Linkee-poo late edition

"After months of expressing caution on a push for impeachment, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi launched a formal impeachment inquiry into President Trump Tuesday." So now we can stop tiptoeing around the elephant in the room. And while the media will focus on the Ukraine call, the Democrats better not limit their actions to that.

Of course, Trump has said he will release the transcript of the call with the Ukrainian President to show it was entirely above board. He's described the conversation as "perfect." No one describes their own conversations that way. That's what people say when you're accomplished all the points you had preplanned in the way that was outlined in advance. "Perfect" is a debate rating. So, yes, I expect that any conversation there had enough plausible deniability to pass the spin-cycle. But then, competency has never been this administration's calling card.

And again I'll say that speculation about the Ukraine call is just that, speculation. There's no actual confirmation that the whistleblower complaint was about, or only about, the Ukraine call.

The Democrats now have hard work ahead of them. They need to construct their argument, the testimony, their conversations with the press and public, all in a way that would make absolving this president and overt act of abandoning the Constitution and any pretense at being a nation of laws. Voting for this president should be seen as a vote against democracy. And no, I don't think they'll do a good job of it. The desire to grandstand and the Democrats propensity to believe everyone knows everything they know and can see through the bullshit is well known.

John Scalzi has a quick and decent analysis of this (and the Brexit thing). The path to "victory" (for various definitions of victory) is narrow, and it will need to be played well. And as John states, the Democrats aren't really known for their finesse and deftness.

But for the moment, while we can't "enjoy" what we (as a nation) are going to go through these next eight months (and yes, it might take that long or longer), we can have some hope we are going in the right direction. For the moment.

And saddle up, cause this process is going be at least twice the effort it took to get to this point. And you can expect the GOP to make this as unpleasant (including strife between people, friends, family, coworkers) as possible. There may be some violence, there will be reprisals, and it will not be "fun."

But it will determine if our experiment with democracy has some more life to it, or if we are fated to tyranny and rule by despots.

For your consideration, a sociological statement

Dogs, Animals by Pink Floyd, David Jon Gilmour and Roger Waters, 1977.



Remind you of anyone?

"Have you heard the news? The dogs are dead."

Well, someone in the White House knows how to play chess

The NYT editorial all the cool kids are talking about. It's a masterful bit of information warfare. The question, though, is who is it aimed at?

"Although he was elected as a Republican, the president shows little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives: free minds, free markets and free people. At best, he has invoked these ideals in scripted settings. At worst, he has attacked them outright."

The president is not a conservative? For some part this is true, however, and this can not be overstated, the GOP is Trump's party. He owns, if not the intellectual course, the rabid base. He owns and represents that 32% of conservative Americans who aren't going anywhere. Trump is a conservative, but here is a way to distance "True Conservatism" from the damage Trump is inflicting on the country. This is the "True Scotsman" fallacy.

"There are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture: effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military and more."

See, those things conservatives run on are "good" and the "highlights" of his administration.

"But these successes have come despite — not because of — the president’s leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty and ineffective."

Hi, have you meet conservative talk radio, InfoWars, or Fox News?

There is the discussion of everything we all can see. The chaos. His inability to think clearly or hold a position longer than a bowel movement. Of which the editorialist calls him a "flip-flopper." There's a tell. Intentionally planted, or a mistake? His love for tyrants and absolute rulers. His disdain for long time allies and his embrace of our enemies. Yes, we all see that.

There is a tribute to McCain which rings hollow. It's a recognition of popularity (and the obvious and overt hagiography) of McCain this past last weekend.

"There is a quiet resistance within the administration of people choosing to put country first. But the real difference will be made by everyday citizens rising above politics, reaching across the aisle and resolving to shed the labels in favor of a single one: Americans."

This is seeing the coming blue wave. If all is true, President Trump will not be the only one sunk by this sea of inequity. The wolves are at the door and they have the scent of the kill. Those associated, who participated, who actively supported and helped bring about this presidency, the appointees, employees, spear carriers and generals will all carry scarlet letters of association.

The NYT states this is a senior staffer, and I accept that they verified this. But the questions of motive still remain.

Is this a distraction from Kavanaugh? The waving hand of the stage magician meant to distract you?

Is this an attempt to call off the dogs? A move to allay our worst fears and maybe take off some of the pressure of Mueller's investigation? Maybe blunt the over enthusiasm of the left for the coming election? See, the president won't do the worst things in your imagination, we have people inside who will stop him. If so, I don't buy it. The president has shown his propensity to bulldoze ahead. Yes, the worst will come. It's already here, the stage has been set.

Is this an attempt to pre-re-write history? Again, all in the administration and all the lap dogs will be marked for complicity. Is this a move to leave doubt that maybe some of them aren't so bad? Should we throw them all to the wolves? Surely there are "good people" who "tried their best" among them. Again, I'm not buying it. If you feel such, resign. Do so publicly and with great fanfare. We don't have the function of a parliamentary government to hold votes of no-confidence. The only way to force the issue is to create the Constitutional Crisis we all know is really going on. End the charade, abandon the president, call for impeachment, force the enactment the 25th Amendment.

Is it an attempt to throw themselves on the mercy of the court? "We were with you all along." Again, I don't buy it.

Go peddle crazy somewhere else, we're all full here.

The president will rant and rave. He'll put on a good show and distract us for a few days. Sand will be thrown in the eyes of the charging bull. And the president may survive the mid-term elections. The Democrats will take the House, but by what margin? What about the Senate? How much has this president, the champion the base clamored for since 2004, tarnished the brand of conservatism? Is it on the surface and can be buffed away, or will it involve welding new material?

No, this is disinformation. This is a bold faced attempt to save the president, save the GOP, save their asses from the fire.

I'm not buying it.

For being where no man/one has gone there sure are a lotta people hanging about

Okay, so, I've seen this Shatner versus University professor thing for a little bit. Thoughts. Judging historical works through the lens of modern mores is perfectly legit. Running these works of the cannon through the modern lens is EXACTLY how art works. You can't do otherwise.

Now, to say we should then "change" the works, I disagree with. I have a long history of watching neutered Warner Brothers cartoons because of Puritanical thoughts of the 70s, do not mess with it. That doesn't mean you can't bookend the works with modern statements pointing out the flaws. My DVD of wartime cartoons does this very well. Leonard Maltin states specifically that the cartoons have racism, agreement with such racism was expected from the contemporaneous audience, but this doesn't make it right, and they weren't going to whitewash it out.

So, you can still find Laura Ingalls Wilder books in your libraries and bookstores. They have the often cited addendum to one line, but are still filled with the casual racism of the author (and the intended audience). They are classics of American Literature, which does not impart some sort of Holiness and infallibility.

The question was should a current award for children's literature continue to carry Laura Ingalls Wilder's name given the current social mores? And the answer is an emphatic no, it should not.

As a writer of SF and Fantasy, our community continues to struggle with this question. It was only last year (or the year before, sorry, past 50 and they start to run together) the statue for the World Fantasy Awards was changed from a bust of HP Lovecraft (who was wildly racists, even in the times he lived in). There are still new words being fed into the ravenous maw of Cthulhu, the universe he created. But these new words are written from a different perspective, and while they may describe racism as practiced in the time the story is set, the works themselves are not racist (for the most part). This may be a fine hair to split, but it's one I think that can and should be split.

Our past is racist. Shit, our present is still fucking racists. But that doesn't mean that we, ourselves, have to be racists.

Oh, while Star Trek did tackle racism (and nationalism) and misogyny, and was considered "progressive" by the contemporaneous standards, it still exhibited a good deal of racism, misogyny, and unexamined privilege. I think Shatner understands this and is attempting to preserve his own space and importance. It could also be a little bit about the worry that those of use growing older have of becoming irrelevant.

Shifts

So there's something I've been tracking for a little while now. Our Russian friends have been changing and adjusting their tactics. Since the beginning of the New Year, and accelerated in the last month, it appears the trolls have changed their composition.

Since the 2016 election we're now in stage 2 (or 4, depending on how you count these things) of operations. Without doing a deeper analysis their nominal composition was about 70/30 conservative (Trump)/liberal (mostly Bernie Bro). Our Russian friends now seem to be putting more resources into the liberal side, developing histories and credentials for the coming mid-term elections.

Again, without doing an analysis, it feels like the composition is roughly 50/50. It looks like the Russians are either playing the odds, or it's a concerted effort to bring more liberals into office. Doing so, while still pushing Trump, will lead to the instability and weakening of the West and the diminishment of the US (they believe) which are their goals.

There are, however, two things working against them. First of all, liberals don't bite on fake news as much as conservatives (although with the election of Trump it appears that more liberals are willing to believe conspiracy theories, it has to do with being out of power and influence and wanting to believe the worst about the opposition). The second part is poor operational controls and old dogs not learning new tricks (at least not fast enough). So for many of the social media accounts the profiles and pinned posts appear to be nominally liberal leaning (or using keywords), however their day to day posting really hasn't changed. For now it's still fairly easy to look behind the front. Old habits are hard to break, and their metrics goals haven't changed.

Or it could be a move to divide and demoralize the left. A play to drive the narrative. But I don't think so. I'm more included to believe their motivation is less ideologically based and more a power play.

I expect several briefings in your guys' futures. Just saying.

The landscape of the battlefield is changing. Their goals remain the same. It'll be interesting to see if they bring their kompromat into the open in an effort to weaken Trump earlier than what I expected (sometime in August/September 2020). It'll also be interesting to see if there's fallout from this switch. Although to be honest, the conservative side of the equations was pretty much self-sustaining, if somewhat isolated. I expect they'll continue to play both sides trying to point us at each other (like they did in 2016). It's also my personal view that they misunderstand the liberal mindset and our somewhat schizophrenic outlook as it doesn't play well into standard planning.

Also while some of us play the "who is more pure", it's not as much of a thing on the left as it is on the right. At this point they appear to be using the same playbook and just plugging in different words.

I don't give this much chance of success. At least not until they get better at this game.

That was interesting

I hope we passed the audition.

Alternatively, I'd really like to read my dossier to see how they analyzed my content.

Also, Google's built-in traffic trackers really need upgraded.

And finally… but oddly enough a lot of my friends are Twitter blocked by some "famous" people, but I'm not. WTF do I have to do here, peoples?!

Check, Check, Wheat Chex, Rice Chex, Chex Mix…

This is a test of the system. Please pay no attention.

Trump is a puppet.

:: waves to all my Russian friends ::

We now return you to your regular broadcast.

There's a place where we belong

It's easy to talk about how the "middle-America" problem is new and caused by NAFTA and those "illegal" immigrants taking "our" jobs. And it's just as much bullshit as the other times I've heard similar shit said during my life. "Things are so hard, we have to exit the EU to save our jobs and national identity" and "We need to renegotiate NAFTA because of all the jobs we lost." Bullshit. Want to know how I know this?

Don't Give Up – Peter Garbiel


This was released in 1986, before the EU (1993), before NAFTA (also 1993). I'm old, but I remember. This isn't the first time we've seen the problems that "the poor, rural white" is supposedly going through (and again, the average Trump voter makes above the average income). This isn't the first time Britain had economic problems. And if we keep blaming the wrong people and the wrong things, we'll continue to have the same problems.

(H/T to Dan for pointing to the song)

The sum of all fears

"Whatever Trump is thinking or means, the white nationalists and neo-Nazis he's activated will hear his speech with glee because he's channeling text book anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, with all the code words and emotional tenor." (Link grokked from John Scalzi) If this had been his first time, it would be easy to dismiss. Unfortunately for us, he long ago placed himself into the neo-Nazi camp willingly. It's about this speech. It's been a very long time since I looked at the rise of nationalism in Germany, but as I remember Trumpster is pretty much cribbing from speeches by Heinrich Himmler and Adolph. "You are great, but you've been subverted, suborn, and are being robbed of your birth right by these people." That pretty much the message of the Brown/Black Shirts. "'Their agenda is to elect crooked Hillary Clinton at any costs, at any price, no matter how many lives they destroy,' he continued. 'For them, it's a war. And for them, nothing at all is out of bounds. This is a struggle for the survival of our nation. Believe me. And this will be our last chance to save it.'" This is setting up the crowds to both commit and accept violence.

This is the myth of having a gun for self protection against robbery, rape, and home invasion writ large. You are being robbed. Your country is being stolen from you. People are conspiring against you. It would be concerning even without the NRA commercials glorifying a "2nd Amendment Solution" to protect yourself and saying Hillary Clinton is coming for your guns. This is different than past cycles which were merely "they're coming for your guns, support your rights," these commercials start with "I used my gun to protect myself" (call to normalize violence and put the idea in your head of using a gun to protect yourself), snd then "that person doesn't want you to be able to protect yourself" placing that person on the side of criminals who are going to harm you.

After the last election there was a spate of mass shootings where the perpetrators were recorded talking about or wishing that their actions would be the start of the revolution. I remember at least three of these. And this was the call from The Malheur National Wildlife Refuge occupation. They overly believed this would be the start of an armed uprising. The specifically called for groups to join them (only a few did, but people did come from across the US to their cause, Mr. "I just want me weed" was from Ohio). They wanted that to be the Lexington/Concord of the new America.

Our politics have been intentionally polarized for the past 30 years. I'm old enough to remember Conservative Democrats and Liberal Republicans. You don't hear about that too much any more. While the majority of people are politically in the middle, one party has been engaged in a sociological sorting based on symbolic causes (as compared to actual pragmatic programs). This is why you see many Christian Conservatives still supporting Trump even though he is the exact opposite of what they've said they are for. They've even come to the point of openly saying that Trump is a disgusting human being. But Trump has promised them power, promised them he would appoint anti-abortion judges. And because he hits those two symbolic hot points they will be his largest constituency and the leaders have mostly all said they will vote for him. The issue of control of SCOTUS has been very big in these last few weeks. Not by the candidate directly, but by the opening speakers and by his surrogates.

Since the last election this sorting has accelerated. Both sides look at the other and wonder just WTF they are thinking. Can't they see the Truth? It's even been stated in the debates about not know what world the other person lives in. The echo chambers on both sides have become intense. You might remember the studies about how we've sorted ourselves on social media. We joke about unfriending people (relatives) who hold the opposite political view. So even though we actually are mostly alike, we've been convinced by arguments over symbolic differences that we want different things. Abortion is probably the easiest issue to point to.

But what I'm worried about (and have been since March, although I had been chalking it up to my own paranoia) is this time, if Trump loses (and it certainly looks like not only will he lose, but he will lose big) he has already prepared his loyalists for action. He has made them paranoid and fearful that their world is ending and that they won't be safe. His rallies brim with violence against any target that might present itself (real or perceived, a mob isn't exactly rational in their choice of victim). I'm afraid the fire has already be lit, the decades of resentment have built up a reservoir of fuel, together they've seen their strength which is the air, all it needs is someone to pour gasoline on it.

And Trump, in his self-absorbed narcissism, in his desperate need to "not lose" and with his long established knee-jerk reaction of "hitting back", could either knowingly or unknowingly be the one who pours that gas.

I really, really pray I am wrong. I hope this is just my own paranoia. While in 2008 his rhetoric would not have had the same effect, the last eight years has seen the stage set for a violent showdown. Losing this election, possibly losing the Senate, maybe losing the House and state level control might be too much for his followers to accept in their worldview. And as has been shown through both the video of the audience at Trump rallies (what little there is), the profiles of Trump supporters like the PA woman's I shared in a previous linkee-poo, the rise of racist, religious, and personal hate crimes, these are not the most stable of people. They are fragile, and they will feel they've been robbed and are about to be harmed (there's been more than one mention of "re-education camps" in the troll age). They have a palpable need for a strongman figure to "right the world". Their leader is a poor loser and doesn't understand fully what his words and actions are bringing about (while I have some doubts, I do believe this is all narcissism and not actual political planning). Add in the machinations of Putin and we are at a dangerous cross roads.

I really hope this is only my own crazy thoughts.

Trump Gives Major Foreign Policy Speech

Who are we robbing?

I've had a weird career path. One of the effects of that is what I like to call "institutionalized paranoia." I'm constantly re-examining my own performance and my perception of the world. It's very easy to fall into False Attribution. That is where you see part of the story and then you make up your own reasons and plots for the rest of the story which typically turns out to be false.

Say you ask a friend to go see a movie and they say, "No." And then you think that your friend doesn't like you, doesn't like what you like, or something along those lines when in reality they really would like to go, but have already committed to something else (like mowing their grandparent's lawn). Take the movie "Oceans 12" for example. Almost the entire movie is a red herring and you only find out what was really going on, and how the game was over before it began, at the end.

So sometimes you look at evidence that doesn't make any sense, and you try to work it into a cohesive narrative. It is, after all, what our brains are designed to do.

For instance, the Trump campaign. Many of the moves, positions, staffing decisions, etc make absolutely no sense in a traditional narrative. People then come to the conclusion that he 1) has no real clue as to how to win an election (politically inept), 2) doesn't know how to function when people don't really need him or his money (narcissistic) or 3) is intentionally throwing the election (a ringer for Clinton).

But what if it's something else entirely? What if it's all going according to a plan. It's just that his plan is not the standard story we all know about how someone becomes President. What if we think he's playing checkers when he's actually playing Parcheesi or Go?

And I'm sure this is all tin-foil hat kinda stuff.

But what if he is setting up a power grab? What if he's intentionally courting the white supremacists who have been waiting and planning for their race war since the late 70s? What if he's giving voice, cover, and recruitment for organizations that have grown more numerous and who's ranks have swelled since President Obama took office? What if he is using the GOP to run cover for his real operation? What if the anger and violence at his rallies isn't accidental or unintended? What if he's signaling in the open, but we're misreading those signals as ineptitude? What if the worse case scenarios were real and after the election, where he will lose badly, he gives the go words, "The election was stolen from the American People"? What then? What if Maher was just one group jumping the gun because they didn't see the whole board and got ahead of themselves?

Could that explain his staffing choices of thugs and mercenaries? Could that explain his often erratic and troubling stances on non-inclusion of races and religions? Could that explain the number of spokespeople and campaigners (and staffers) that have ties to white nationalism? Could that explain how he quickly disavows somethings but took over a week to disavow Duke? Could that explain his staffers comments and positions ("says who?")? Could that explain the numerous retweets of known racists and even including their visuals at his rallies? Could that explain the rumblings of support from the racists? Could Duke running for office be another smoke screen to cover organizing (and that he's running his own game to gain power)?

Are we seeing signs that in December we'll all be saying, "Why, it's all so clear in retrospect?"

I'm sure it's just my institutionalized paranoia. But it makes me wonder exactly what the Southern Poverty Law Center is seeing in the field and if anyone there is as worried as I am at this point.

Audience tracking

Okay, it looks like all my new Russian friends are gone. Sad facey frowny. But my friends in Germany are still plugging along. Hi, guys. Enjoying the ride? (Actually I did have several hits from Germany before the whole Russian Troll Farm thing, but traffic from there is about twice the normal, and there's a suspicious amount from former Soviet Block countries)

The Devil and the Deep Blue Sea

A letter to my fellow progressives and liberals.

Okay, having fun watching the conservative side of politics implode from their own self-delusional behavior? Yes, it can be fun, in some ways, except that they may have so well fertilized the ground with conspiracy and idiocy that Donald Trump does have a legitimate path to win the White House. Not so funny anymore, is it? Unless you're in the media comedy (or standup) business, this would be a Very Bad Thing™.

And don't let the various articles from the GOP intelligentsia rending their garments and pissing themselves about Trump make you think that this Fall there's going to be some mass defection behind the voting booth curtain (does anybody still have those anymore?). Trump is exactly the candidate they want. He will be exactly the President they want.

• He will govern like a business dictator, which fits both their ideal view of what a President does. Which is why they're constantly upset at "Imperial Obama", but don't actually do anything about it. And it goes along with their professed view that government should be run like a business (no it should not, but they think it should)
• He hates the people they hate. This is what Trump's supporters are saying when they say "he tells it like it is" and "he says what's on his mind." What they mean is "I wish I could say those things in public" and "he isn't playing nice like we must to get along because we're scared of the other".
• He stokes their pet concerns about "absolute security" and "kicking all these people out" even though anyone with a brain, even in the GOP, will tell you those things are impossible and would cost too much.
• He is the school yard bully, which they love. Do I really need to explain further, do you not see the Bully/Toadie relationships. They like to talk tough, and beat their chests, and swing their dicks around like they own the place. They use the language of bullies. And the vast majority of them, faced with actual violence or having to fight, if they can't do the quick put down, the fold (how many draft deferments have been running this year).
• He thinks he'll be able to close down the parts of government they hate. It really isn't easy to do that. Just look at the discussions around creating DoH. Once created, it takes 100 times the effort to end.

I could cite more.

Although, I should point out, part of me wants it. Part of me wants to be able to point to concrete evidence that their rhetoric is garbage are not a way to govern by allowing him to be elected and watching the economy and our lives go right in the shitter. There have been lots of experiments run on the core economic and governance beliefs of the GOP, and they've all come up lacking and typically cost 2 to 100 times more. And despite all that real world evidence they just don't believe it, they'll continue to clap harder so Tinker Bell comes back to life. They've been doing it since Pres. Reagan. No, really, there are no new ideas in their campaigns. All the grass roots tell them that what they want is someone to espouse the Real Conservative Values and they believe their current leadership just hasn't had the guts to go full bore for them. But the hell we'd all have to live through isn't worth that satisfaction. And I'm also not willing to sacrifice my friends or their futures just to prove a point.

If you think this is a bonanza for Democratic Party, you need to re-examine what is about to happen. The GOP will hold their noses and the rank and file will close up and they'll all vote for him. The ones who don't will just lose heart and stay away from the polls. Their hate of Hillary Clinton will drive them more than their fear of turning over the government to a demagogue. Conservatives are reliable voters. More of them reliably vote straight ticket than any other demographic. And they always come to the election. This is why they win off year elections. The Democratic Party hasn't been focused on statewide and national elections since the late 80s, so there isn't as big an effort to get to the polls on the off years.

Here's what the Democrats really need to come out of this and do.

• Deep down-ticket support for candidates at the local level. That means cultivation, encouragement, and education of progressives who are willing to serve on local committees and be elected as mayors, councilmen, supervisors, etc.
• Stop believing everyone is paying attention and knows all the ramifications of the arguments. Look at how the GOP does it, zombie arguments galore because even after being disproven, they still continue to make the same statements and argue their talking points like nothing happened.
• Never believe the argument is ever over. The conservatives have lost on Social Security, Medicare, Civil Rights, abortion, Obamacare. Have you seen them walk away from the battlefield? They are still hell bent on making this election a referendum on Obamacare. I see you shaking your head, yes, we already had one. But they didn't get the outcome they wanted so they will do it again. And again. And again until they win. I'll point to abortion as the example. The battles are not over, get back to the ramparts and defend your ideas full throatedly. Without opposition they will wear down the public and convince them they are right. Keep beating that damn horse until it actually falls apart.
• You have a historic opportunity to explain how all elections matter. This presidential election is about more than just the Presidency. It's about the Supreme Court with both this opening and the possibility that 3 other judges will be nominated by the next president. That's four justices and the majority of the Court. If you think a Trump presidency would give a damn about the balance of the Court, get medication. Even if he doesn't believe the rhetoric (which I think is a dangerous assumption), giving the conservatives an overwhelming majority would secure his re-election and they'd probably carve his face on Mt. Rushmore.
• Don't beat the issue until the base doesn't want to hear it. Democrats are notorious for getting tired of an issue quickly. There will be enough opportunity that will come naturally in the course of this to remind everyone what is at stake.

So here we are, as the GOP elite allow the coronation of the person they despised. The wonks know they have no other cards to play and so will bluff with the 10 high hand they have with Trump hoping progressives shoot themselves in the foot again. And while the circus goes on, they work hard on the bread and win small victories that amount to much more. Democrats point and laugh and think the public agrees with them and understands the implications of what is being said including not actually asking for the votes of the people.

I still think Hillary has the strongest chance of winning the election. She understands the politics of the situation better than anybody. Unfortunately the party seems to be paralyzed and not willing to take the cheap shots needed to change the course (mostly because liberals hate the bitter parts of politics). I keep hearing rumors that President Obama is ginning up his electoral engine, but I see so little on the ground, it makes me worry.

The GOP registered 1 million new voters in the Youngstown area. The Democrats are calling for 3 million new Ohio voters by the end of the month.

I don't know the answer. I wish I did. That part of my brain that kept bothering me during the waning years of the GW Bush presidency has been worrying me again. "You swore an oath, Buchheit. What the fuck are you going to do about it?" I don't know.

Linkee-poo special

So, today the Trumpster made a gaff and said that if abortion is made illegal, women who have abortions should be punished. He later walked back that statement (while at the same time saying his position hasn't changed, see earlier statements on how the Trumpster talks and tries to get things both ways). He did this because there was tremendous outcry against that position, including from the anti-abortion crowd who said they would never go that far.

Oh, reeeeeeally?

Rennie Gibbs in Mississippi, Purvi Patel in Indiana, Amanda Kimbrough in Alabama, Nina Buckhalter in Mississippi (again), Melissa Ann Rowland in Utah, Bei Bei Shuai in Indiana, and others. All of these mothers are being prosecuted because their children were either stillborn or died shortly after birth. All charged under laws protecting the health of the fetus (most charged with ingesting drugs or poison to intentionally cause the death of the fetus). It took me longer to type this paragraph than it did to google the articles.

So let me call bullshit on the anti-abortion movement. They really do want to make abortion illegal and inaccessible to women, and then prosecute those who may try to do it themselves. They also are coming for your birth control (as previously linked to).

Dear media outlets, this is part of what we mean when we say that you need to report on what is happening, not just say, "this person said this." But that requires smart people doing the reporting, and the courage of the news outlets to upset the people they report on. This isn't hidden knowledge, but it does require actual effort. As you can see it doesn't require much effort.

Go and do likewise

I voted today (with the security at the day job I'm finding it difficult to upload the photo of the "I voted" sticker). I was vote #5 at my precinct. If you live in the 5 states and 1 territory that votes today, and you're registered, go and vote. If you're eligible but not registered, take the time to get registered so you can vote in the Fall.

Vote

Just a reminder that if you live in the 5 states voting tomorrow (Florida, Illinois, Missouri, North Carolina or Ohio, oh, and the Northern Mariana Islands) and are a registered voter, I don't care whom you support, get out and vote.

Briar Rabbit

Okay, crazy wild-ass conspiracy theory to follow.

Donald Trump is a Republican plant. Not the leafy kind, the kind that waves it's hands and keeps you from noticing someone is making bunny-ears behind you for the class picture.

I know what you're thinking, but give it a moment (and I'll probably discount this tomorrow).

First off, the Right has a long history of shouting "Wolf" and the Left only to kept the Left from claiming the Right is the Wolf. If you've been watching Fox news you've seen this play out a thousand times. And this strategy was outlined in a number of memos that came out from Newt Gingrich in the 90s on how to influence people and win elections. And it was early on that the Right claimed that Donald Trump was a plant from the Democratic Party.

See, one of the lessons the Right learned in 2012 was that people actually listen and pay attention now. I know there's been a lot of "Mitt Romney lost because he couldn't sway minorities… he was too moderate… he was establishment…" blah blah. Remember all their polling told them they would win easily. But you know what, the electorate had almost 6 months of Romney, and that was all they could take. Actually we had enough of Mitt as he was dragged to the Right to win the Primaries, he couldn't swing hard enough to the Center to win in the general election (the Right wouldn't let him, and there were all those statements he made during the Primaries that came back to haunt him, "Corporations are people, too, my friend" and "I'm a conservative's conservative").

So, what better way to remove that threat as all the candidates swing hard to the Right to win the primaries than give the public Bread and Circuses. What did the English Parliament call Trump, "a buffoon, a clown…". But an entertaining one. As all the other candidates make their dog whistles to the Right, Trump is out there in front blatantly calling out the political game and sucking up all the air in the room, not to mention all the air time from the news. So the Right gets to hear the candidates, but the general populace only gets to hear Trump.

Trump is winning what the Right considers their "staunch supporters", they kind they believe will come out and vote for anyone with an "(R)" after their name. All to keep those godless liberals from office. So, the RNC thinks Trump can do his dance, keep all the yokels satisfied and keep the Left distracted.

Why would he have not only missed the last debate before Iowa, but also counter schedule his own event? Maybe to keep the general public's eyes from the debate, but allow the hard core caucusers get a clear view of the candidates.

The RNC and Fox News keep going from loving him to having fits about him. But lately those fits have held a tinge of "Don't throw me in the briar patch" about them. Plausible denial.

And what does Trump get? Publicity. Lots of it. And he gets to call himself a winner. Fawning fans that love him, feeding his narcissism. And in the end, maybe a President that will see to his interests as a very rich guy. Also, if he plays his cards right, it might be him (do you think Trump would never try to double-cross someone?).

Just some idle thoughts.

I'm sure it's not true.

Thoughts on the Campaign on Donald Trump

And here I will pause for a moment. In my twitter feed there has been a lot of people talking about being at that moment in Weimar Republic and there being a funny looking little guy with dangerous ideas rousing up the folk, and just what were we going to do about it, President Hindenburg? And I'm not entirely sure they're wrong anymore. Donald Trump is just as ignorant as the people he's whipping into a frothy mixture with stiff peaks. But he's smart enough to play that ignorance, the be the populist to that demographic. Hindenburg and his intelligentsia laughed at the funny little man. And then, three years later, he appointed him Chancellor with emergency powers. Because laughing up our sleeves doesn't counter his message.

And, yes, I've just Godwin'ed my own post. It's intentional.

I am as guilty as the next person for making the Trumpster the butt of the joke (see all the Linkee-poos since, I don't know, July?). I'm not going to stop at that, but I've never discounted him or the rage he's tapping into. It's a dangerous path he's trending, and to mix my metaphor, that high-voltage live wire he has grasped may just turn on him. He has shown he knows how to wield it. Not everything has gone his way, but that power is intoxicating and the people around him are getting a contact high from it.

His rise needs to be checked, and that may mean some of us will need to grab that hot end of that live wire. My tool of choice is ridicule, to play the fool, but my voice is small. Together our voice is louder. It may be that New Hampshire breaks the campaign (I'm laying odds he wins Iowa), it has done so in the past. However, the Trumpster has broken the patterns of the past ("he'll fade by Fall", "He won't make it past the tides of October", "We'll see his numbers fall by Thanksgiving when people really start to make up their minds and get serious"). The Trumpster is doing quite well with the theory, "There go my people, I must leave to go lead them." The undercurrent of hate and pent up anger (yes, to these people, it's still pent up) is a strong tide he can ride right into office. I can't let that happen. The rest of the GOP field appears better only because of the comparison to the lunacy of the Trumpster. He's a dangerous lunatic, fueled by narcissism and his internal stories. He's taken on the mantle of the Voice of the People. That's a major step.

His rallies are not safe places to contradict him (I give props to the Black Lives Matter Movement and Jorge Ramos for trying, those people have put their health and safety on the line). A head-to-head confrontation will lead to violence. Not from the Trumpster himself, but from his followers who have reached a point where they will tolerate no dissent. In these types of movements, the front men never get their hands dirty, and there are toadies a plenty who will volunteer to do the work. The Trumpster needs to be countered before we reach a state of not being able to stand up to him.

Many people who remind us to think of the Nazis and not wanting to repeat history have an incomplete knowledge of that history. Before the Holocaust, before the Nazis rounded up the crippled, mentally ill, handicapped, and then gay people for extermination there was the Night of the Long Knives when Hitler and his cronies assassinated anyone that might challenge him for power (including many leading Nazis and Brownshirts).

Right now everyone is discounting the Trumpster's chances. And none more loudly than those on the right. The establishment of the GOP is already conceding they may be losing control, and the Trumpster has made even Chairman Reince Priebus apologize and make nice (so there's not going to be any King Richard moment coming). He's formed a co-dependent relationship with Roger Ailes. He is coopting the power structure of the party.

They all say he won't last past Iowa. And even if he makes it to the nomination, Hillary will stomp all over that parade. I am not as certain. A small victory in Iowa could be enough to propel him to the nomination (it hasn't happen for the past 20+ years, but again he is breaking all known patterns). Even a strong showing (but an over all loss) in Iowa might be enough. And then as we on the left laugh, scoff, and point at the ignorance and fear mongering suddenly we wake up November 9th to President-Elect The Donald. And that's a hang-over I don't want to experience. Again, this is the actual lesson of history.

So understand when I make fun of him, I'm dancing in front of the King with my jester stick firmly in hand, looking for an opening to twist the (metaphorical and/or political) knife in.

If I'm successful we can tie all the bastards together so we only have to find one weight to sink them to the bottom (I grew up in southern NJ, it's a thing there).

Terrorism 101

Terrorism is used to provoke an unlawful, disproportionate response that violates citizens expectation of rights and protections. By doing so a government breaks the social contract with citizens, which leads to questioning the right of that government to exist. Long term fear leads to anger, anger leads to blame. People blame their government for not protecting them. This leads to revolution, which is the terrorists' goal. The overthrow of governments by the citizens.

Terrorists are political animals. They don't eat, shit, or piss unless their politics tells them to do so. The are revolutionaries who realize their own cause can't draw enough people or funds to actually cause the revolution. So they turn to terrorism and wait for the targeted governments/societies to tear themselves apart. In that chaos they hope to emerge in a position of power, however they have accepted they may all die to get there.

So every idiot out there who tells you that you should be afraid, afraid of refugees fleeing these same terrorists, strangers, your government, your fellow citizens, they are doing the work of the terrorists for them. Donald Trump saying he would bomb ISIS is falling into that trap (if it were that easy, drop a few bombs, we would be way past the time when they were all dead). Every idiot saying "we should kill all the muslims" is doing the work of the terrorists. That's exactly what ISIS/al Qaeda wants us to do. Every Congressperson and Senator who says we shouldn't close Gitmo and handle these people as either criminals or repatriate them is doing the work of the terrorists.

This is how they work. They divide us up, make us come to the conclusion that only revolution will cure us of the disease. Drive us to remove rights and oppress others, violate our own laws and societal customs. All of this is exactly what the terrorist wants. Even to the point of their own extinction, this is what they want.

Because the ultimate goal is to kill off the targeted government. If the terrorists survive to take advantage of the situation, that's just the icing on top.

Don't fall into their trap.

And, yes, so far they're winning because G. W. Bush forgot that lesson once he walked back into the White House on 9/11 and fell prey to the chickenhawks in his administration. You only have to look at the racist, isolationist, chest beating responses to the Paris attacks to see that they are winning. Look at how Europe is responding. That's because they have had decades longer experience dealing with terrorism (especially when it was home brewed). They know this playbook better than we do.

You should too

Gods, can we get a decent designer in government. These stickers suck (besides being very derivative). What's next, "Got Vote?" Yet another reason to hate Jon Husted. Besides being a horrible politician, he can find or appreciate good art. Let that be your tombstone.