 55,000 square feet and
that presidents are constitutionally prohibited from painting it gold.
Invite Trump to a pool party and before he arrives glue a bunch of nickels to the bottom
of the deep end.
Invent time travel, go back to 2008, and stop ourselves from attacking the Obama
administration with the exact same vitriolic, divisive rhetoric that Trump picked up on and
has now ridden to his present position.
Stop sheepishly acquiescing to Trump's bluster and acting like he isn't a despicable
racist monster in hopes that it's not too late to prevent the complete collapse of society.
Change election procedure so that the remaining delegates must pledge their support to
whichever nominee scores highest on a seventh grade vocabulary test. Unfortunately this will
probably give the edge to college debate champ Ted Cruz, an opportunistic, bigoted liar whose
vision for America is a theocracy engaged in an apocalyptic war against Islam run by a man who
looks like Dracula's fat cousin smugly eating a sour candy he received as a prize for
tattling. But you can't have everything.
Donald Trump answers the question 'what is 2+2?': "I have to say a lot of people
have been asking this question. No, really. A lot of people come up to me, and
they ask me. They say, 'What's 2+2'? And I tell them, look, we know what 2+2
We've had almost eight years of the worst kind of math you can imagine.
Oh, my God, I can't believe it. Addition and subtraction of the 1s the 2s and
the 3s. It's terrible. It's just terrible. Look, if you want to know what 2+2
is, do you want to know what 2+2 is? I'll tell you. First of all the number
2, by the way, I love the number 2. It's probably my favorite number, no it
is my favorite number. You know what, it's probably more like the number two
but with a lot of zeros behind it. A lot. If I'm being honest, I mean, if I'm
being honest. I like a lot of zeros.
Except for Marco Rubio, now he's a zero that I don't like. Though, I probably
shouldn't say that. He's a nice guy, but he's like, '10101000101,' on and on,
like that. He's like a computer! You know what I mean? He's like a computer.
I don't know. I mean, you know. So, we have all these numbers, and we can add
them and subtract them and add them. TIMES them even. Did you know that?
We can times them OR divide them, they don't tell you that, and I'll tell
you, no one is better at the order of operations than me. You wouldn't believe
it. So, we're gonna be the best on 2+2, believe me."
Sean Anthony Dylan , 2016-03-08 17:42:31
Priceless! Next stop, Saturday Night Live or similar.
[Feb 21, 2016] An historic breakthrough for robot rights.
A real dark night of the soul tonight for Jeb!.He sits on the couch in his hotel room, drinking
straight out of a bottle of Glenfiddich, after crawling around on his hands and knees for an hour
in a fruitless search for one of his brand new contact lenses. He finally gives up on that and
sits, with vision in only one eye, with the lights turned down low and the television with a smashed
screen. He stares at the copy of "The Art of the Deal" on the coffee table, the book a gag gift
from W. The phone rings. "Yeah, mom, I know. It doesn't look good. What am I going to tell the
money people? You know, the thing that really gets to me is that I was the only one to stand up
to Trump, the only one with the balls to go after that son of a bitch. Marco? That slime ball
really did a number on me. I'm going to call him up right now and tell him to bring that sword
I gave him over here and just stab me in the back. I got that Terri Schiavo law passed to save
her life. I wish somebody would pass a law to keep my candidacy on life support. Do you think
if Chris Christie got back in the race he'd be willing to take on Trump at the next debate? Yeah…probably
not." He takes a long pull from the bottle. "Yeah, mom, I know W did all he could. But it wasn't
enough. The shock and awe didn't happen for me tonight. There was no freakin' mission accomplished,
except I look like a loser. Maybe Trump was right.The kids and their mom aren't here, I can't
put them on the phone. Their mom didn't want the kids to see me like this so they got a different
room. What am I going to do? Well, first I'm gonna take me another little bitty drinkee-poo from
this here bottle."
Speaking at a press breakfast to launch the new Daily Show,
which starts on Monday 28 September, the South African comedian said he would use his position as
an outsider in the US to look at some of the more bizarre elements of the country's political
system without preconceptions.
... ... ...
Jon Stewart's final
year in charge at the Daily Show saw the programme
win three Emmys for outstanding variety talk series, outstanding writing for a variety series
and outstanding directing for a variety series.
[Sep 04, 2015] Clinton is transparently Fake.... Looks like Josh is a Extramarital Art Expert....
Anyone know if he has the Black Condom yet?
YoringeFri, 9/4/2015 - 9:34
WASHINGTON-According to a report released Monday by the U.S. Department
of Education, an increasing number of American parents are choosing to have their children raised
at school rather than at home.
Deputy Education Secretary Anthony W. Miller said that many parents
who school-home find U.S. households to be frightening, overwhelming environments for their children,
and feel that they are just not conducive to producing well-rounded members of society.
Thousands of mothers and fathers polled in the study also believe that those running American
homes cannot be trusted to keep their kids safe.
"Every year more parents are finding that their homes are not equipped to instill the right values
in their children," Miller said. "When it comes to important life skills such as proper nutrition,
safe sex, and even basic socialization, a growing number of mothers and fathers think it's better
to rely on educators to guide and nurture their kids."
"And really, who can blame them?" Miller continued. "American homes have let down our nation's
youth time and again in almost every imaginable respect."
According to the report, children raised at home were less likely to receive individual adult
attention, and were often subjected to ineffective and wildly inconsistent disciplinary measures.
The study also found that many parents expressed concerns that, when at home, their children were
being teased and bullied by those older than themselves.
In addition to providing better supervision and overall direction, school-homing has become popular
among mothers and fathers who just want to be less involved in the day-to-day lives of their children.
"Parents are finding creative ways to make this increasingly common child-rearing track work,"
Miller said. "Whether it's over-relying on after-school programs and extracurricular activities,
or simply gross neglect,† school-homing is becoming a widely accepted method of bringing children
Despite the trend's growing popularity, Miller said that school programs are often jeopardized
or terminated because shortsighted individuals vote against tax increases intended to boost educational
"The terrifying reality we're facing is that the worst-equipped people you could possibly imagine
may actually be forced to take care of their children," Miller said.
Parents who have decided to school-home their children have echoed many of Miller's concerns.
Most said that an alarming number of legal guardians such as themselves lack the most basic common
sense required to give children the type of instruction they need during crucial developmental years.
"It's really a matter of who has more experience in dealing with my child," Cincinnati- resident
Kevin Dufrense said of his decision to have his 10-year-old son Jake, who suffers from ADHD and dyslexia,
school-homed. "These teachers are dealing with upwards of 40 students in their classrooms at a time,
so obviously they know a lot more about children than someone like me, who only has one son and doesn't
know where he is half the time anyway."
"Simply put, it's not the job of parents to raise these kids," Dufrense added.
Though school-homing has proven to be an ideal solution for millions of uninvolved parents, increasingly
overburdened public schools have recently led to a steady upswing in the number of students being
[Jul 12, 2015] "An aggressor is anyone who attacks a country before the US does."–Czech President
Republican preferences of Presidential candidates ;-)
Trump filed for bankruptcy protection in 1991, 1992, 2004 and 2009. I have zero interest in
putting him in charge of anything remotely connected to my prosperity or posterity.
But I will say this, with Hillary! the current frontrunner, fully 98% of democrats are insane
Witht that kind of experience, we should make him president of Puerto Rico.
Not My Real Name
Trump is too much of an ego maniac to have that kind of power.
You mean like Obama?
Wrong. The popularity of Trump and Sanders is they are actually talking reality versus the
papsmear crapola that comes out of the mouths of the corporate polititcians from both sides. They
also actually have policies that appeal to the majority of the people in their respective parties.
Most people oppose the crony trade deals that get signed that do nothing for the people yet enrich
the CEO and the politician that passes the bill after they are out and get massive "speaking"
fees. Not the corporatists such as Bush and Hillary - never met a trade deal favorable to corporations
they didnt like. Quid, meet Pro and Quo.
Southpark said it best regarding voting and elections: But Stan, don't you know, it's always
between a giant douche and a turd sandwich. Nearly every election since the beginning of time
has been between some douche and some turd. They're the only people who suck up enough to make
it that far in politics."
Thanks for the heads up. Is there any candidate that is not in AIPAC's pocket?
Before the people realized that behind the "most
transparent administration ever" there was nothing but double seasonal adjustments, drones
and an impenetrable layer of propaganda and lies, there was...
And change, of course.
Sadly, at some point over the past six years the hope died, first for the people (if not the
bankers), and then for the creator of the infamous "Hope" poster himself, Shepard Fairey who told
Esquire magazine in an interview that Obama has not come even close to embodying the break
with the past administration that Fairey and so many voters hoped he would.
"I mean, drones and domestic spying are the last things I would have thought [he'd
But support them he did while crushing the much promised transparency and freedom for the masses,
for one simple reason: money, the same reason why Fairey is almost willing to give Obama a pass,
again. Money, and of course, power and control of the masses by the select few.
Still, the confused artist still isn't fully ready to throw away all his idealism just yet:
I've met Obama a few times, and I think Obama's a quality human being, but I think that
he finds himself in a position where your actions are largely dictated by things out of your
A "quality human being" he may be, but when it comes to personal motives, money always wins. Just ask the Clinton Foundation. Even Fairey, who says he "agrees
with Hilary on most issues" finally grasps that now:
... campaign finance structure makes me very angry, because it means that politicians are
going to have to raise a huge amount of money, which narrows the field dramatically. There
are only certain kinds of people that either have the preexisting resources or the willingness
to work in way that will get them a lot of money from donors. That narrows the field right
there. Then there's the idea that the people who you are going to have to listen to are the
people that are going to give you the biggest donation. That means lobbyists, special interest
groups, and corporations are going to have politicians eager, disproportionally.
He adds: "I'm not giving him a pass for not being more courageous, but I do think the
entire system needs an overhaul and taking money out of politics would be a really good first
A systemic overhaul by whom? The same politicians who are nothing but "whores" to corporate
Or maybe the infamous artist should just blame the American public for agreeing to be swindled
and manipulated by one liar after another, all of whom promise change yet end up merely perpetuating
the broken, corrupt system they inherit from their predecessor and make it even worse.
Actually, that's precisely what Fairey did. This is what he told Esquire:
We also need a public that isn't so uneducated and complacent. I hate to say Americans
are ignorant and lazy, but a lot of them are ignorant and lazy.... When you live in
a place that has a lot of good things that make life easier, it's easier to take them for granted.
But what frustrates me to no end are people who want to blame Obama or blame anything that
is something that if they were actually doing anything as simple as voting, it might not be
as bad as it is. There's a lot of finger pointing and very little action and very little
research into the dynamics that created the situation that they're unhappy about.
Actually, about that he's quite accurate
However his message will be diluted and ignored, and the media will do is what it always does
when facing a threat to the status quo: crush the messenger.
And conveniently, Fairey made it very easy for them: after all, and quite amusingly,
his Hope poster itself was a fraud.
The artist was recently sentenced to two years of probation and fined $250,000 in 2012 for
destroying documents and concealing others in an attempt to hide that he had used an Associated
Press photograph as the basis for his "Hope" poster. And even more ironic, as
Gawker wrote in 2009, Fairey himself was "lawsuit happy to artists who ape or parody his stuff."
Unfortunately, in retrospect Fairey's story is one of "tidiest little package" summaries of
the banana republic status the US, and its leadership, has devolved to.
In the classic novel Don Quixote de la Mancha, the great Spanish writer Cervantes explored
the danger of mixing delusions of grandeur with adventurous combat. Yet, today instead of the man
of la Mancha, we have the neocons playing the men (and some women) of dementia, as ex-diplomat William
R. Polk describes.
It was over half a century ago that I first read Cervantes' marvelous novel,
Don Quixote de la Mancha. I was then studying at the University of Chile, trying to learn
Spanish, and Don Quixote was the first novel I remember reading. Or, to be honest, "reading
at" because my Spanish was still weak and the text is full of unfamiliar expressions. Also, I was
very young and did not know enough about the world to understand fully what Cervantes was saying.
But he had a remarkable gift of writing on different levels. His tale could be enjoyed as just
a good story or more profoundly. So, despite my shortcomings, he caught me in his magical web. A
few years later, somewhat better equipped, I dipped into Don Quixote again in a delightful
course on satire I was taking as an undergraduate at Harvard.
So now I have gone back. Or not quite back. Not quite, because I now can put both of those early
ventures into a new perspective from experiences I have had and observations I have made over the
last half century. I now realize that what Cervantes wrote about his own times could be applied to
Cervantes was writing about themes that recur often and are particularly apposite today. Indeed,
the auguries suggest that they may be virtually a prediction. His "Ingenious Hidalgo Don Quixote"
can be read as an amalgam of several of our own "knights errant," and his accounts of his hidalgo's
adventures foreshadowed some of the wilder forays into combat of our own warriors.
A terrifying thought at least to me is that the hints and themes we can read into his story may
be played out in the aftermath of the next election. So, laugh with Cervantes - or shudder with me
- over a few pages of his fable.
He begins by anchoring us in place, En un lugar de la Mancha, de cuyo nombre no quiero acordarme
("in a place on the Plain whose name I don't wish to remember"). As I now transpose it to Washington
D.C., he might have written, "at little town in Foggy Bottom whose name I don't wish to remember."
Then he introduces the target of his satire, Don Quixote: no ha much tiempo que vivía un hidalgo
de los de lanza en astillero, adarga antigua, rocín flaco y galgo corredor ("not much time has
passed since there lived one of those gentlemen of the sort who keeps a lance hanging on the wall,
an ancient shield, a bony mare and a greyhound"),
At this point, one stops. Who in our times might fit such a description? Are there such eccentric
would-be warriors holed up in government offices, think tanks or war colleges with the symbols of
warfare and the hunt flaunted above their desks?
A memory pops into my mind: yes, I remember when it was quite fashionable to festoon the walls
of offices in the Executive Office Building, the old State and War Departments, of the White House,
with the modern equivalents of Quixote's lance. Battle-scarred weapons fashioned by the Vietcong
were particularly favored. Some of us even brought our hounds (but not our nags) into our offices.
But in those far-off days, knights errant were few even in Foggy Bottom. Now, they seem to have
multiplied beyond counting. So, could we single out anyone as our Don Quixote? Names of candidates
flow past my inner eye. Indeed, even Cervantes puzzled over the name of his hero. He offers several
We might do the same. The character we need to fit his story is an arm-chair warrior who is
carried away by his occult reading to the point that he is prepared to embark (or at least to send
others to embark) on great (and disastrous) adventures in faraway lands, and whose grip on reality
is, like Don Quixote's, to say the least, faulty.
We have a legion of candidates who fit that bill. So it is hard to pick a single name. Never mind.
As Cervantes wrote, the name "matters little for our account; it is enough that the narrative does
not depart a single point from the truth." (esto importa poco a nuestro cuento; basta que en
la narracíon dél no se salga un punto de la verdad.)
Being accurate or at least suggestive within reasonable bounds was very important for Cervantes
and is also important for us because the tale we - the combination of Cervantes classically and I
in modern terms - relate is hard to believe.
The Land of Neocons
As I say, many of our great statesmen come to mind, but the richest lode is to be found in the
neoconservative movement. Whoa! I pull on the reins of my imagination. Could Cervantes have imagined
a Dick Cheney? A Paul Wolfowitz? One of the Kristols? Surely such figures are to be seen only in
Well, no. Not at all. History provides quite a few ancestors for them. However, as the text of
the book makes clear, Cervantes' hidalgo was a complex character who not only read and fantasized
but actually himself also went out and fought. Doing both narrows the field rather drastically.
It is hard to find one of the great statesmen we read about, much less those we know in our times,
who both proclaimed policy and themselves went into harm's way. In the "leisure of the theory
class," as Veblen has been amended for our times, the armchair was found to be much more comfortable
than the helicopter bucket seat. So, Cervantes would have had to invent a combination of something
like Paul Wolfowitz and David Petraeus.
And, of course, he would have transposed Don Quixote's lance, shield, bony mare and greyhound.
They don't quite do in our day. So consider our modern Don Quixote trading them in for a fighter-bomber,
a Patriot missile system, an aircraft carrier and, although this may be stretching it even for Cervantes,
a drone in place of the greyhound.
Never mind. Don't quibble about the tools of the trade. Cervantes, himself, was less concerned
with the artifacts than with the mind of his hero. As he tells us, Don Quixote had read so many romantic
tales about the glorious adventures of knights errant that "the poor fellow lost his reason to such
an extent that not even Aristotle could have untangled the wild imaginations that he believed, were
he to be brought back to life just to do that job." (Con estes razones perdía el pobre caballero
el juicio y desvelábase por entendarlas y desestrañarles el sentido que no se sacara ni las entendiera
el mesmo Aristóteles, si resucitara para solo ella.)
To try to understand what all the writings were about and what they told him to do, Don Quixote
talked with the learned priest of his village. Just so, our modern Don Quixote, having imbibed and
partly understood the neoconservative bizarre view of human affairs, consulted with the High Priest
of neoconservatism, Leo Strauss, who held forth in his "village" as the President of the University
of Chicago once referred to its department of political science. But, as we shall see, Don Quixote
chose a rather better guide than did our policy makers.
Cervantes was not kind about the writings of such philosophers. He shows his poor hero dazzled
by the intricacies and blind alleys of the outpouring of his version of the great myth peddler. Cervantes
has his spinner of tales, a man known as Feliciano de Silva, leading his avid but disoriented devoté
into a maze with "clarity of the prose and intricacy of reasoning" exemplified by such marvels as
"the reason of unreason affects my reason to such a degree that my reason withers away…" (La
razón de la sinrazón que a mi rasón se hace, de tal maner, mi razón enflaquence…)
That is, put rather more prosaically, logic and facts cease to matter. It is the vision of romantic
action against demonic forces that give the necessary energy for wild endeavors. Thought becomes
a banner to signal the grand campaign. And, as Cervantes said, razón enflaquence…reason
Finally, as Cervantes tells us, his Don Quixote became so immersed in such readings that he passed
the nights from dusk to dawn and the days from dawn to dusk "until finally the brain dried up and
he came to lose his mind. Having filled himself with the fantasies he had read in de Silva's writings,
imaginary happenings became actual for him [and] no other interpretation of the world was more real."
"As a result, having lost his mind, he hit on the strangest plan that had ever occurred to a crazy
person anywhere: it came to seem to him appropriate and necessary both to augment his own honor and
to serve his republic to make himself a knight errant and take himself around the world with his
weapons and on his mount to seek adventures and to put into practice all he had read… becoming a
knight errant, going about the world with his arms and mount, seeking adventures, righting every
manner of wrong and by putting himself in situations of great peril to make famous his name. The
poor fellow imagined himself crowned for his valor, at the very least, with the empire of Trebizond;
so with these agreeable thoughts in mind, he immediately set out to put into effect his plan."
But he faced an immediate obstacle: having decided to venture into the dangerous world, Don Quixote
realizes that he must be properly "entitled" - that is, he could not afford to be seen as an outlaw
or a war criminal but must be recognized as a person legally or at least officially entitled to engage
in combat to overthrow and to kill the wicked.
So he seeks someone to dub him a knight, which in contemporary terms would give him legitimacy.
Just so, the neoconservatives realized that it was not enough simply to proclaim their doctrine in
their journals even if that attracted to their cause real warriors who could put it into effect.
Rather they must be vested with authority. Even intellectuals, after all, need to be "knighted" if
they are to perform acts that when done unofficially or by ordinary citizens are crimes.
So, after an agonized delay in which he found no proper authority to knight him, Don Quixote comes
upon an inn whose keeper emerges to welcome him. To our would-be knight errant the inn is a castle
and the keeper is its lord just as our Don Quixote found his authority to be the lord of
the White House. Cervantes has his Don Quixote say – and we can be sure that our Wolfowitz-Petraeus
spoke similarly - these magic words,
"My adornments are my arms,
My leisure is to fight."
Then, before the proprietor of the house, Don Quixote falls on his knees, saying "I will never
raise myself from where I am, Illustrious Lord, until you have given me what I seek, that which will
spread your fame and do good to all humanity …. that I may go forth equipped with the necessary credentials
as an armed knight such as never before was to be found in the world."
One can only imagine how the modern bond was forged. However it was done, we know that our modern
hero-to-be was welcomed into the "House" by its Great Lord who proceeded to anoint him with the signs
of high office. Neither would have been put off by the earlier hero's expectations:
"Who could doubt that in the coming times, when my glorious deeds emerge in the light of true
history … my brave deeds will deserve to be cast in bronze, carved in marble and painted on canvasses
to be seen for all time. Ah you! Wise enchanter of the future! Whoever you may be. To you will fall
the honor of chronicling my great crusade!"
He also admonished the future historian not to forget his warhorse.
And so, in our marvelous age of instant history, it happened as predicted - or requested. It was
not long before that very chronicle appeared. Written not about Don Quixote, of course, but about
his modern and only partial successor, Paul Wolfowitz, under the title Visionary Intellectual,
Policymaker and Strategist. The author was so fulsome that he certainly did not forget the "warhorse,"
the great weapons of war.
Back to the Inn/Castle/White House, the keeper/lord/president mentions that although he had not
read - he was not noted for his reading– the marvelous accounts that had so affected both the old
and the new Don Quixotes, while still a young man he too had wandered the world, seeking adventures.
In place of Seville, Malaga, Cordoba and Toledo, in the earlier account, read New Haven, Cambridge,
Austin and Dallas - and, after a number of shady enterprises, as we are told by Cervantes earlier
and by the media in our times, they both had entered their "houses."Castle lords or not, they both
were empowered to dub anyone a knight "or at least as much a knight as anyone in the world was."
(y tan caballero, que no pudeiese más en el mundo.)
So empowered, Don Quixote sets out on his first venture, rushing to "regime change" a tyranny.
It happened like this:
As Don Quixote was riding along, he heard moans coming from a forest he was passing. Looking for
a cause for which to fight, he exclaimed "I give thanks to Heaven for giving me so soon a means to
carry out my calling." With that, he rode into the forest where he saw a "stout rustic" lashing a
poor boy. Don Quixote exploded in anger and, thinking that the rustic was a knight, challenged him
to a fight. The peasant tried to excuse himself by saying that the boy had been stealing from him
and was not protecting his sheep. And "he says I am a miser who does not want to pay him what I owe
Furious, our hero threatens the tyrant with his lance and orders him to pay the boy at once or
"if not, by The God, I will make an end to you." (Pagadle luego sín más réplica; si no, por el
Dios que nos rige que os concluya y aniquile en este punto. Desatadlo luego.)
So it happened also that when our modern heroes rode through the deserts of the Middle East, they
saw a robust fellow (Iraq) mistreating a little fellow (Kuwait). When our heroes accosted him, the
big fellow said that the little fellow was stealing his oil and not helping him protect his flock
(the Arab nations) from the advancing Iranians. So Iraq, who had no money "with him" as Cervantes
says of the lout Don Quixote encountered, said he could not pay Kuwait what it owed it.
In Cervantes' tale: the bully said he would take the little boy under his control and promised
eventually to pay him the money. The boy was terrified and said that he would never trust the bully.
But Don Quixote brushed his worries aside and said that he had given orders, which the peasant would
obey. The boy need not worry; all would be well. And, if the peasant did not pay, he, Don Quixote
would return and punish him.
Waiting until the valiant knight was out of sight, the peasant then tied the boy again to the
tree and lashed him nearly to death.
So what happened in the story as it unfolded in our times? Our replacement of the peasant, the
dictator of Iraq, consulted with the American ambassador who told him that we really took no position
on what happened to the boy, Kuwait. The Americans apparently meant that the Saddam Hussein should
be allowed a little "beating" of Kuwait, but not too much.
Saddam took that to give him permission, a "green light," as America had flashed to another dictator
in far-off Indonesia. So he grabbed Kuwait. The Americans were surprised by the ferocity of the attack
because they thought he would not take all of the country. That is, not beat the "boy" nearly
to death, as Cervantes's rustic set about doing.
"And in this manner," wrote Cervantes, "the valorous Don Quixote righted the wrong, being very
happy that everything turned out so well according to the high ideals of knighthood."
Wisely, Cervantes had his hero ride happily away. It was not so, as we know, in the modern version.
Infuriated that Saddam went too far, the Americans returned to punish him. Then, having announced
that they had imposed the high ideals of democracy, literally at the point of the lance, our modern
heroes stayed on at the house of the cruel peasant, tore it apart and killed many of his family –
and are still there.
As Cervantes makes clear and as we know from experience not only in Iraq but in a string of other
countries, the intervention of the great warrior resulted in the total breakdown of social institutions,
security, justice and protection of the weak.
Cervantes could not have imagined how many times and in how many places his parable would be reenacted!
But already, he realized that "regime change" gives birth to chaos and misery.
When Don Quixote finally got back to his own house, having been severely beaten in another encounter
on the way, his friends decided that it would be an act of mercy to demolish the fantasies that had
driven him mad and had nearly gotten him killed.
The great man's housekeeper thought that all that was necessary was to sprinkle Holy Water on
the books in his library, but his friends thought that the ridiculous doctrine could be erased only
by sterner action. They were too late. He was already infected by the ideas he had imbibed.
I leave it to the reader to draw the modern parallel. Is it too late for us and our valiant leaders
to realize how pernicious are the delusions they have imbed, how many lives they have cost, how much
treasure they have wasted? We cannot be sure, but the trends are against us.
Suffice it to say that the neoconservatives are again plugging their dangerous policies and myopic
views of cultures and societies and urging more mummery despite the record of their past malpractice.
Behind the buzzwords of counterinsurgency and "nation building," they caused and then justified not
only the great harm done to those who stood in their way but also violations of those principles
that have guided our democracy.
Cervantes catches this violation neatly. Since one of the books Don Quixote had been reading was
called The Knight of the Cross, Cervantes has the village priest remark that "behind the
cross stands the devil." (mas también se suele decir, "tras la cruz está el diablo.)
Or, as we might transpose it to modern terms, behind the philosophical musings of Leo Strauss lurk
the violent warmongering of the neoconservatives and the justifications for the rise of the "security
These collections were both pernicious, but undoubtedly the results of the impact of Strauss were
far worse. They were directly harmful to our liberty and well-being.
It is here where Cervantes introduces Sancho Panza whom some readers find to be an even more complex
character than the great knight himself. Often a man of good sense, sometimes even noble and generous,
he was also greedy and inconsistent. He was fair game for Don Quixote, and our wild warrior quickly
brought Sancho into his court. Who was he?
As Cervantes describes him, he was "a working man, living nearby, a good man (if such a title
could be given to a poor man) but not very bright; so after inveigling him with (soothing) words
and (lavish) promises, he got the poor hick to agree to go with him and serve him as his squire.
Among other things Don Quixote argued was that he ought to be willing to go along because, if
their venture succeeded, they would win some island of which he would become governor. With these
promises and others, Sancho Panza, although himself a simple working man, gave up his fields, left
his wife and children and signed on as squire."
It is hard to avoid reading Barack Obama into the character of Sancho. Having listened to
the brave words of the neoconservatives, Obama and many members of Jefferson's, Jackson's and Roosevelt's
Party of "the common man," the Democrats, readily gave up their customary fields of concern, the
well-being of their families and fellow citizens, said goodbye to their long-time partners and rushed
off as followers of the new doctrine in pursuit some distant "island" where they could win both laurels
As they rode along together, Sancho (here the opportunistic Democrat) assured Don Quixote (here
the Obama convert to Bush's policies) that "if you give me that island you promised, I will rule
it, no matter how big it is."
But, as I have said, Sancho was a complex figure and another part of his personality – his innate
common sense – comes out in the most famous of the great knight's misadventures, the attack on the
As Cervantes tells the story, the great knight suddenly sighted some windmills and turning to
his newly commissioned acolyte said, "luck has brought us even more than we could have desired; for
there you see, Friend Sancho Panza, revealed before you 30 or a few more vicious giants with whom
I think to do battle, deprive them of their lives [and] with whose spoils we will begin to enrich
ourselves for this is a just war and is a great service to God to drive such vile species from the
An astonished Sancho, blurted out, "What giants?"
"Those you see before you," replied Don Quixote. "those with the long arms…"
"Look, Your Excellency," Sancho replied, what you see there are not giants, only windmills and
what seems to be long arms are just wings to catch the wind and make the millstone turn."
"It is clear," continued Don Quixote, that you do not understand such matters. Those are giants.
And if you are fainthearted, stand aside and say your prayers while I engage them in fierce and unequal
battle." With that the valiant knight spurred his horse into battle. [I have condensed the beginning
section of Chapter 8.]
We all have heard the story of what happened next: the windmill's wings caught the knight's lance,
pulled him and his horse into the air and smashed them onto the ground. And, as Cervantes tells us,
he was particularly grieved over the breaking of his lance.
To convert Cervantes to our times, imagine, I ask you, that the windmill was the little perceived,
simple and otherwise engaged country of Afghanistan. Without much thought of the danger or the cost
and no perceived consideration of alternative actions, we charged in and like him were caught in
the whirling melee of its fiercely independent people.
Don Quixote was, of course, mad, but his action was unprecedented; we, in contrast, whether mad
or not, had ample warnings from the experiences of the British and the Russians. Both the British
and the Russians had lost their armies and their "lances" jousting there. Our Don Quixote, now multiplied
by tens of thousands, paid a heavy price both for knowing no history and for having believed the
wild dogmas of the neoconservatives.
Could this painful venture - and all our other escapades in Vietnam, Somalia, Libya (and now perhaps
Syria and even Ukraine) have been avoided? An attempt to answer that question takes us back to Sancho
Panza. Sancho was a realist and tried to dissuade the knight errant from some of his dementia, but
he - like modern Democrats - also sought to profit from the dementia. Recognizing Sancho's venality,
Don Quixote promised him a kingdom if he obeyed.
In our times, the "kingdom" is not a faraway and imaginary island but victory at the polls, promotions
and even the forges of "lances." These rewards come about more easily and quicker from sound and
fury than from careful and constructive action.
Cervantes got it right. Don Quixote's flights of madness are addictive. Eventually, even Sancho
was converted. And today, as we see almost daily the Obama administration has taken over the major
aspects of the neoconservative creed. Looking to a future of the probable choice between a Hilary
Clinton and a Jeb Bush, who will have the will to call a halt to madness?
Cervantes speaks to us all.
William R. Polk is a veteran foreign policy consultant, author and professor who taught
Middle Eastern studies at Harvard. President John F. Kennedy appointed Polk to the State Department's
Policy Planning Council where he served during the Cuban Missile Crisis. His books include: Violent
Politics: Insurgency and Terrorism; Understanding Iraq; Understanding Iran; Personal History: Living
in Interesting Times;Distant Thunder: Reflections on the Dangers of Our
Times; and Humpty Dumpty: The Fate of Regime Change.
WALTHAM, MA-Frustrated with a growing list of unacceptable workplace indignities, fed-up Catamount
Systems employee Marc Holden is just about 14 years away from walking out the front door of his office
and never returning, sources confirmed Thursday. "I swear to God, if things don't improve around
here real fast, I am out of here in 14 years or so-I am not bluffing," Holden said, noting that if
he has to endure just a decade and a half more of company-wide incompetence and pointless micromanagement,
he is gone for good. "Seriously, I don't think I can take any more than 3,000 more days of this before
I snap. Mark my words, if 2029 rolls around and it's still the same old shit around here, I'm cleaning
out my desk, getting on that elevator, and never coming back." Holden added that if his boss belittled
him in front of the entire staff just 200 more times, he would storm right into his office and tell
him exactly where he can stick it.
.... he describes his decision to quit The Daily Show, the American satirical news programme he
has hosted for 16 years, as something closer to the end of a long-term relationship.
... ... ...
At 52, Stewart has the bouncy energy of a man half his age and, unlike most in the public eye,
has an aversion to compliments. If I tell him I liked something about the film, he will immediately
deflect the compliment and insist it was all down to Bahari, or the film's star Gael García Bernal,
or the crew. For all the claims of his detractors that Stewart is the epitome of East Coast elitism,
there is more self-deprecating New Jersey grit here than arrogant Manhattan elan.
Much as he might wince to hear it, for the past 16 years Stewart has occupied a place in America's
cultural and political life far greater than the small audience of his cable show would suggest.
The Daily Show's simple format consists of a mix of reports from roving reporters (who have included
Steve Carell, Stephen Colbert and John Oliver), monologues delivered by Stewart and an end-of-show
interview. Over time, Stewart has evolved from a satirist to a broadcaster celebrated as the voice
of US liberalism, the one who will give the definitive progressive take on a story.
His moving monologue after the Charlie Hebdo killings in January was widely shared; his frequent
on-air support of Democrat senator Elizabeth Warren helped her evolve in the eyes of the public from
Harvard professor to dream 2016 presidential candidate – particularly among those who find Hillary
Clinton too centrist and hawkish. Stewart's energetic campaigning on behalf of the 9/11 first responders
(the emergency services who were first on the scene, many of whom later suffered debilitating illnesses),
prompted the New York Times to compare him to Walter Cronkite and Edward R Murrow, the most revered
newscasters in American history. It is a delicious irony that in the world of American TV news, one
populated by raging egotists and self-aggrandisers, the person who is generally cited as the most
influential is Stewart – a man so disinterested in his own celebrity, he often didn't bother to collect
his 18 Emmys, preferring to stay at home with his family.
When George Bush left office in 2008, some worried that Stewart would run out of material. This proved
as shortsighted as the hope that Obama would be America's grand salvation. Stewart, who describes
himself as "a leftist", has always hammered the Democrats with the vigour of a disappointed supporter,
and subjected Obama to one of his most damaging interviews during his first term: the president
admitted that his 2008 slogan probably should have been "Yes We Can, But..." At the time, Stewart
laughed, but today he admits with a shrug, "It was heartbreaking. It's generally heartbreaking –
that's what the gig is."
Jon Stewart gave Barack Obama one of his toughest interviews, suggesting his 2008 election
slogan should have been 'Yes we can, but…'
His seemingly effortless interview with Tony Blair in 2008 cut through Blair's crusader mentality
in a mere six minutes, as Stewart calmly rejected Blair's theory that any kind of military action
can keep the west safe. As Blair stammered, huffed and shifted in his seat, Stewart concluded that:
"19 people flew into the towers. It seems hard for me to imagine that we could go to war enough,
to make the world safe enough, that 19 people wouldn't want to do harm to us. So it seems like we
have to rethink a strategy that is less military-based." This was Stewart at his best; it's also
fair to say that some of the interviews, generally those with actors and authors, seem like mere
puffery, a point with which Stewart agrees (he embraces criticism as eagerly as he deflects compliments).
... ... ...
Stewart likes to credit "the team", but given that he has always been deeply involved in the script
(unusually for a host), writing and rewriting drafts right up to the last minute, the show will be
a pretty different beast without him. He has described his successor, the South African comedian
Trevor Noah, as "incredibly thoughtful, considerate and funny", and defended him when it was discovered,
to widespread fury, that Noah had in the past tweeted offensive jokes about Jews, overweight women
and transgender people.
The furore over Noah's tweets reflects just how high Stewart has set the bar. There was such an outpouring
of grief when he announced he was stepping down, that he mused on air the following day, "Did I die?"
Even the normally dispassionate New Yorker magazine claimed, under the headline Jon Stewart, We Need
You In 2016, "the last hope for bringing some rationality to the 2016 Presidential field died". Not
since Oprah Winfrey announced her retirement from network television has a US TV host's departure
received such international coverage, but Stewart bridles when I make the Winfrey comparison: "If
Oprah can leave and the world still spins, I honestly think it will survive me."
And it should be noted that not everyone was distraught. Fox News, displaying its mastery of making
colour-based accusations about the kettle from its pot-based position, reported that Stewart was
"not a force for good" and that his sustained criticisms of the right "had no foothold in the facts".
The Daily Show duly responded with a Vine of Fox News' best factual distortions.
... ... ...
In 2010, Stewart hosted a Rally To Restore Sanity in Washington DC, attracting 215,000 people, who
cheered him on as he berated the media, or "the country's 24-hour politico–pundit-perpetual-panic-'conflictinator'."
... ... ...
My biggest objection to Fox News, I say, is not the scaremongering, it's the way it's reshaped
the Republican party. It will misrepresent social and economic issues, and promote the more extreme
elements of the party, politicians such as Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee, in a way that is hugely
detrimental to American politics. (For the record, Rupert Murdoch disagrees, and last year claimed
that Fox News "absolutely saved" the Republican party.) "Watching these channels all day is incredibly
depressing," says Stewart. "I live in a constant state of depression. I think of us as turd miners.
I put on my helmet, I go and mine turds, hopefully I don't get turd lung disease."
... ... ...
Jon Stuart Leibowitz was born in New York and raised in New Jersey, the son of a teacher and a
professor of physics. He grew up in the shadow of the Vietnam war and Watergate, events that left
him, he has said in the past, "with a healthy scepticism towards official reports". He jokingly recalls
the time his older brother fired him from his first job at Woolworths as one of the defining, "scarring
events" of his youth. But his parents' divorce when he was 11 was clearly more so, prompting him
to drop his surname and eventually legally change it to Stewart. He has described his relationship
with his father as still "complicated". "There was a thought of using my mother's maiden name, but
I thought that would be just too big a fuck you to my dad," he says. "Did I have some problems with
my father? Yes. Yet people always view it [changing his surname] through the prism of ethnic identity."
So it was a family thing as opposed to a Jewish thing? "Right. So whenever I criticise Israel's
actions it's [he puts on a Yiddishy accent] 'He's changed his name! He's not a Jew! He hates himself!'
And I'm like, 'I hate myself for a lot of reasons, but not because I'm Jewish.'"
After college, Stewart performed on the standup circuit in New York, landing his own talkshow on
MTV in the 1990s. In 1999, he took over the then little-loved Daily Show on Comedy Central, turning
it from hit-and-miss satire to the news- and politics-focused programme it is today. Coming to it
at 38, he says, the job was so ideal, "I couldn't have created one better".
Since Stewart announced his departure, much has been written about him being the most trusted news
source for young Americans. Stewart kiboshes this as "conventional wisdom. In the sea of information
that surrounds people of that generation, I'd be truly surprised if their only news comes four days
of the week, for a few minutes a night." He laughs when I describe him as a celebrity ("I'm not Madonna!"
he hoots, raising an eyebrow). The only restriction fame has put on his freedom, he says, is "I don't
hang out on the Upper West Side during Sukkot". Isn't he being a bit faux modest, I ask, especially
when he insists that what he does is comedy and not news? That comes with a certain profile. He thinks
about this for a few seconds. "It's not that I… I mean, it's satire, so it's an expression of real
feelings. So I don't mean that in the sense of, 'I don't mean this.' What I mean is, the tools of
satire should not be confused with the tools of news. We use hyperbole, but the underlying sentiment
has to feel ethically, intentionally correct, otherwise we wouldn't do it."
'Would I watch Fox News? If it was a nuclear winter and it might help my family'
... ... ...
IMNonsuch Alyeska 18 Apr 2015 18:29
I would have gone for Tina Fey, or Amy Poehler, but preferably Tina. I think the show could
do with a woman and her talent for absurdity dishep up with a straight face would fit the bill
IMNonsuch 18 Apr 2015 18:22
It's not possible that he doesn't realise why he is considered the most trusted news source
by so many. Underneath the satire, there is a layer of perspective that he offers. And precisely
because he offers it, but doesn't thrust it upon his viewers, that is why he is trusted by his
audience. And as I wrote above, it's inconceivable that he is unaware of that.
fraac1 tankerton 18 Apr 2015 18:12
I've watched The Daily Show and, until it finished, The Colbert Report for several years by
torrenting them as soon as they appeared (very quickly). Both far superior to news commentary
we have in Britain.
Nicholas Rios 18 Apr 2015 18:08
Television icon. Modern philosopher. Thanks Mr. Stewart.
Alyeska bjammin187 18 Apr 2015 18:06
I'd offer Samantha Bee double to please please retire from television. She's not funny, she's
John Oliver would have been the perfect choice - or, Tina Fey!
Nicholas Rios Wynters 18 Apr 2015 18:04
John Oliver was on Stewart's show. Even hosted it for 3 months. Are you daft?
Westy61 MsTeatime 18 Apr 2015 18:00
Every Iranian government post-revolution has abused the human rights of the people it finds
That would be every single Iranian government after the CIA/MI6 lead coup that overthrew the democratically
elected Mosaddeq government and installed the despot Shah-an-Shah Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi whose
CIA trained SAVAK secret police were notorious for torture and executions, wouldn't it?
Bluejil 18 Apr 2015 17:58
"the country's 24-hour politico–pundit-perpetual-panic-'conflictinator'."
Hilarious and not something that only happens in the US, we have it here too and so very true!
I was living in the US during the first Bush term, after 9/11 it was quite frightening, the media
pandering to Bush. Stewart was the only voice telling the truth and challenging the media.
For sixteen years he continued to do so and he deserves high praise for that, a remarkable
and very funny man.
George Silversurfer 18 Apr 2015 17:50
i used to feel Colbert was the right successor to David Letterman...but now i believe John
Stewart might have been a better fit.
DCJ1987 18 Apr 2015 17:46
He has multi-millions of dollars, got tired of doing the same O same O, & needs a change in
his mid-life. He'll play golf with friends like of Bill O'Reilly, Will Ferrell, Sean Hannity,
Tavis Smiley, & Rush Limbaugh. Go on shows like Bill Maher's, Tonight with Jimmy Fallon, & the
New Late Night with Stephen Colbert. He'll be paid $275,000.00 for speeches, too.
bjammin187 harpedonaptae 18 Apr 2015 17:38
Just wondering if you voted for G W Bush. If so, what did you confuse for leadership there?
bjammin187 reddan 18 Apr 2015 17:33
Nope. He made Blair squirm. What should he have done? Perform a citizens arrest?
Nicko Thime 18 Apr 2015 17:31
The world is a better place for John Stewart having done the yeoman work he has done for the
past years. Those who are his audience have long been recognized as the most informed, mostly
due to his efforts.
I am sad to see him leave, but look forward to new blood in the spot as well was wishing this
great observer of the American condition the best of luck.
Thanks, Mr. Stewart.
Phil Smith 18 Apr 2015 17:16
I've just read this sentence: "The furore over Noah's tweets reflects just how high Stewart
has set the bar." ... which is of itself a reflection on how Twitter, currently, has the sway,
as the lazy current affairs writer's Wikipedia, I think... mind you, I'm writing below the line
and it is a little late.
goto100 18 Apr 2015 17:08
Someone who thinks Elizabeth Warren (ex-Republican, neo-liberal supporter of Israel above everything
and frenemy of banks) is the solution to all the world's ills, is "left wing"? And the man who
"headed off the real left wing at the pass" with his "rally to maintain the status quo at all
costs, because, well...hell...I'm more tan alright, Jack", is on the side of the good guys?
Wow, that shark you jumped was big, Guardian.
Thomas19999 Sue Cormack 18 Apr 2015 16:44
Always assuming your intelligence intellect and interests are not restricted UK air space only,
please watch a few days of the Daily Show
If you have an interest in US and world events and politics it will help you appreciate the
show and laugh more often
SonOfTheDesert percy123 18 Apr 2015 16:42
The Guardian has more readers in the US than anywhere else.
Why is anyone still making a fuss about this?
1984farm 18 Apr 2015 16:37
Over the Iron Curtain, in Poland during the 70-s,the government allowed that kind of political
satire on the state radio ( channel 3 ) as a safety valve.
Since I moved to the West ,Jon Stewart and old reruns of Monty Python helped me to adjust to
the brave new world.
I hope , one day there will be people just like him.
Wynters Mike Resvit 18 Apr 2015 16:28
Kudos for the irony (although it's a bit too thick), but have you ever heard of John Oliver?
I know he's a Brit and so he's probably not made it onto the the US circuit (and someone like
Jon Stewart would never be seen dead on the same network, let alone in the same room) but he's
RonnieHubbard tankerton 18 Apr 2015 16:12
there are many ways to watch the daily show in the uk
and there really aren't many better comedians than him, but to say he's a comedian is too simplistic.
It's like saying Ricky Gervais is just a comedian. Like they are both comedians, but they're a
different style of comedian to say Jack Whitehall or Jimmy Carr
There isn't really a British version, (unless you count John Oliver) of him. There isn't a British
show anything like his.
Thomas Seymour LetThemSnortCoke 18 Apr 2015 16:11
I was ten when the US participation in the Vietnam war ended. It cast a shadow on US culture
and politics for many years after that.
Mike Resvit tankerton 18 Apr 2015 16:09
Yeah, that's why so many Brit comedians are so well known over here...not. We know some of
your actors, we know some of your politicians and your royals but pretty much none of your so-called
comedians. It's because they're not funny. They simply can't cut it here. Some have tried, a few
standup comedians, but they ended up running back to merry 'ol England with their metaphorical
tales between their legs. You people wouldn't know funny if it smacked you in your face like a
yob high on molly. Your Eurocentric existence precludes you from having much of a personality
or a sense of humor.
It's an "American thing, you wouldn't understand" is appropriate here in that life in the US,
when compared to every other nationality on earth, is so unique, so different, that foreigners
cannot begin to comprehend. You simply have to "live here" to get it and you have to live here
for years, if not decades. The rest of the world is like 1960's America when it comes to pretty
much everything social. We honestly feel sorry for you guys for being so backwards.
PotholeKid easternCanada 18 Apr 2015 16:04
Yup.. he gives just a little taste of reality... but the truth, well Americans can't handle
Sue Cormack Eric Walker 18 Apr 2015 16:02
Exactly. I know we export a load of crap to the US and, good on you for rejecting a fair whack
Thomas Seymour BlogAnarchist 18 Apr 2015 16:01
Should have cut off that last sentence at the dash - or maybe just a word shorter.
Tanvirnator Sue Cormack 18 Apr 2015 16:01
Because his integrity and sense of social justice is inspiring.
"And now, ladies and gentlemen, if you'll just follow me over in this direction, I'd like to show
you one of our rarest and most reviled species here at The Human Zoo – it's the proverbial 'Reagan
"Most of your younger visitors here at the Zoo have no idea what a Reagan Democrat could be, so
I always like to take the time to explain it to them. Indeed, most of them don't even know what Reagan
was, except that they keep hearing the people who wrecked Old America talk about this wrinkled prune
faced guy with the Gumby hair as if he were some sort of deity. I get a lot of questions about how
someone could actually have done things that don't sound even remotely plausible, but I generally
leave that for the historians to explain, other than to remind people that injecting religious dogma
into politics doesn't just mean stupidity only when it comes to policies related to sexuality, war,
taxation, the economy or the environment.
"But already I digress... The Reagan Democrat (technically, Imbecelicus politici) was always
the strangest and most contemptuous of species from the habitat of American politics, as you've perhaps
already heard. Try to imagine another example from the animal kingdom that could be so readily counted
upon to bring harm upon itself and others. There are some of course, but usually they are simply
ignorant animals, often with very limited cranial capacity.
"The Reagan Democrat, on the other hand, was simply obnoxiously greedy, and took great pains to
aggregate to itself as much stuff as was possible, including even meaningless psychological affirmations
of its existential worth. It wasn't very long, of course, before another animal in the jungle noticed
this tendency, and established a parasitic relationship with the Reagan Democrat. These others were
known as The Wealthy (Plutocratus illegitimi), and they got very rich – though they could
still never seem to achieve happiness – by exploiting the opportunities provided to them by the Reagan
Democrat. A very mean-spirited and deceitful group of marketing gurus like Lee Atwater and Karl Rove
were generally the weapon of choice for accomplishing this.
"Anyhow, before we enter the exhibit, perhaps I should stop now and take any questions. Yes, you,
young lady, what can I tell you?"
"Well, sir, you've never quite defined what a Reagan Democrat is. And, especially, why someone
associated with Mr. Reagan would be a Democrat. Wasn't he from that other party, the, uh..., the...
Regressocans? ...the Degenocrats?"
"Ah, fine questions, indeed, and you're quite right that I've been remiss in not explaining those
fundamentals so far. It's an occupational hazard, I suppose. We zoo curators get so caught up in
admiring our own erudition that we sometimes we forget to do our jobs properly!
"Speaking of which, where were we...? Oh, yes, I was going to answer your questions about the
meaning of this term. First of all, let's get that political party name straight. Reagan was a Republican.
That's what makes the creature we're about to see so interesting. It came from working class roots,
often recently arrived just a generation earlier from some very poor Eastern European country or
such. Its local social unit had only recently been elevated to the middle class, and this achievement
had everything to do with the progressive policies the Democratic Party. For the first time ever,
and because of these policies, it had a good job, a house in the suburbs, two cars, and it could
send its offspring to institutions of higher education which had previously been reserved exclusively
for elites, as represented by Mr. Reagan's party.
"But it was very, very greedy, and thus differentiated itself off into a new species which was
marked by the fact that it could have its underdeveloped psychology readily appealed to for purposes
of exploitation by Republican operatives, representing the economic elite species. In fact, it was
actually pretty easy to do. All they had to do was throw some line about an evil foreign bogeyman
down to the Reagan Democrat, or perhaps a story about uppity darker skinned members of the genus,
or some televised ruse about how very, very bad people were out to destroy Christmas, the silly religious
holiday of yore... Anything like that would generally work.
"It really didn't matter very much what ploy was chosen, though the more naked the appeal to greed
or vanity, the better. For instance, a handful of elites could carve out for themselves massive chunks
of the commonwealth's (formerly) common wealth, but as long as they tossed a few pennies in the direction
of the Reagan Democrat at the same time, the latter was sure to support what amounted to his or her
own financial undoing, every time. Likewise, since the Reagan Democrat tended to be the most fearful
and the most self-loathing of animals in the human sphere, the basest appeals to its vanity could
also buy votes en masse, and on the cheap, too. You just had to make him feel a little bigger than
someone else – women, foreigners, brown people, homosexuals – it didn't really matter. Then you could
get his vote and pick his pocket."
Noting that the Valero Energy representative had been coming to his office for more than a decade
now, Sen. John Cornyn (R‑TX) told reporters Thursday that he now knows the regular lobbyist's order
without even having to be told.
"Pete always drops in Monday mornings around eight on his way to work-well, you see the same
friendly face year after year and you just pick up on what he wants,"
said Cornyn, adding that he's typically already preparing the lobbyist's usual order of tax breaks
and fossil fuel subsidies even as he's taking off his coat.
"Every once in a while, he'll throw me a curveball and ask for a rider slashing regulations
on greenhouse gas emissions, but for the most part, he knows what he likes and sticks with it.
The way I see it, folks will always come back if you treat them right."
At press time, the lobbyist had arrived right on time and was getting settled in his usual seat.
WASHINGTON-Saying the Likud Party leader had set Israeli citizens' expectations extremely high in
the run up to his reelection Tuesday, top-level sources expressed their worry Wednesday about whether
the United States would actually be able to live up to Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu's
"Given the ambitious list of security and spending initiatives that Netanyahu
guaranteed Israeli voters on the campaign trail, I think it could be very difficult for the U.S.
to come through on all of them; the pressure's really going to be on America not to disappoint his
constituents," said U.S. State Department spokesman Eric Patel, explaining that, realistically, the
U.S. would likely have trouble following through on Netanyahu's repeated vows on the campaign trail
to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon at any cost and continuing to thwart the creation
of a Palestinian state.
"He made a bold personal pledge to every voter that Israel's military capabilities would be considerably
bolstered under his watch, which is going to be real tough for us to accomplish. I'm afraid we might
end up having to eat his words." With Netanyahu's extensive agenda laid out before the U.S., Patel
added that America would likely just have to increase its annual $3.1 billion in aid to Israel a
little further and hope for the best.
In a concerted effort to ease growing tensions between the two nations, Israeli prime minister
Benjamin Netanyahu assured his critics Monday that he still has the utmost respect for U.S. money.
"Relations between our two countries have at times been strained, but I promise you all that the
entire Israeli government, myself included, still holds a high opinion of the United States' cash,"
said Netanyahu, emphasizing that his speech to Congress was not intended to show any disrespect for
American funding whatsoever. "I appreciate everything U.S. money has done for Israel.
Though we come at this issue from different perspectives, I have no doubt that we can overcome
this disagreement and maintain positive relations between Israel and U.S. economic aid, as we always
have." Netanyahu added that he also maintained great respect for the U.S. military's weapons.
WASHINGTON-Fueling further speculation this week that she has her sights set on the Oval Office,
former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is said to have hinted at her presidential ambitions by
concealing a vast trove of information from the American people. "By using a personal email account
to keep records out of the hands of investigators and the U.S. populace, Clinton is making it resoundingly
clear that she has presidential aspirations," said political analyst Stuart Rothenberg, adding that
Clinton's efforts to obfuscate basic facts and hide thousands of documents from taxpayers for years
on end demonstrate her capacity to successfully perform the duties of the commander-in-chief. "Clinton
is showing voters that she's ready and willing to circumvent regulations in order to keep Americans
in the dark on important issues and prevent anyone from uncovering potentially incriminating evidence.
This is definitely her most unambiguous declaration of her intentions at a presidential run." Rothenberg
added that Clinton's flimsy justifications for her actions and her efforts to deflect blame further
prove that she will handily win the Democratic nomination in 2016.
10. Both use made up names. Stalin's family name was Jugashvilli, Nuland's ancestor's name was Nudelman.
The ancestors of both Nuland and Stalin came from the Russian empire, which probably gave them both
the idea that they have a special knowledge of how to handle Russia.
right hand man happens to be her husband, Robert Kagan. Stalin's right hand man was a fellow communist,
named Lazar Kagan(ovich). Kagan co-authored "Project for a New American Century" and he obviously
wants to realized his vision for Ukraine by implementing what might be called, "amerikanizatsiia,"
that is, the process of bringing in the officials from US and other countries to run Ukraine along
the American lines. In his turn, Kaganovich was the
First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Ukrainian SSR from 1925-1928 and was expected to
usher in "New Soviet Century" through the politics of
a new ruling Soviet elite for Ukraine, the elite brought in primarily from other places.
8. Both are clear ideologues: Nuland of "neocon movement", Stalin of bolshevism.
Both went to schooling with the masters and chief ideologues. Nuland worked closely with
and Cheney, starting as Vice President's senior aide, and eventually serving as his deputy national
adviser. In his essay for Financial Times, Geoff
Dyer quotes an former colleague in the Obama administration State Department , who observed that
"I have no doubt that when she sits down for a family dinner, she is the biggest neocon at the table."
While Lenin's widower, Krupskaia, joked that had Lenin re-appeared when Stalin was already in charge,
he would have had Lenin put to jail for deviating from the party course.
7. Both are willing to see through numerous deaths in Ukraine to get the territory
under their influence. Stalin together with Kaganovich unleashed forced collectivization upon Ukraine,
resulting in mass death of peasants, known as Holodomor. Nuland's and her fellow neocons' forced
"americanization" resulted in the civil war between Donbass and Kiev, that so far has claimed thousands
of lives, destroyed infrastructure, and produced hundreds of thousands of refugees.
6. They both tend to be aggressive and demanding and refuse to take no for an
answer. Consequently, they prefer to squeeze their opponents till they break. Geoff Dyer's
quotes Dimitri Simes, president of the Center for the National Interest in Washington DC who
observed: "It is clear that her whole approach is to push Russia so hard that it has no choice but
to accommodate the US." Stalin's ability to squeeze his opponents is, of course, proverbial.
5. According to Stalin's critic, Abdurakhman Aftorkhanov, Stalin made two mistakes
during the WWII. He showed Europe to Russians (soldiers who saw how prosperous it was and realized
that they were duped). And he showed Russians to Europe – which got scared, and started NATO, and
other programs. The fate of Russia and the rest of the world has changed as the result of these mistakes.
Someday, Nuland's critics will charge her with accomplishing a similar feat. She has fully exposed
to the Western world Ukraine's lawlessness, corruption, and neofascism. And she has amply demonstrated
Western World to both Ukrainians and Russians, who will never trust it again: seeing its unscrupulous
meddling into their affairs.
4. Both are too arrogant and impatient to waste their time of diplomacy, and
prefer to cut to the chase. They dismiss the possible opposition or obstacles with the similar terms.
"F..k EU," famously observed Nuland, in response to the questions about EU attitude toward the regime
change in Ukraine. Stalin never hesitated to resort to the foul language, calling Lenin's wife, "syphilitic
whore," or bragging that in the course of WWII he managed to outsmart Great Britain: "Stalin
could always raise a laugh from his courtiers by saying, as he often did: 'We f***ed England!'"
3. Both prefer to rule by decree and appoint the people to the offices. While
Nuland boldly proclaimed from the comfort of her office that Yatseniuk will be the future leader
of Ukraine: "Yats is the man," Stalin, of course, went even further, not only assigning Kaganovich,
Khrushchev, and others to run Ukraine, but threating Lenin's widow, Krupskaia, that if she continues
to challenge him, he'll appoint another woman as Lenin's widow.
2. Similarly to Stalin, who for the sake of strategic purposes made the deal
with Nazis (Ribbentrop), Nuland held various
meetings with Ukraine's Right Sector and other ultra-nationalist, neo-fascist
organizations; and seems to be very cozy with Svoboda leader, Oleh
1. And finally, both Stalin and Nuland tend to present themselves in stunning
visual imagery as the good caring parents of the new nation, easily duping the gullible locals. Here
is Stalin surrounded by admiring Soviet children who are forever grateful to him for their happy
and here is
Nuland, surrounded by happy Ukrainians, whom she feeds with
pastry as they
are ready to embark on the path toward the new statehood.
Stalin cookies vs Nuland cookies (or Ukrainians as clueless children)
John Kerry about King Abdullah: King Abdullah was a man of wisdom and vision. US
has lost a friend & Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Middle East, and world has lost a revered leader,
John Kerry on Russia: "You just don't, in the 21st century, behave in a 19th century
[Jan 23, 2015]
The president of the country that calls itself "democratic" praises the most absolutist monarchy
;-). This is a good theme for Saturday Night or John Stuard show... I think US president reach level
of contempt' of its citizens that was previous achieved only by the Secretary of CPUSU Brezhnev.
Statement by the President on the Death of King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz
It is with deep respect that I express my personal condolences and the sympathies of the American
people to the family of King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz and to the people of Saudi Arabia.
King Abdullah's life spanned from before the birth of modern Saudi Arabia through its emergence
as a critical force within the global economy and a leader among Arab and Islamic nations. He
took bold steps in advancing the Arab Peace Initiative, an endeavor that will outlive him as an
enduring contribution to the search for peace in the region. At home, King Abdullah's
vision was dedicated to the education of his people and to greater engagement with the world.
As our countries worked together to confront many challenges, I always valued King Abdullah's
perspective and appreciated our genuine and warm friendship. As a leader, he was always candid
and had the courage of his convictions. One of those convictions was his steadfast and
passionate belief in the importance of the U.S.-Saudi relationship as a force for stability and
security in the Middle East and beyond. The closeness and strength of the partnership
between our two countries is part of King Abdullah's legacy.
This year saw the "fake news" landscape shift in unexpected ways, with the departure of "The Colbert
Report," and the swift rise of John Oliver. But through all of the changes, we've had the steady,
but never boring, voice of Jon Stewart leading the way.
Since 1999, Jon Stewart has been at the helm of "The Daily Show," offering an outlet for disaffected
liberals and helping to foster an entire generation of comedy stalwarts. And while some have
grown tired of his trademark snark, there is still no doubting his impact on popular culture.
This year was an eventful one for Stewart, who branched outside of the world of comedy with his
"Rosewater." More so than ever, people are wondering what "The Daily Show" looks like after Jon
Stewart. But that time hasn't come just yet.
Here were his best moments from 2014:
One of the most amazing aspects of Jon Stewart's "The Daily Show" is its ability to nurture,
support and elevate an impressive group of comedians. This was made quite apparent in 2014. Here's
a taste of the incredible voices of "The Daily Show":
"Jessica's Feminized Atmosphere" shows why Jessica Williams is the greatest.
The show was so good and so meticulously performed that you could, in fact, not watch it. That,
too, is high praise. It's rare for a show and a performer to become so enmeshed with the zeitgeist
that ratings become a moot point. Only the most loyal citizens of the so-called Colbert Nation truly
needed their nightly dose of the layered political satire that Colbert mastered in the guise of "Stephen
Colbert," a narcissistic, conservative blowhard spouting his fact-averse commentary on the day's
The rest of us could instead check in from time to time and make sure his carefully constructed outrage
and indignation were still very much attuned to the degrees of viral outrage and deep indignation
that have come to define American life in the early 21st century. The Colbert era was in the air
as much as on the air, as the show's best work took morning victory laps on Internet news feeds.
The joke caught on and never exhausted itself. What we were seeing was the perfect indictment of
the world of political punditry, yes, but also a send-up of our inflexibility when it came to opinions,
reason and the truth. "Truthiness," an early invention of the Colbert shtick, allowed its host to
have it both ways, as a buffoon who holds objectionable opinions that he intends his liberal-leaning
audience to object to by pretending to bask in his jingo-wingo patriotism. "Anyone can read the news
to you," Colbert said on the show's first episode. "I promise to feel the news at you."
"The Colbert Report" was both a spin-off from and essential companion piece to "The Daily Show
With Jon Stewart," which airs before it. Together - yet pretending to be ideologically apart - Stewart
and Colbert occupied a rare, perfect melding of the serious and the satirical during a period in
which the country was at war abroad and experiencing a series of nervous breakdowns at home.
... ... ...
"We know that polls are just statistics that reflect what people are thinking in 'reality,' " Colbert
told the audience at the White House Correspondents Association dinner in 2006. "And reality has
a well-known liberal bias." His monologue then proceeded to strafe an audience filled with media
people, politicians, cabinet members, generals, a president and a first lady. It was at once quietly
horrifying and frankly beautiful.
After that night, it seemed as if our world had sorted itself in yet one more way: People who
got Colbert and the dolts who didn't; people who were in on the act and people who were congenitally
impervious to it
... ... ...
In personal moments, such as a videotaped Q&A with Google employees two years ago, Colbert referred
to the character he played on "The Colbert Report" as "a well-intentioned, poorly informed, high-status
idiot. … He is living an unexamined life and that's fine with him."
... ... ...
Watching his final shows, it's clear that Colbert the actor intends to seal the "Stephen Colbert"
character away forever. "The Colbert Report" is leaving a world largely unchanged; almost eerily,
the long-awaited report on CIA torture arrived as a grim flashback to the era in which the show began.
The nation made almost no progress on the biggies - the wars, the environment, the bickering, the
wealth gap. Noting that China had released a statement asking, "How long can America pretend to be
a human rights champion?" Colbert replied: "Uh, I don't know - for about as long as I can pretend
I don't know who made my iPhone?"
Hank Stuever has been The Post's TV critic since 2009. He joined the paper in 1999 as a writer
for the Style section, where he has covered an array of popular (and unpopular) culture across the
"...so many still maintain that America is the greatest nation in the world.
They swear that America represents all that is good; freedom, democracy, merit based capitalism and
the rights of the individual. That is true America does represent such things. However, it
is fraudulent to consider our current nation America. America was a concept that promoted
all that is good. And so it would seem that the nation in which they find themselves cannot be America.
Their nation today represents the will of the political class at all costs, period. Their sole motivation
is themselves. Very different from America. And so perhaps a renaming on the nation is required,
at least until or if the people decide to take it back and reintroduce the world to the concept that
is America for as discussed below you cannot destroy a concept and so there is hope to bring her
back. But until then we need a name for this geographic region and its new societal system...
It seems"Neoconica" is most fitting."
Here's how the European powers (including Imperial Russia) and Japan were portrayed in their concerted
attempt to divvy up the Chinese Empire at the turn of the 20th century.
That Chinese pie in the drawing could very well be replaced by a Russian one nowadays and a
symbolic figure for the USA would have to be included, of course, to replace the one portraying
I love the way a grim Victoria locks eyes with an even grimmer Prussian, probably Bismarck.
Look how sweet La France looks, pure innocence, and how gentle is the Tsar …
Btw – the Germans did get a Chinee 'colony', and were told to bloody well fight during the Boxer
uprising: "Germans to the front" – that is a call which would have the present-day Germans rolling
on the floor with mirth, given the state of the Bundeswehr.
Such cartoons could of course never
be made today, because they're racist, innit, and demeaning. But this does depict the mindset
still prevalent in the Western upper levels of 'Mandarindom', replacing the gentle Tsar with a
very gentle Uncle Sam and the 'Chinaman' with a Russian peasant.
No, it's Kaiser Bill with his patented waxed moustache with the ends pointing upwards to the heavens.
It really was patented as well!
As regards the Boxer Rebellion and the German participation
therein, that's how the Germans got labelled as "Huns", because the daft Kaiser made a rather
silly speech (Hunnenrede) to his expeditionary force before it embarked for China:
Bremerhaven, July 27, 1900
"Great overseas tasks have fallen to the new German Empire, tasks far greater than many of
my countrymen expected. The German Empire has, by its very character, the obligation to assist
its citizens if they are being set upon in foreign lands. The tasks that the old Roman Empire
of the German nation was unable to accomplish, the new German Empire is in a position to fulfill.
The means that make this possible is our army.
It has been built up during thirty years of faithful, peaceful labour, following the principles
of my blessed grandfather. You, too, have received your training in accordance with these principles,
and by putting them to the test before the enemy, you should see whether they have proved their
worth in you. Your comrades in the navy have already passed this test; they have shown that the
principles of your training are sound, and I am also proud of the praise that your comrades have
earned over there from foreign leaders. It is up to you to emulate them.
A great task awaits you: you are to revenge the grievous injustice that has been done. The
Chinese have overturned the law of nations; they have mocked the sacredness of the envoy, the
duties of hospitality in a way unheard of in world history. It is all the more outrageous that
this crime has been committed by a nation that takes pride in its ancient culture. Show the old
Prussian virtue. Present yourselves as Christians in the cheerful endurance of suffering. May
honour and glory follow your banners and arms. Give the whole world an example of manliness and
You know full well that you are to fight against a cunning, brave, well-armed, and cruel enemy.
When you encounter him, know this: no quarter will be given. Prisoners will not be taken. Exercise
your arms such that for a thousand years no Chinese will dare to look cross-eyed at a German.
Maintain discipline. May God's blessing be with you, the prayers of an entire nation and my good
wishes go with you, each and every one. Open the way to civilization once and for all! Now you
may depart! Farewell, comrades!"
The unofficial but correct version of the crucial passage reads as follows:
"Should you encounter the enemy, he will be defeated! No quarter will be given! Prisoners will
not be taken! Whoever falls into your hands is forfeited. Just as a thousand years ago the Huns
under their King Attila made a name for themselves, one that even today makes them seem mighty
in history and legend, may the name German be affirmed by you in such a way in China that no Chinese
will ever again dare to look cross-eyed at a German."
[Source: Johannes Prenzler, ed., Die Reden Kaiser Wilhelms II. [The Speeches of Kaiser Wilhelm
II]. 4 volumes. Leipzig, n.d., 2. pp. 209-12.]
THe Hun reference was removed from the official records after the shit had hit the fan because
of what the Kaiser had said. However, the unofficial version of what Wilhelm II said before his
troops at Bremerhaven is still accessible:
Unofficial version of speech reprinted in Manfred Görtemaker, Deutschland im 19. Jahrhundert.
Entwicklungslinien [Germany in the 19th Century. Paths in Development]. Opladen 1996. Schriftenreihe
der Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung, vol. 274, p. 357.
Translation: Thomas Dunlap
Source: GDHI (above)
Some think that Merkel's latest tirade against Russia is similar to the Kaiser's "Hun Speech":
I wonder if the cartoonist has made Queen Victoria and Kaiser Wilhelm II look very similar because
she was, in fact, his maternal grandmother?
It's interesting too that the cartoonist has shown
the Kaiser grasping his carving knife with both hands.
Political cartoonists often made it clear that the unfortunate Kaiser had a withered left arm,
the result of his clumsily manipulated breech birth.
The Kaiser quite successfully concealed this defect by means of special tailoring and having
his shorter "dead" left arm covered by padded clothing and his gloved left hand attach to his
jacket, tunic, sword handle or whatever, as can be seen below in this 1905 picture taken of him
and Tsar Nicholas II, in which photograph the two emperors are wearing the military uniforms of
each other's country:
As a matter of fact, I'm quite fond of Kaiser Bill. I think he was basically a decent bloke
– but he had "problems", not least of which was his disabilility.
It would have been far better if his father had not died shortly after having become Kaiser.
Wilhelm II's father, Kaiser Friedrich III, died of throat cancer after having only been
Kaiser and King of Prussia for a mere 3 months in 1888. His wife was Queen Victoria's eldest
Friedrich was extremely liberal in his politics. I remember reading somewhere that old Queen
Vic used to admonish her mob whenever they strarted ridiculing Wilhelm II's posturing, telling
them that they should never forget how decent a sort "Uncle Fritz" had been and what a pity
it had been that he had died so young – and that his dickhead son had ascended the throne.
(My words, at the end, not Her Majesty's.)
This is how Fritz Lang depicted German (on the left) vs. Hun (on the right) in his great film,
(P.S. – the image is not as racist as it looks. In the film, Atilla is the only actual noble
character. Although the Germans are given a pass for their odious behavior, on the grounds
that, whichever side they are fighting on, they are bound by an unbreakable oath.)
This hardly can be called humor. Those killing probably will not make the USA new friends, no matter
how much NED and USAID would spend for the promotion of democracy in those countries...
This clip is perfect to have a good debate about a serious issue, but we have to suffer the
fucking trolls ruining the conversation. When is Google going to acknowledge that they have ruined
the youtube comments? ...
"Right now we have the executive branch making a claim that it has the right to kill anyone,
anywhere on Earth, at any time, for secret reasons based on secret evidence, in a secret process
undertaken by unidentified officials.
That frightens me." This is how Rosa Brooks, a Georgetown professor and former Pentagon official
under President Obama, explained the US policy on drone strikes during a congressional hearing
Anger over a disallowed goal in the Winter Olympic ice hockey has united host nation Russia, though
not for the reasons President Vladimir Putin would have wanted.
The American referee's refusal to count what would have been a winning goal for Russia against
the United States on Saturday outraged fans from across the political divide, breaking down barriers
in a way that almost nothing else can in Russia.
"The puck was in the goal. What an abomination. Cheating before the whole world! Disgusting!"
Alexei Pushkov, a senior pro-Putin member of parliament, wrote in comments on Twitter lambasting
At the other end of the political spectrum, opposition leader Alexei Navalny backed the torrent
of abuse about the disallowed goal that quickly flooded Twitter: "I go along with everything that's
been said about the referee
The Daily Currant - a satire site that does
well to mask the fact that it is satire - has struck again ... It fooled this time even more people
then usual including an army of Facebook lemmings.
The man responsible for operating the Olympic Rings during last night's Winter Olympics opening ceremony
in Russia was found dead today.
According to local reports the body of Boris Avdeyev was found his hotel room early this morning
with multiple stab wounds....
Avdeyev was a technical specialist responsible for the Olympic Ring spectacle, which embarrassingly
malfunctioned last night. Five animatronic snowflakes were supposed to transform into Olympic Rings.
The first four functioned properly but the fifth snowflake failed to change shape.
Although his body was badly mangled and the wounds were consistent with a struggle, so far officials
say they don't suspect foul play.
"Sure there were stab wounds and bruises all over the body," admits the lead investigator on the
case. "But who knows what caused them. Maybe he tripped and fell on a set of knives. Right now we're
ruling this an accidental death.
"It's terrible when accidents like this happen. But then again, maybe Mr. Avdeyev should have
thought twice before he screwed up the Olympics. Accidents tend to happen to people who betray Russia."
Despite the government's story, fellow hotel guests reported hearing a struggle in Avdeyev's room
around 3 a.m. local time.
First of all he has stopped Western interference in Syria. That was totally anti-gay.
Then he has restored the Orthodox Church in Russia, after 80 years of Churches being forcefully
destroyed by Communists. That was totally anti-gay.
Then Putin has worked for peace with other nations. Totally anti-gay.
But Putin defends Russian interests. Totally anti-gay.
Also now we have British, French, Americans all attacking Ukraine and causing riots. They hope
to make a civil war that will then affect Russia. That will only cause a repeat of the Russian
revolution in Russia today. That is all the worst traits of Bolshevism brought back to today.
Sorry but again, we need to touch the theme of Olympics in Sochi...
Well, what we can do if new reasons to discuss it was provided by our foreign "partners" , many
of which just can't sleep because this most important international sporting event is held in Russia
One imagining that in Russia on every corner people with a long beard in hard boots and ugly "fufayka"
, tied with hemp instead of morning coffee drink the blood of gays and transvestites and lesbians,
sharing it with tame bears.
Other are preoccupied with the vision of Vladimir Putin personally shooting from "Maxim" machine
gun right on the Red Square Russian sportsmen who lost their events on Olympics.
Yet another can't sleep because of cost overruns that the sad fact that gold and treasure which
were safely hold in the distant mines since the time of Ivan the Terrible were wasted on Sochi Olympics;
by modest estimated no less that a kvadragintillion dollars ...
What is a " peaceful protest ", ie spell come in large numbers from Pindostana organizers or other
coup supporters in a surreal state?
This Orwellian principles according to the " truth - it's a lie ," "World - this is war ," etc.
Let's assume that protesters captured the New York City Hall. In a peaceful, naturally way. Which
is a lie, or more correctly - an oxymoron.
Now let's assume that the American special forces are not allowed to throw out rebels and let
officials in their offices in order to manage the municipal economy. Transport, running water, etc.
Now let's assume that all U.S. media with the exception spit on and redicult Bloomberg when he
tried to remove from the city Hall a bunch of comfortably feeling thier Republican homeless. Which
are constantly dumped from the other states sympathetic to Republicans. And those state provide them
with instructions - what they should do .
And how Democrat Obama reacts to the the situation of thousand of provincial Rednecks delivered
by buses from the most loyal Republicans states to the City Hall? Of course, the first thing to do
for him is to fire Bloomberg, Who betrayed his confidence . Well, if he was expelled from City Hall.
Never mind that at this time he was trying to organize at least some of the economic life of the
city offices prefectures. Bloomberg is a convenient scapegoat.
Meanwhile, on Wall Street Republican rural people from Colorado Springs organizes five-meter barricades
of shit, enclosed by barbed wire. On Broadway Avenue , on Wall Street , etc. In the format of " peaceful
protest ." How it can be otherwise? After all Obama did not signed important international agreement.
That's why Rednecks protest.
Obama is now deeply ashamed. He is ready to betray everybody and dismiss Bloomberg , and the CIA
and the FBI. And all his Democratic Party. Just to remain the president.
At rallies he is mocked by visiting senators and deputies from Holland, Germany , Burkina Faso
and others. Many outstanding historical personality come to help protesters.
Against the wall Obama gives the order to punish all his FBI and others three letter agencies
. And of couse to create a monument to all this nasty crowd around City Hall, who is defecating directly
on the streets. Monument is planned in the form of a five-meter bronze barricades. And still he will
be overthrow the next day.
Yes. That allegory demoxtrates pretty clearly that Yanukovych is absolutely fine character, with
the only problem that self-esteem is not known to him, but self preservation does. He does not feel
the pulse of history . And , most importantly, he betrayed and betraying his own supporters. It is
unlikely that such a policy has a future.
[Editor's Note:Many publications have advice columnists, but none has our
old friend Colonel Manners (ret.), whose experience in military and surveillance matters is
evident from his impressive CV (unfortunately, a classified document). His assignment: toanswer questions from Americans puzzled by the abstruse intricacies of the American way of war
and by the etiquette, manners, and language of the arcane national security world of Washington.
Here is a sampling of his recent correspondence.]
Dear Col. Manners,
I'm a 17-year-old high school student with an interest in American records. After college, I'm
hoping to land a job with Guinness World Records. So here's my question: I notice that
news reports regularly
refer to the Afghan War as the "longest in American history." How is that possible? The war began
in October 2001 and it's now December 2013. Counting on my fingers, I get 12 years. The Vietnam War
began in 1961 and didn't end until 1975 (with those
famous images of helicopters going over the side of an aircraft carrier). That's 14 years by
my count. I'm proud of American records of every sort, but this doesn't seem like one. What am I
Proud in Toledo
You have a lot to be proud of and, as far as I can tell, you have just the right number of fingers.
It's true that, historically, we've been numero uno among record-breaking countries. Still,
sometimes we get a little overeager. This is one of those cases. Clearly, those claiming the much
desired "longest" title for Afghanistan are cheating by counting the Vietnam War as starting in 1964
with Congress's Gulf of Tonkin resolution, or 1965 when the first official U.S. combat troops entered
that country, not in 1961, when significant numbers of armed "advisors" initially arrived.
But don't lose hope! Let me offer you some future numbers to be proud of. After all, at this moment
the Obama administration is negotiating to keep
15,000 of our troops in Afghanistan as trainers and to hunt al-Qaeda until 2024 ("or
beyond," as some reports say). If, despite the
machinations of that country's emotionally unhinged president, they succeed... well, you can
do the math yourself. That's a 23-year war, so put it in the American record books -- and by a long
But don't stop there. After all, the U.S. fought the Soviets in a
proxy war in Afghanistan from 1979 to 1989. I don't know Guinness World Records rules, but if
that decade is admissible, you've just left the 30-year war of the Vietnamese against the French
and the Americans in the trash heap of modern records, and the European
Thirty Years' War of
the seventeenth century in the dust. I won't claim that somewhere there hasn't been a longer war,
but this would still be one for the global record books. And keep in mind that all of this has taken
place in the landlocked backlands of the planet, a place most Americans couldn't have located on
a map before 1979.
Or let me put it this way and be a proud grandpa while I'm at it: my granddaughter Edna was born
in October 2001. Before 2024, if all goes well, she could have at least three tours of duty in Afghanistan!
So I say: 2024 or bust!
By Your Colleagues? Jon Stewart targeted Texas senator Ted Cruz over a possible presidential run
in 2016 that has people already lining up behind the conservative firebrand. For one thing, Stewart
pointed out Cruz isn't exactly the most liked senator by either party right now. But perhaps more
importantly, Ted Cruz was born in Canada.Stewart took on the surprising level of animosity Cruz has
garnered from both the left and right, including John McCain calling him a "wacko bird." Stewart
mocked Cruz raising questions about Chuck Hagel's possible terrorist ties by piling on, "He might
fuck puppies, I don't know!"And yet, the man described as the "most hated" in the Senate is considering
a run for the presidency. Stewart asked, "Why limit yourself to being hated by your colleagues when
you could be hated by the whole country?"
Stewart mocked Cruz's patriotism as so "American as apple pie that the government has laced with
flouride to dull you into handing over your guns." But there is one little snag with a potential
Cruz candidacy: HE WAS BORN IN CANADA.
Stewart tore into Cruz as "nothing but a dirty syrup-guzzler," and said that there's only one
person who can take this issue head-on: Donald "Fuckface von Clownstick" Trump. who should look into
there is also a sense of superiority in our culture. We like to think that we are better than
every other country. The funny thing is that we are trailing behind in science and education.
What good is a country if it has a sub-par educational system? The smart thing to do would be
to not feel like America is #1. The smart thing to do would be to realize that we are all in this
shit together and that your place of birth isn't indicative of your greatness.
The intercepted emails showing Assad telling his commander to gas 'em all. Let's hear the phone
conversations played out in public:
Assad: "Go ahead, commander, do the deed. It'll be a gas."
Commander Thug: "But, your malign majesty, don't you read the papers? The Americans are
listening in on the other end! Now they'll thwart your glorious plan to commit genocide and go down
in history as the worst mass murderer since Harry Truman!"
Assad: "Bullshit. Those Americans think they are smart, but I've outsmarted them. Because,
you see, I'm wearing my Anti-NSA Encryption Ring ..."
Why is this not mentioned in the EULA and User Agreements one clicks through to sign up for
a cell phone account? "We may allow the NSA and/or other federal agencies to collect your data,
including your phone calls, metadata, and location."
Little tip for you shell scripters -- let's start overloading their filters:
I think it's important to recognize that you can't have 100% security and also then have
100% privacy and zero inconvenience. We're going to have to make some choices as a society.
--Barack Obama, June 7, 2013
As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals.
. . . Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake.
--Barack Obama, Jan. 20, 2009
I fail so see what all the complaining is about. Right in the first several paragraphs it said
that the U.S. Attorney General was the last line of defense with the NSA. I assume that means
Eric Holder is in charge and will protect us American citizens. What could possibly be wrong with
1. Before Barrack Obama's next televised speech, prepare your "Bullshit Bingo" card by drawing
a square. I find that 5″ x 5″ is a good size - and dividing it into columns –five across and five
down. That will give you 25 1-inch blocks.
2. Write one of the following words/phrases in each block:
Restored our reputation
Let me be clear
Make no mistake
Back from the brink
Signs of recovery
Out of the loop
Affordable health care
At the end of the day
Empower (or empowerment)
Inherited as in "I inherited this mess"
Relief for working families
Accountable (or held to account)
Players can make substitutions to this list, but only one phrase can be used in any one block.
Change (as in "change you can believe in)
Universal health care
Brought the economy back from the brink
3. Check off the appropriate block when you hear one of those words/phrases.
4. When you get five blocks horizontally, vertically, or diagonally, stand up and shout "BULLSHIT!"
Testimonials from past satisfied "Bullshit Bingo" players:
"I had been listening to the speech for only five minutes when I won." - Jack W., Boston
"My attention span during speeches has improved dramatically." – David D., Florida
"What a gas! Speeches will never be the same for me after my first win." - Bill R., New York
"The atmosphere was tense in the last speech as 14 of us waited for the fifth box." – Ben G.,
"The speaker was stunned as eight of us screamed "BULLSHIT!" for the third time in two hours."
– Harry A. Chantilly
NSA is the only part of the US government that actually listens to the people.
Aw. When I was a kid, my parents assured me that I was never alone. I thought they were talking
about Jesus, but it turns out they meant creepers at the NSA can be the ones to watch over me
at night. And double-check to make sure those pictures I'm sending to my husband aren't too racy.
diamondgeeza -> Niclynn
I've decided to stop backing up my files. I mean, what's the point? If I lose data all I need
to do is phone Fort Meade right? They'll have a copy.
Hey Russians you have a XKeyscore server on your territory.
The Stasi would be proud
Bluestone -> Zakida
Personally I think they would be jealous as all hell.
What the American government is doing right now is the Stasi wetest of wet dreams.
smileydog -> johannesgutenberg
Maybe if governments weren't spending huge amounts of money spying on the world, they'd have
more money to do something about housing.
The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies,
the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. These contradictions
are not accidental , nor do they result from from ordinary hypocrisy: they are deliberate exercises
- George Orwell, 1984
President Transparency, in the interest of protecting his Administration's spotless record of
least transparent ever, has decided to erase sections of his original campaign website so that inconvenient
and broken promises (i.e., every single thing he said) can't be so easily exposed. Although clearly
no one goes to the campaign site for groundbreaking news, it had served as a useful platform to compare
candidate Obama to the George W. Bush clone he has become as President. From Policy Mic:
In a recent
blog post by the Sunlight Foundation, the watchdog organization curiously notes how the Obama
administration has removed previously available content from then candidate Obama's famous 2008
campaign platform, Change.gov. While
the site has long since served as a landing page to redirect traffic towards the now President
the content of the website, particularly the materials and agenda pages, has always been accessible.
However, very recently, access to such information is now no longer supported through the site
and appears to have been "scrubbed" off the internet (of course, you can still access
archived forms of the aforementioned pages).
Thus, because President Obama's policies have failed to match candidate Obama's campaign
platform (particularly the change part of "hope and change"), it is possible that the easy availability
of such contradictory information, not to mention the reputability of the source, has proven to
be too detrimental to President Obama's reputation - given the current political climate. More
specifically, the President's views on government ethics and whistle blowing:
The following was candidate Obama's position on whistleblowers.
Protect Whistleblowers: Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse
in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to
speak out. Such acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often
save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled. We need to empower federal
employees as watchdogs of wrongdoing and partners in performance. Barack Obama will strengthen
whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority
in government. Obama will ensure that federal agencies expedite the process for reviewing
whistleblower claims and whistleblowers have full access to courts and due process.
No worries, at least we still have the right to go out into the street and mindlessly scream USA!
This contains some interesting background on then State Senator Obama and his sudden entrance
into the national spotlight.
Billionaire Bankster Breaks into Obama's Cabinet
By Greg Palast
May 2, 2013
....Today, Obama has named Penny Pritzker Secretary of Commerce. As the President says,
It's a milestone: the first female fraudster to hold that post. No longer will criminal bankers
have to lobby the administration - because now they'll have one of their own in the Cabinet.
"We never heard of this guy Barack Obama until 2004. Less than three years before taking the
presidency, he was in the Illinois state senate, a swamp of scammers, backhanders, and party
machine tools - not a stellar launch pad for the White House. And then, one day, state Sen.
Barack Obama was visited by his fairy godmother. Her name is Penny Pritzker.
worth is listed in Forbes as $1.8 billion, which is one hell of a heavy magic wand in the world
of politics. Her wand would have been heavier, and her net worth higher, except that in 2001,
the federal government fined her and her family $460 million for the predatory, deceitful,
racist tactics and practices of Superior, the bank-and-loan-shark operation she ran on the
South Side of Chicago.
Superior was the first of the deregulated go-go banks to go bust - at the time, the costliest
failure ever. US taxpayers lost nearly half a billion dollars. Superior's depositors lost millions
and poor folk in Sen. Obama's South Side district lost their homes.
Penny did not like paying $460 million. No, not one bit. What she needed was someone to
give her Hope and Change. She hoped someone would change the banking regulators and the Commerce
Department so she could get away with this crap.
Pritzker introduced Obama, the neophyte state senator, to the Ladies Who Lunch (that's really
what they call themselves) on Chicago's Gold Coast. Obama got lunch, gold and better - an introduction
to Robert Rubin. Rubin is a former Secretary of the Treasury, former chairman of Goldman Sachs
and former co-chairman of Citibank. Even atheists recognized Rubin as the Supreme Deity of
Rubin opened the doors to finance industry vaults for Obama. Extraordinarily for a Democrat,
Obama in 2008 raised three times as much from bankers as his Republican opponent...
It's just as bad to kill people by illegally storing explosive fertilizer as by deliberately
bombing them. The laws are broken by the actions you take, not by the thoughts you harbored when
you did those things. In the Texas case it apparently wasn't lack of regulations, it was lack
of enforcement. That seems to be a common cause of disasters these days.
Crocodile Chuck :
I reckon its deeper than this-it wasn't even lack of enforcement, as regards the zoning laws-there
weren't any in the first place (the school and nursing home sited close to the munitions magazine,
erm, fertiliser plant). And no one in the community ever even thought about this, let alone raised
an alarm, as these were being built.
For those who would like to listen to other speakers at The 31st Annual Monetary and Trade
Conference where Sachs presented this (including Michael Kumhof's presentation on The Chicago
Plan Revisited, which starts at about 1:02, and which I would LOVE to see more economists discuss),
here is the link.
Bill Maher ended Friday's "Real Time" by saying that he's concerned about North Korea. Not about
Kim Jong Un's nuclear capabilities, but rather the way American politicians overreact to foreign
threats by using them as an excuse to start expensive wars.
"With Afghanistan winding down, America is dangerously close to not having a war," Maher said.
And when we don't have a war, he continued, the country "gets a little sad. A little introspective.
It begins thinking about poverty, schools, our crumbling infrastructure."
But he joked that going to war since World War II is a foolish endeavor: "Offering to go to war
with the U.S. is like offering to go out for drinks with Lindsay Lohan."
The North Korean threat could just be another ill-fated war like so many we've participated in
over the half half-century -- including a few countries with whom we've been engaged in multiple
wars, like Afghanistan. "That's when you know you're war mongers, when some countries are coming
For foreign policy, Maher suggested that U.S. presidents look to one man for inspiration: Jimmy
"He is the one out of all of them who figured out how to sit in office for four years and never
fire a shot. The negative example should be Dick Cheney, who even shoots his friends in
Maher closed out the segment with advice to the Democratic frontrunner for president in 2016,
Hillary Clinton. "The reason you lost your primary battle in 2008 was because you voted for the Iraq
war, and some guy named Obama was smart enough to be against it. In your upcoming campaign, I hope
you know you don't have to run as an 'iron lady,'" referencing the late, hawkish British prime minister
Margaret Thatcher. "Because what good is being the first female president if you still have to be
Former South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, a love story: a story that peaked with a
non-existent hike on the Appalachian Trail that was actually a five-day tryst with his Argentine
lover. The Sanford tenure in the state house was sprinkled with lies, deceit, international
negative press, ripping off taxpayers, expense repayments, state planes for personal use, numerous
ethical lapses for which he paid a $70,000 fine; a multitude of moral lapses, a legislative
censure, infidelities (plural) and a shattered family and subsequent divorce. ...
..."De-dup De-dup,,,and That's NOT All Folks"...
Tom > Logic Driven Conservative
South Carolina is not known for its "smarts" - my Lord, they do have Lindsey Graham as a Senator
and the are the home of Jim DeMint - both jokes and flakes. As far as they are concerned, the
Civil War never ended. Perhaps a "new" voice would do them good.
On this week's episode of "Real Time," Bill Maher used his final "New Rule" of the night to take
on Libertarianism and the conservatives whose obsessions with Ayn Rand have "ruined" the political
philosophy for him.
Once a supporter of Libertarianism and its views on government intervention, Maher explained why
he thinks politicians such as Paul Ryan and Rand Paul are "intellectually stuck in their teen years"
and have turned a once promising movement into a free market-obsessed, "nanny state"-fearing delusion.
Maher went on to defend his new views on Libertarianism by mocking the party's tendency to reject
government services even when they are arguably very useful:
"To everyone who keeps trying to shame me about abandoning my Libertarian moorings, my message
is this: I didn't go nuts, this movement did. Like when you see a stop light, your reaction should
be 'Great, an easy way to ensure we don't all crash into each other,' not, 'How dare the government
tell me when I can and cannot go!"
Bill Maher delivered a blistering critique of modern libertarianism on Friday's episode of
Real Time With Bill Maher, slamming adherents for developing a "creepy obsession" with author
"It's all stuff that seems very deep when you're 19 years old," he said, before making a quick
exemption for one of his guests, young anti-creationism advocate
Zack Kopplin. "About how government is a dirty trick played by the weak on the strong, and I
can see how, if you're a privileged college kid, you read that and think, 'Yeah, that's right, I
don't need anything. So shut up, Dad, and pay my tuition.'"
Rand's work has often cited been as an influence on Republican lawmakers like Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)
and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI). Ryan went so far as to once say that Rand taught him "what my value systems
"I believe him," Maher said of Ryan. "Because [Rand's work] has a strange appeal to people who
are kind of smart, but not really."
Years ago, Maher conceded, he supported some libertarian ideals, saying he wanted to keep the
government out of his bedroom, his medicine chest, "and especially not in the second drawer of the
nightstand on the left side of my bed."
But somewhere along the way, he said, libertarians became devotees of Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged,
which he called "a book that's never been read all the way through by
anyone with a girlfriend."
But even as he said he still supported notions like "shutting down the American empire," Maher
also had a message for people attempting to shame him for allegedly turning his back on that stance.
"I didn't go nuts, this movement did," he said. "Like when you see a stop light, your reaction
should be, 'Great, an easy way to ensure we don't crash into each other.' Not, 'How dare the government
tell me when I can and cannot go!'"
WASHINGTON-In a shocking display of deep self-absorption and narcissistic behavior, President
Barack Obama stood up in front of the entire nation Tuesday and talked for more than an hour straight,
Appearing before a crowd of several hundred people, whom he had apparently required to attend
and sit silently as he spoke, the egocentric president reportedly talked nonstop from roughly 9 p.m.
to 10:15 p.m. Eastern time, giving his opinion on whatever topics he felt like discussing. Apparently
unwilling to concern himself with any beliefs other than his own, Obama selfishly spoke without interruption,
never once allowing another person to get a word in edgewise or offer a differing viewpoint.
"Christ, that guy just wouldn't stop talking," said Lehigh, PA resident Ken Datillio, 41, who
said he watched in mounting disbelief and annoyance as the self-involved leader kept going on and
on, seemingly unaware of how profoundly egocentric he was being. "He talked, no joke, for 10 minutes
straight about the economy. I thought that would be it, but then he started right in talking about
energy for at least another five minutes-and that was just the start of it. It's like this guy has
a goddamned opinion on everything."
"Have you listened to someone talk for 60 minutes straight?" Datillio added. "It's excruciating."
NORFOLK, VA-According to numerous reports, local 62-year-old Earl Bailey, who owns a shotgun and
several boxes of ammunition, is currently the last bastion of defense between the United States of
America and the federal government's plot of a full-scale takeover.
Bailey, a recent retiree and a proud advocate of gun rights, has been confirmed by multiple sources
as being a true patriot, and is, at present, the only person capable of preventing top-secret forces
within the government from striking and forcefully coercing hundreds of millions of Americans to
submit to a fascist and brutal New World Order.
Since the early 1990s, sources estimated the gun owner has staved off innumerable large-scale
government threats, all from the center of his 12-acre ranch.
"It is every American's right to be good and armed, and that's a right that should always be protected,"
said Bailey, now the sole American protecting the nation from the government's hidden plot of disarming
all citizens, gradually gaining control of the mass media, and installing martial law throughout
the nation's streets. "Our Founding Fathers intended for each and every one of us to protect ourselves
from tyranny. That's what America is all about."
"What happens when the feds show up at your front door and start telling you how much meat you
can eat or how to raise your kids?" continued the lifetime NRA member, brandishing the very weapon
that now serves as the final hope of staving off a totalitarian state. "Is that the future you want?"
Stewart, after telling O'Reilly he's the leader of "Bull---- mountain,"
a recurring Daily Show theme: "When you need something, it's an entitlement,"
said Stewart, "When they need something it is what it is."
O'Reilly: Fox "is making a billion dollars a year, so something's going right."
Stewart: "Yes, you can't make money selling crap in America."
October 7. 2012 | USA TODAY
It may not have been the most important debate of the 2012 presidential election season but it
was certainly, so far, the most entertaining. And who needs President Obama and GOP rival Mitt Romney
when you can get your politics with laughs from Jon Stewart and Bill O'Reilly?
In what was billed as O'Reilly vs. Stewart 2012: The Rumble in the Air-Conditioned Auditorium,
the host of Comedy Central's The Daily Show and Fox News' top-rated personality and Factor
host faced off Saturday night at a sold-out event from Lisner Auditorium at George Washington
University, and streamed online for $4.95 a pop, with half the proceeds going to charity.
The Rumble was moderated by journalist E.D. Hill, who kicked off the night's comic side by introducing
O'Reilly as "the gargantuan 6-foot-4" and Stewart as a "hobbit-like 5-foot-7-inches tall." (Stewart
was on a motorized platform that rose him up to O'Reilly's eye level - and, at times, well beyond.)
The debaters went toe-to-toe and joke-to-joke on the Middle East, health care, partisanship and
And the zingers were slung fast and furious:
Stewart on Obama's having to deal with Bush's legacy: "We are merely
weeks from being a failed state or, even worse, Greece. To solve it is to kill Big Bird."
O'Reilly: "Bush is gone. Adios, sayonara, aloha. It's boring. He's gone. It may have been Bush's
fault for the first year, maybe two, but not 3½."
Stewart, after telling O'Reilly he's the leader of "Bull---- mountain,"
a recurring Daily Show theme: "When you need something, it's an entitlement,"
said Stewart, "When they need something it is what it is."
On the Middle East, O'Reilly held up a sign that said "Drones. Yes. Waterboards. No," citing the
irony of the country's policy allowing drones to strike and kill civilians but condemning waterboarding
Stewart, after O'Reilly holds up another sign that reads "Iran not frightened," claiming Obama's
sending the wrong message to Iran about American might: "Did they attack our embassy because Barack
Obama is weak?"
O'Reilly, blaming government intervention on business' lack of confidence in the economy: "You've
got to let the free market run away a little bit. You gotta unleash the machine."
Stewart: "Because what could go wrong?"
On media bias, Stewart: "I don't think ABC or NBC or CBS are activist organizations" then called
Fox News "the lupus of news" that's gone "overboard."
O'Reilly: Fox "is making a billion dollars a year, so something's going right."
Stewart: "Yes, you can't make money selling crap in America."
On the American they most admire: Stewart: Robert Kennedy; O'Reilly: Abraham Lincoln.
... ... ...
At a news conference after the debate, O'Reilly joked: "Everybody knows that Stewart's opinions
are very shallow and not thought out. ... I thought he was very witty with the excrement mountain
Stewart's response: "Yeah, I completely switched over and I think I'm taking Hannity's spot."
CHARLESTON, WV - According to the results of a Gallup poll released Monday, the overwhelming majority
of rural white Americans said they would rather vote for Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad than
U.S. president Barack Obama.
What kind of a people could delight in machine-gunning the lifeboats of those who are attempting
to escape, not to thrive but to merely survive, the mayhem and chaos that these same sociopaths have
created through their selfish and criminal actions? And what sort of gullible fools will listen to
them, and assist them in their work even if passively by saying nothing?
"The inability to identify with others was unquestionably the most important psychological condition
for the fact that something like Auschwitz could have occurred in the midst of more or less civilized
and innocent people.
What is called 'fellow traveling' (collaboration) was primarily business interest: one pursues
one's own advantage before all else and, simply not to endanger oneself, does not talk too much.
That is a general law of the status quo."
Have we truly learned nothing? Must we make the same mistakes over and over again?
These 49 percent
include for the most part the elderly, students, the working poor, soldiers and their families, and
These 'handouts' include Social Security and unemployment insurance which people have paid for
when times were good. The ranks of the working poor have swelled for sure, because of a financial
collapse brought on by unfettered greed and fraud of Wall Street, and a stagnant real median wage
for the past 20 years in the face of rising costs, often driven by monopolies, fraud, and cartels.
A kleptocracy is sucking the life out of working men and women by force and fraud. A group of
sociopaths, who have committed one of the great crimes in history, not only blithely walk away with
their loot unpunished, but come back to rob their victims once again, to finish the job. And they
gorge themselves on the public trust even while begrudging the widow her pittance, or trying to steal
They pervert and corrupt so many, filling their hearts with their passionate lies, appealing to
what is the very worst in them. They are truly a den of vipers and thieves.
You can believe what you will, but you will be held responsible for your beliefs, and your actions,
what you do and do not do.
The UK is as John Le Carre expressed 'A wholly owned subsidiary
of Uncle Sam'
The Israelis are still in the position of a nasty little tail
wagging a very large and sometimes stupid dog.
So they are happy to feed the Westerners a line, give them a little something, and pretend
to reluctantly accept more than they ever dreamed.
Funny, that sounds like "Israeli Foriegn Policy". Feed the westerners a line about Iran having
nuclear weapons within a couple of years (like they have for over a decade), give a little pretend
movement on the Palestinian issue, and then reluctantly accept more US foriegn/military aid.
Another factor that will have an effect on the decision whether or not to attack Iran is
the fact the around 80% of conservatives belong to the Conservative Friends of Israel. [...]
the Labour party isn't any better either as a lot of them belong to Labour Friends of Israel.
This is depressing - but there's a difference between being a 'Friend of Israel' - i.e. taking
the money from the Israel lobby - and being a bloody stupid friend of Israel, i.e. supporting
yet another disastrous war in the Middle East.
"No, you just can't": something about GOP propaganda attack on Obama ;-)
I love this crap!! Every voting cycle it happens!! Obama, like all democrats before him has
made the mistake of trying to "talk" to the voting public man to man!! Because you will not admit
to yourself how dumb these people really are, you wind up talking "down" to these people and you
can't do that!!
The morning after Obama made the mistake of trying to tell everyone that they had a little
help along the way, I visited my coffee shop!! A friend of mine asked,
"Did you read that Obama crap"? "I sure did, did you"? Yep, I sure as hell did!! Then he went
on to quote the Romney version!! You can't win!!!
As the "single most powerful tool for population control," the CIA's "Facebook program" has dramatically
reduced the agency's costs - at least according to the latest "report" from the satirical mag
In the video, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is dubbed "The Overlord" and is shown receiving
a "medal of intelligence commendation" for his work with the CIA's Facebook program.
The Onion also takes a jab at FarmVille (which is responsible for "pacifying"
as much as 85 million people after unemployment rates rose), Twitter (which is called useless as
far as data gathering goes), and Foursquare (which is said to have been created by Al Qaeda).
Check out the video below and tell us in the comments what you think.
[Jul 02, 2012] Something about Moscow protest meeting size estimates in Western press
It staggers the imagination that the police – who I assume have some training in estimating the size
of a the meeting, especially as it might turn ugly on them, estimate the size of the crowd at 18,000
while reporters and event organizers gleefully estimate the same crowd at "more than 50,000″.
They must all work for penis-enlargement websites.
STEWART: Oh, it's not fair. He's using unlimited money to buy influence. Rigging the system in
some way. Interesting. I can't imagine how frustrated and helpless you Newt Gingrich must feel. Hey,
how did guys like Mitt Romney come to be anyway? [...]
You're mad at Mitt Romney? But that's like saying... it's like saying Mitt Romney answered the
eHarmony ad and now you're saying it's unfair. That it's not what you meant and you don't mean it
that much. Mitt Romney is the pure distillation of conservative economic policies. But now that you
have to go up against him, now it's unfair? Republicans, you can't say, release the kraken and then
when the kraken turns on you, be all like... that's a very scary kraken.
TARP was basically being administered by Hank Paulson as the last man home in a lame-duck presidency.
I tried to get them to use the TARP to put some leverage on the banks to do more about mortgages,
and Paulson at first resisted-he just wanted to get the money out. And after he got the first chunk
of money out, he said, "All right, I'll tell you what, I'll ask for a second chunk, and I'll use
some of that as leverage on mortgages, but I'm not going to do that unless Obama asks for it."
This is now December, so we tried to get the Obama people to ask him, and they wouldn't do it.
During the critical period when the TARP was being administered, there was a vacuum of political
At one point, Obama said, "Well, we only have one president at a time."
I said I was afraid that overstated the number of presidents. We had no president.
An English princess
with an Egyptian boyfriend
crashes in a French tunnel,
driving a German car
with a Dutch engine,
driven by a Belgian
drunk on Scottish whisky,
followed by Italian Paparazzi
on Japanese motorcycles;
treated by an American doctor
using Brazilian medicines.
This is written by a Canadian,
using American patents
with Taiwanese chips,
a Korean monitor,
assembled by Bangladeshi workers
in a Singapore plant,
transported by Indian truckers,
hijacked by Indonesians,
unloaded by Sicilian longshoremen,
and delivered downtown by Mexican illegals.
"Among the attributes I most envy in a public man (or woman) is the ability to lie. If that
ability is coupled with no sense of humor, you have the sort of man who can be a successful football
coach, a CEO or, when you come right down to it, a presidential candidate. Such a man is Mitt
Rep. Schilling said he was even considering asking Fischer (inset) to be godfather to his youngest
WASHINGTON-According to Capitol Hill sources, Rep. Bobby Schilling (R-IL) came to the painful
realization this week that agribusiness lobbyist Stephen Fischer, who had been kind and generous
toward him for months and had often met up with him for drinks after work, was not, in fact, his
"Steve used to call all the time to catch up and ask about my family and chat about the
genetically modified feedstock industry, but now, nothing," said Schilling, who admitted he was
still struggling to accept that all their "good times" together at Washington steak houses and
nightclubs had not been part of a sincere friendship. "He was such a likable guy-sociable, funny,
and he always somehow managed to find great seats to sold-out concerts."
"I thought we were really tight," Schilling added. "But now I can't help but think he was just
using me to get stricter seed-patent protections."
According to Schilling, the two first met at a Republican Party fundraiser last spring and "hit
it off" immediately. The congressman was surprised to discover Fischer seemed to share his interests
in deep-sea fishing, soybean crop insurance, and Big Ten basketball, and recalled in particular how
the lobbyist was impressed by Schilling's position on the House Agriculture Committee.
From there, Schilling said, the high-paid employee of Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland began
frequently taking him out to exclusive Washington restaurants and to his private luxury box at Baltimore
Orioles games, leading Schilling to believe he had found a genuine, affable buddy.
"Sure, I found it unusual that Steve always asked me about the progress of alfalfa silage
tax credits and would casually suggest potato-crop insect-management earmarks, but I never thought
twice about it," the congressman said. "I just assumed he was curious about my work. Maybe it
sounds na•ve, but when a guy does something really nice, like fly you out to Pebble Beach for
18 holes, you just assume he's your friend."
In the weeks since, Fischer reportedly claimed to be too busy to go out with the congressman and
eventually stopped answering Schilling's calls altogether. Once he suspected manipulative behavior
on Fischer's part, Schilling said he grew despondent, saddened that what he believed had been a promising
friendship had vanished so suddenly and left him with nothing but a few boxes of ultra-premium cigars
and $47,000 in campaign contributions.
The crestfallen legislator said he now felt unsure who his true friends were, and had begun to
question whether fellow congressmen, prominent donors, and even his constituents actually cared about
him as a person-or whether they all just wanted something from him.
SPRINGFIELD, Va. - He is not your typical politician. He's running as a write-in candidate and his
campaign is beginning to catch on. But it's not for what he stands for, but for whom he is.
purr-fect candidate can be tough to find. One with just the right ideas, a proper wardrobe and a
candidate who cannot be bought.
"If any sort of lobbyist needs to get to him, they would have to do that with cheese," says Campaign
Manager Matthew O'Leary.
Hank is a nine-year-old Maine Coon who is running for the U.S. Senate in Virginia.
He has signs and stickers that will make you an F.O.H. - or Friend of Hank. He loves Facebook,
and really, all social media.
"Cats are normally adapted to Tweeting since birds and everything like that," says O'Leary. "They
know how to handle that sort of thing."
His campaign headquarters is at his family's townhouse in Springfield, Va. It is a house full
of Obama supporters, but he is not a Demo-cat.
"I would read left-leaning political books at night, and in the morning when he'd wake me up for
breakfast, he would tear up the political books, just the political books, to get my attention,"
He says that is when they knew they had a conservative on their hands. He is running as an independent
though - no surprise - a cat who is independent. He wants to snap to it and start creating jobs.
And he is tired of politicians who always have their claws out.
Hank is running against two veteran politicians in George Allen and Tim Kaine. Some believe the
fact that he is an outside the beltway cat could be an advantage.
"Hank did live a good part of his life inside the beltway, but now we live just west of it, so
he's outside the beltway," says O'Leary.
Hank ran for Virginia State Senate a while back and got nine write-in votes. He is a rescue cat
from a place called Animal Allies.
"He was about five weeks old when we got him and he was rescued from a kill shelter that was going
to put him down," says O'Leary.
He has been a perfect pet. Just a few flaws. Not the best manners, a little lazy and according
to O'Leary, "he can be scared of things that normally don't scare anyone. Sometimes if there's a
grocery bag or something, he'll freak out about it and attack it. He can be a little on edge sometimes."
Recently, in the course of one evening in the Big Apple, President Barack Obama "hosted" three
fundraisers ranging from $35,800 a head to $1,000 a head and raised $2.4 million - and that wasn't
even close to 1% of the funds he will need for this election season. This
reflects the power, needs, fears and desires of America's 1%, and how it has turned the rest of us
from citizens into viewers. - Tom Engelhardt (Dec
in 2011 nearly half of the population lived in a household that receives some form of government
benefit, which in turn accounted for 65% of total federal spending, or $2.5 trillion, and
amount to 15% of GDP.
Confusing? Just *TRY* to have a normal conversation with my UK and US relatives and you will
find out that they think they live in the land of the free and that the eurozone is a socialist
overregulated hellhole where half of the population is on some kind of government support.
The project wasn't completed by a government developer. It was done by a contractor, because everybody
knows that the government is inefficient and costs a lot of money.
So they demand that they outsource it to the private sector, which means all kinds of extra overhead.
Private contractors, being driven by the profit motive, will turn in crappy work unless you spend huge
amounts of effort clarifying precisely what's required, followed by meetings to ensure that they have
done it. Just the product spec meeting cost more than the time spent actually doing it. All because
the Government is Bad.
itwbennett writes "How much does it cost
to make a phone app to tell local temperature and suggest
how not to get heatstroke, such as drink water and avoid alcohol? If you're the U.S. Government,
it'll cost you a pretty penny. Using MuckRock to file a Freedom of Information Act,
Rich Jones of GUN.IO discovered the Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration
paid $106,467 for the Android version; $96,000 for the iPhone version, and an additional $40,000
for a BlackBerry app that never got distributed."
It was actually $467 for the Android version
... plus $106,000 for change management.
You know as well as I do that you can't function as a developer unless you spend at least half
your day reporting progress to management. If the six layers of management above you don't know
what you're doing, how could you?
Summary can't add
The iPhone version was $56,000. The Blackberry version was $40,000. Together, they were $96,000.
It says this very clearly in the original scan.
The iPhone version was $56,000. The Blackberry version was $40,000. Together, they were
$96,000. It says this very clearly in the original scan.
It doesn't sound that much once you have dealt with specs and tenders with govt orgs.
Commissar Julia Joffe teaches peasants what to think
Just another useful idiot head of a G7 country… The US, Italy, France, Germany, now the UK…
Which states are NOT ruled by useful idiots, LR, "Kosovo", probably? Why don't you emigrate?
Commissar Julia Joffe
What you don't understand, because you are an idiotic Russian, is a little thing we have in
the West called an election. Where we live, unlike your sad, frozen little prison, we can throw
out the useful idiots and replace them with brilliant heroes, like Ronald Reagan for example.
Today a useful idiot, tomorrow John McCain. Who knows, maybe one day Russians will get grown up
and civilized enough to try it for themselves.
WASHINGTON-A team of leading archaeologists announced Monday they had uncovered the remains of an
ancient job-creating race that, at the peak of its civilization, may have provided occupations for
hundreds of thousands of humans in the American Northeast and Midwest.
According to researchers,
these long- forgotten people once flourished between western New York state and Illinois, erecting
highly distinctive steel and brick structures wherever they went, including many buildings thought
to have held hundreds of paid workers at a time.
"It's truly fascinating-after spending a certain number of hours performing assigned tasks, the
so-called 'employees' at such facilities would receive monetary compensation that allowed them to
support themselves and their families," said archaeologist Alan H. Mueller, citing old ledgers and
time-keeping devices unearthed at excavation sites in the region. "In fact, this practice seems to
have been the norm for their culture, which consisted of advanced tool users capable of exploiting
their skills to produce highly valued goods and services."
"It's a complex and intriguing set of rituals we're still trying to fully understand," Mueller
added. "But it appears as if their entire society was centered around creating, out of thin air,
actual jobs that paid an actual living wage."
In the 800-page volume, titled O Say Have I Seen: The Real Truth Behind The Red, White, And
Blue, the president renders in explicit detail numerous shocking revelations about the United
States, including its inability to manage its finances, its struggles with oil addiction, its willful
ignorance of the issues that affect it most deeply, and its frequent battles with obesity.
"Anyone with even a passing interest in the nation is going to want to read all the juicy tidbits
the president offers up here," publicist Armand Neal said of the book that draws from Obama's firsthand
experiences as well as candid conversations with millions of U.S. insiders. "Nobody has had as much
firsthand access to America's demons as the president, and he dishes dirt on everything from the
nation's self-destructive, codependent relationship with the pharmaceutical industry to its habit
of repeatedly borrowing and spending its way into massive amounts of debt. I promise you, he spills
everything-everything-about the United States."
I used the phrase "charlatans and cranks" in the first edition of my principles textbook to describe
some of the economic advisers to Ronald Reagan, who told him that broad-based income tax cuts
would have such large supply-side effects that the tax cuts would raise tax revenue. I did not
find such a claim credible, based on the available evidence. I never have, and I still don't.
- We can say, with
certainty, that certain executives in various firms were responsible either directly for or directed
others to engage in the reckless investment schemes that resulted in firms going bankrupt or in need
of a bailout from the federal government. Under this condition, we can target [name redacted] of
[firm redacted] who concealed $50 billion in loans in order to inflate the firm's value while at
the same time personally taking several hundred million dollars in compensation. We know this occurred.
We have evidence that it occurred. We know that [redacted]'s actions, in part, led directly to the
financial crisis of 2008-2009.
- If the targeted killing of American citizens is justified in our ongoing war with terrorists
above and beyond any previous congressional authorization, and if the military has previously been
involved in the ongoing war on drugs, then we can say with confidence that the proposed targeted
attacks on financial executives falls under the purview of the "War on Poverty," which was declared
by President Lyndon Johnson in 1964 and which, like the ten-year war on terrorists and the forty-year
war on drugs, has not been successfully concluded. This might seem to strain legal justification,
but we are talking about criminals who have done grievous harm to the nation.
... ... ...
The total use of Predator drones against financial industry executives would most likely be minimal.
After several strikes, we anticipate that others will turn themselves in to authorities for prosecution
out of fear for their lives.
In the left-hand-side column you find a translation of the original Moral Code of The Builder
of Communism  which you can compare with the newly formulated Code on the right hand side. With
this arrangement the unquestionable superiority of the latter can be clearly seen and appreciated.
For non-monolingual people – ref.  contains the original text of the Code in Russian.
Moral Code of the Builder of Communism
Moral Code of the Builder of Capitalism
Devotion to the cause of Communism, love of the socialist Motherland and of the socialist
Devotion to the cause of capitalism, love of the capitalist Motherland and of the other
Conscientious labor for the good of society: he who does not work, neither shall he eat.
Conscientious effort to obtain a direct government assistance, the government contracts
or any other form of public money: those who don't receive government funds, will only find
themselves funding the government.
Concern on the part of everyone for the preservation and growth of public property.
Concern on the part of everyone else for the preservation and growth of public property
by them for you to use
High sense of public duty; intolerance of actions harmful to the public interest.
High sense of capitalistic public duty and sanctity of (your) private property; intolerance
of actions by others harmful to your private business interests.
Collectivism and comradely mutual assistance: one for all and all for one.
Individualism and readiness to fight for your piece of pie: each one for himself, against
everyone. Remember: the only goal of any business is to make the owner richer than other people,
so the others might be permitted to benefit only if it cannot be avoided.
Humane relations and mutual respect between individuals: man is to man a friend
Show humility and do respect the potential strength of others – up until you have measured
them up: human humanum lupus est. Remember: competition is the primary driving force of capitalism.
Elimination of the competition is the fastest road to your financial success.
Honesty and truthfulness, moral purity, unpretentiousness and modesty in social and private
Public display of appearance of honesty and truthfulness, libertarian moral purity Friedman-style,
unpretentiousness and modesty in social and private life (so as not to disturb the plebs too
Mutual respect in the family, concern for the upbringing of children.
Mutual respect in the own family – proportional to the individual contributions to the
family budget, concern for the upbringing of your own children in accordance with this code.
Remember that your family are just people – they are as much after your money as anyone else.
Irreconcilability towards injustice, parasitism, dishonesty, careerism, and profiteering.
Irreconcilability towards unjust distribution of unearned income to others, including social
benefits. Fight dishonesty, careerism and all other attempts of profiteering by hired labor
Friendship and brotherhood among all peoples of the USSR, intolerance of national and racial
If and when – and only if & when – this helps your business – open and public display of
friendship and brotherhood among all people, intolerance of national and racial hatred. In
other cases you will be a fool not to use such inexpensive tool as racism to efficiently reduce
the cost of hired labor.
Intolerance towards the enemies of communism, peace, and freedom of nations.
Intolerance towards the enemies of capitalism, enemies of peace (if you are not in defense
industry) and enemies of the freedom of other nations to follow your nation's understanding
of economic liberty principles appropriate for them.
Fraternal solidarity with the working people of all countries, and with all peoples.
Fraternal solidarity with capitalists of all countries up until you see a chance to rip
them off dry.
PS. On a (slightly) more serious note – I am not a communist, have never been one and most likely
will never be – because I haven't yet met sufficiently large number of people ready to live strictly
by the rules in the left-hand-side column above. "Sufficiently large" – to form a party, that's it.
Perhaps, this shortage was the reason why the "communism" as economic system had never worked as
intended. But neither did pure ("wild") capitalism – as Russian experience of 90s demonstrated all
For those who want a touch of reality – as of 21 of September 2011 – it is
Quote"..To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time,
is at levels consistent with the dual mandate, the Committee decided today to extend the average
maturity of its holdings of securities. The Committee intends to purchase, by the end of June 2012,
$400 billion of Treasury securities with remaining maturities of 6 years to 30 years and to sell
an equal amount of Treasury securities with remaining maturities of 3 years or less.."
Let say we – I, You and Chronoscopist – were on a plane across the Pacific Ocean. While on board,
we consumed substantial amount of absinthe, kicked up a row and in the process tore off a door to
the toilet. For our noble deeds we were promptly thrown out of the plane via emergency exit. Luckily,
next to where we plunged into the water, was a small nameless Polynesian island. After we climbed
on its soil, we held a short council and decided to name the island The United States of Absinthe
Naturally, when we were thrown out of the plane, they forgot to return us our luggage. As the
result, all our tangible and intangible assets consisted of the toilet door, which You forgot to
leave on the plane and a single $100 note which You discovered in your wallet. Thus all non-financial
assets of our USA consist of one toilet door, and all financial, aka "money supply", of a single
$100 note. This is all our country has. Since we have nothing else, it can also be said that our
material assets – the toilet door, supports (secures) the money supply of $100. Or, in other words,
our door costs $100.
Still under the influence of absinth, we decide that we need to start getting the things organised.
The Chronoscopist, proved to be the shrewdest – he announces that he opened a bank and is ready to
accept deposits from the island's population and promises to pay 3% interest annually. You give him
your $100 and he writes it under "Liabilities" -> "Deposit Accounts" in his book.
But I am too not just out of the woods – indeed, after so many years I spent investigating economic
swindles, I now know how to expropriate your door and your $100. I offer You 5% interest on your
$100. I tear off a sheet of paper from my notebook and write "Bond Certificate of USA. Issued for
the amount $100 at 5% interest, paid annually". You feel that You have drawn a full hand. You withdraw
your money from the deposit account You have with the disappointed Chronoscopist and give it to me
in exchange for my Bond. I take your $100 and immediately deposit it into my account with now smiling
Ideally, we could have stopped right here and then, and start doing something real, say, shake
the palm tree or try to collect shell fish – to eat our bread in the sweat of our faces, so-to-speak.
But you all know that I am indefatigable financial genius, and I am not interested in the petty things
such as coconuts and oysters. After a refreshing tour of our island – 50 steps from South to North
and 30 from West to East, I invent an ingenuous combination. I approach You and offer You to earn
an additional 1% annually. You should take a loan in Chronoscopist's bank at 4% and use it to buy
from me another USA Bond at 5% interest. This second Bond Certificate for $100 I have just written,
and now I wave it in front of your nose. Immediately You rush to the bank and borrow $100 there,
using my first Bond as a security. The Bank has the money – I put it there on my deposit account.
You give me the $100 You have borrowed and put the second USA Security Bond into your wallet. Now
You have $200 worth of USA Bonds. I put $100 in the Bank – now I have $200 on my deposit account.
Chronoscopist jumps from joy – his credit business is growing up!
Do you really think I am going to stop there? Hold your horses – I have already written a third
USA Bond for You. You rush to the Bank to borrow another $100, secured this time with my second Bond.
Closer to the night, got tired of running around the island with this single $100 note and having
used all pages in my diary to write USA Bonds, we have the following results: You have $5,000 worth
of USA Bonds, while I have $5,000 deposited on my account.
Now I feel that this is the right time to expropriate your toilet door. I offer to buy it from
You for $100. But You do not want to sell the only toilet door on the island for $100 and ask $1,000.
Well, I agree – after all I have $5,000 on my deposit account. I use the last page left in my diary
to write a Payment Order to Chronoscopist to transfer $1,000 from my account to yours – and take
If this accounting is given to an American economist, he or she will inform you that our USA had
$1,000 in assets in the form of toilet door and $10,000 financial assets in bank deposits and USA
Bonds. Which means that our combined wealth increased 110 fold in one day. Well, a less refined and
educated observer, might say that we are the three idiots, because by the end of the day we still
have nothing but the same one toilet door and $100, and that only complete imbeciles could have spent
the whole day tearing sheets out of their diaries to write nonsense, instead of collecting coconuts
or shell fish. Who of the two is correct –you, the Reader, should decide yourself.
IHS vice president George Pearson (who later became a top Koch Industries executive) responded
three weeks later, conceding that it was all but impossible to arrange affordable private medical
insurance for Hayek in the United States. However, thanks to research by Yale Brozen, a libertarian
economist at the University of Chicago, Pearson happily reported that "social security was passed
at the University of Chicago while you [Hayek] were there in 1951. You had an option of being
in the program. If you so elected at that time, you may be entitled to coverage now."
A few weeks later, the institute reported the good news: Professor Hayek had indeed opted into
Social Security while he was teaching at Chicago and had paid into the program for ten years.
He was eligible for benefits. On August 10, 1973, Koch wrote a letter appealing to Hayek to accept
a shorter stay at the IHS, hard-selling Hayek on Social Security's retirement benefits, which
Koch encouraged Hayek to draw on even outside America.
The American Congress (Parliament) a den of thieves, megalomaniacs and jackarses as the world
has rarely seen, except maybe in the final days of the Roman Senate, are about to help their owners,
the super bankers, to become the biggest owners of improved property, in the world.
How is this?
Very easy. The American government organizations of HUD, Fanni Mae and Freddie Mac have become
the primary owners of the vast majority of American "distress" property.
The ever ironic former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan on whether government intervention can create
"There were unintended consequences to almost every action I was involved in" as Fed chairman,
said Mr. Greenspan, who himself cut interest rates to help stave off a bond-market crisis in 1998,
and later was accused of helping inflate the stock bubble of the late 1990s. "If we anticipated
the unintended consequences that were going to happen we might have changed the policy," he said,
but he added that it is impossible to forecast all the consequences of government action.
10. Quantitative Easing Helps the Economy
Yes, quantitative easing is "printing" money. No, it won't help the economy. Make no mistake,
quantitative easing is a gift to bankers and nothing else. The Federal Reserve is giving bankers
risk-free trading profits and causing food and gas prices to surge (making it even harder for
Americans to get out of debt).
9. Republicans Are Fiscal Conservatives
* Total Years: 29
* Average Inflation Adjusted Deficit: $150.73 billion
* Total Years: 36
* Average Inflation Adjusted Deficit: $202.28 billion
8. President Obama Is an Enemy of Wall Street
* The two men who served as principal negotiators for banking deregulation: Gene Sperling and
* The two men who President Obama appointed to become his top economic advisers: Gene Sperling
and Larry Summers.
* Two guys who happen to be paid millions of dollars in consulting and speaking fees by "too big
to fail" banks: Gene Sperling and Larry Summers.
7. The Financial System Is Safer Today Than in 2008
The majority of "too big to fail" banks are even bigger. Meanwhile, high-frequency trading is
alive and well and the causes of the Flash Crash have not been addressed.
6. The 'Bush Tax Cuts' Increased Tax Revenue
Washington has always had a spending problem, but since the "Bush Tax Cuts," we have a revenue
problem as well. From 1990 to 2000, U.S. tax revenue had a period of exceptional growth. Following
the 2001 tax cuts, revenue plummeted - then recovered - then plummeted again.
5. 'No One' Could Have Seen the Financial Crisis Coming
No one - except for everyone who did. TheStreet has interviewed numerous economists and money
managers who have been pounding the table for years.
4. If You Support Capitalism, You Support Big Business
Can a corporation be socialist? Corporations and governments are very similar entities, and both
can have capitalist or socialist leanings. If a politician praises big business while chastising
big government, or the other way around, be skeptical.
3. Republicans Are a Bunch of Fat-Cat Millionaires
The average congressperson is a millionaire, and if you break down the 50 richest members of Congress
by political party, here's the split:
2. The U.S. Has the Highest Standard of Living in the World
According to the United Nations' most recent Human Poverty Index (from 2008), the U.S. standard
of living ranks 17 of 19 among developed countries. The ranking is a composite of life expectancy,
literacy, long-term unemployment and income equality - while this data is over three years old,
it's not unthinkable that our situation has worsened in the aftermath of the Great Recession.
1. U.S. GDP Is Growing
U.S. GDP has increased by 4.26% from 2007 to 2010, according to data compiled by the U.S. Bureau
of Economic Analysis. In the same period of time, the U.S. national debt has increased by 61.6%,
according to the U.S. Treasury. Looking at these numbers, you don't need to be an economist to
see that something is very, very wrong.
"The Night of The Living Dead"- 1969 movie, the Zombies were a metaphor for the implosion of
American capitalism, the cannibalism was a metaphor for a society...
Although zombie cannibals were inspired by Matheson's I Am Legend, film historian Robin Wood
sees the flesh-eating scenes of Night of the Living Dead as a late-1960s critique of American
Wood asserts that the zombies represent capitalists, and "cannibalism represents the ultimate
in possessiveness, hence the logical end of human relations under capitalism." He argues that
the zombies' victims symbolized the repression of "the Other" in bourgeoisie American society,
namely civil rights activists, feminists, homosexuals and counterculturalists in general"..
In answer to the generic question regarding President Obama's actions regarding the debt ceiling,
I am re-posting this from 2/25/09. In comments of the original I stated that cutting the deficit
by 1/2 seemed to "optimistic" for me.
Ok, here are my basic issues with the substance of President Obama's speech. First, may I remind
that as of 11/08 I declared my divorce successful. Has it become my mission accomplish moment?
I heard this:
"And we will expand our commitment to charter schools. but as a father when I say that responsibility
for our children's education must begin at home."
And thought: 2 tier education system/vouchers, no thank you. Education begins at home when home means
one parent has the time to spend at home oppose to both working.
I heard this:
"And we must also begin a conversation on how to do the same for Social Security, while creating
tax-free universal savings accounts for all Americans."
And thought: Are you freak'n kidding me! In this time of financial collapse we're still going to
talk about turning an insurance for the masses against the follies of finance into some form to include
finance? The entire reason we want to create jobs is because we have suddenly realized that the vast,
vast majority do not earn their money from money. Tax free? Has he not heard of 401K, IRA and all
it's versions, HSA, higher education accounts? Italy?
I heard this:
"Yesterday, I held a fiscal summit where I pledged to cut the deficit in half by the end of my
first term in office."
And thought: Yeah, how'd that work for the last administration who made such a declaration? Did he
have to say "in half"? Has his advisors not taught him about the blip during the FDR recovery? Only
one way I can think of doing this: Raise taxes where the money is and whack the defense budget in
half and I mean take a swipe at all moneys related to security. Are we really $1 trillion dollars
worth of paranoid?
Three weeks ago Putin called Bernanke a
hooligan. Since that remark came from the (allegedly) largest oil producing country in the world,
it provoked nary a peep from America's foreign department. Today, he decided to ratchet up the rhetoric,
and in a speech to a Kremlin youth group told his listeners what the bulk of the rest of the world
thinks of America: ""They are living beyond their means and shifting a part of the weight of their
problems to the world economy," Putin told a Kremlin youth group while touring its summer camp north
of Moscow. "They are living like parasites off the global economy and their monopoly of the dollar.""
Russia has not made its distrust of America clear in the past, and while others (ahem China) have
been jawboning about selling Treasurys even as they continue buying US one-ply paper, Russia has
actively dumping its Treasury paper to the lowest in years. The reason for the unprovoked outburst?
The insanity in Congress. "Thank god," Putin said, "that they had enough common sense and responsibility
to make a balanced decision." The former KGBer's solution? Other, and more deserving, reserve currencies.
The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership
failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now
depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless
America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ''the buck
stops here.'' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of
our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans
I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America's debt limit."
Consider, for a second, a quick list
of characteristics of mind control techniques that cults use:
"Studies performed by those who believe that some religious groups do practice mind control
have identified a number of key steps in coercive persuasion:
People are put in physical or emotionally distressing situations;
Their problems are reduced to one simple explanation, which is repeatedly emphasized;
They receive unconditional love, acceptance, and attention from a charismatic leader
They get a new identity based on the group;
They are subject to entrapment (isolation from friends, relatives and the mainstream
culture) and their access to information is severely controlled."
Let's go through each one by one.
People are put in physically or emotionally distressing situations. Does the edifice
of modern-day finance put people in emotionally and physically distressing situations--moreso
than they have to be, to amplify the stakes? In fact, it puts entire nations and regions in them--just
ask Europe, America, or China. The cries of "Panic!! Armageddon!!" that every minor question or
challenge to the cult of finance are met with are a form of inflicting distress--as are the constant
looming threats that "the markets" will eternally, hellishly punish those who fail the test of
Problems are reduced to one simple explanation, repeatedly emphasized. Does the monolith
of modern-day finance reduce problems to one simple explanation, repeatedly emphasized? Sure:
it's the idea that I've called
financial determinism--that through unfettered financialization (read: bigger banks, funds,
faster trades, more intense buying and selling of paper) the world's challenges can be surmounted,
and humanity's biggest problems solved--and that conversely, without hyperfinancialization, humanity
has little chance at prosperity. Simply put: more finance, good. Less finance, bad. Would that
the world were so naively simplistic.
They receive unconditional love from a charismatic leader. One word: Geithner. Kidding
aside, the point is: the cult of finance has a set of leaders--leaders who show cult members a
level of unconditional love that's truly breathtaking, that makes religious cult leaders look
like misers. Bailout after bailout after bailout for blowing up entire economies? Now that's
They get a new identity based on the group. Does modern-day finance create "a new identity
based on the group"? I think so. Once you're a member of the cult of finance, the kid gloves come
on. You're essentially above the law, beyond the state, and through the looking glass. And I'd
guess that might be behind the curiously overweening sense of power most of the members of this
cult display: the off-the-cuff remarks that bank chiefs make, for example, that are farcically
absurd (when they're not savagely dehumanizing)--like Lloyd Blankfein's famous claim that Goldman
Sachs is just "doing God's work".
They are subject to entrapment, and their access to information is severely controlled.
Does modern-day finance create situations of entrapment, and control access to information? Of
course--it's entire "business model", as anyone who's spent more than a day or two inside an "investment
bank" is premised on hoarding, restricting, limiting, and squeezing information--and so literally
keeping nations and corporations, CEOs and prime ministers in the dark. This point is indisputable,
given the steep rise over the last few decades in revenues from trading--and the not-so-secret
secret that much of that trading revenue is based upon a whisper circuit of quasi-insider info.
The cult of finance is premised fundamentally on sophisticated tools to erect barriers to information
at every pass--that's exactly what shadow banking is.
I tried repeatedly to surrender to the House GOP, but they wouldn't take even my most abject surrender.
I have summoned them back to the White House tomorrow morning in another attempt to force them to
accept it. If worst comes to worst, and they will not accept my surrender, I am prepared to accept
theirs, but I really don't like it, and will use the opportunity to campaign against Democratic values
in the next election.
"...President Obama convened two dozen Wall Street executives, many of them longtime donors,
in the White House's Blue Room."
This lede needs a rewrite. A truer version would read:
The CEO brought in to manage the leveraged buyout of CSB Corp (Corporate States of Banking,
formerly USA) held a meeting of outside directors in the White House's Blue Room. Suspected
at times of excessive sympathy with the employees affected by restructuring plans which include
extensive layoffs and termination of pension and health benefits (aka 'entitlements'), Mr.
Obama sought to reassure investors in the deal of his commitment to delivering a quick return
on their capital.
Most of this capital was provided in the form of subprime CDO collateral during the famous
TARP bailout, and has itself been described (by anonymous sources, concerned for their safety)
as of 'questionable quality'. But the outside directors who assembled in the White House have
denounced these criticisms as 'scurrilous'.
I'm safe too. I am THE oligarchic fat cat. The system works for ME. This is oligarch nation
now! This MY world now! So bow down before me, you peasants! I foreclosed on your homes, I'll
cut your grandma's medicare, I'll privatize your social security, and I am going to make all of
you MY serfs.
Conservative Busheviks have a chance to be as disasterious the USA Inc. as Bolsheviks were for Russia
;-) "It's an elegant warning against the Republican obsession with winning at all costs. The party that
marches back into command behind the banner of Christine O'Donnell and Sharon Angle, O'Rourke is warning
his readers, is on a suicide mission"
Prankster and humorist P..J. O'Rourke has fooled the Weekly Standard into printing a
takedown of the conservative movement, masquerading as a takedown of liberalism. Democrats, O'Rourke
writes, are nihilists with no interest in passing good legislation.
They don't just hate our Republican, conservative, libertarian, strict constructionist, family
values guts. They hate everybody's guts. And they hate everybody who has any. Democrats hate men,
women, blacks, whites, Hispanics, gays, straights, the rich, the poor, and the middle class.
I imagined aloud that Obama was going to immediately step back to the mike, after having seemingly
finished, to throw in an, "Oh, by the way, I've officially shut down Guantanamo Bay for good,
and as of today, the War on Terror is officially declared "won", ALL of our troops and "contractors"
are on their way home as I speak, Bradley Manning has been freed on his own recognizance, and
the NSA and CIA have been shut down and their personnel are being reassigned to a brand new Wall
Street and Washington Ethics Police Force. That is all. Good night, and God bless America."