Monthly Archives: October 2011

He was drunk. Or he has a brain tumor.

FILE - In this Oct. 18, 2011 file photo, Republican presidential candidates, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, left, and Texas Gov. Rick Perry, speak during a Republican presidential debate in Las Vegas. Rick Perry plans to participate in at least five more presidential primary debates, his campaign said Saturday, Oct. 29, 2011 dismissing speculation that the Texas governor's lackluster performances so far would lead him to skip future Republican debates.  (AP Photo/Chris Carlson, File)

Associated Press photo

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and current Texas Gov. Rick Perry tangle at a Repugnican Tea Party presidential debate earlier this month in Las Vegas.

Jesus fuck. I’d read Internet buzz that Rick Perry apparently was drunk during a recent speech that he gave in New Hampshire, but Rachel Maddow’s coverage of it pretty much removes all doubt.

Slurring his words, being confused as to what his next word will be, choosing odd and quite unpresidential words and gestures, displaying emotional lability — yes indeed, Rick Perry very apparently was publicly drunk. On videocamera.

If not, perhaps he has a brain tumor.

Something neurological, whether it was alcohol and/or drug intoxication and/or some neurological condition, was going on.

Wow.

Let’s give this guy access to The Button — not.

Team Romney must be absolutely giddy, with it being all over but the (drunken) crying for Rick Perry, and with Herman Cain probably unable to politically survive the revelation that the National Restaurant Association, which he headed in the 1990s, very apparently did give payouts to one or two women who had accused Cain of sexual harassment. No matter what Cain did or did not do, such a payout itself is pretty fucking damaging.

And my guess is that former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee kicks himself daily for having bailed out of the race so early.

P.S. Rachel Maddow does not come right out and say it in her piece that Perry appeared to be drunk, as it’s difficult to prove definitively whether or not someone was inebriated, and she and MSNBC no doubt don’t want to be sued. I have no such fear.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Ides of October

Herman Cain has proposed a so-called "9-9-9" tax plan that would tax people, businesses and sales at a flat nine percent

AFP photo

Maybe “666” wasn’t the best photo op after all… (I mean, it’s pretty pathetic when Michele Bachmann is shown to maybe have been correct about anything.) Anyway, Repugnican Tea Party presidential wannabe Herman Cain has been accused of having sexually harassed at least two women while on the job. Why do I tend to believe that he is guilty as charged? 

So last night I saw the George Clooney political movie “The Ides of March,” which is about how a good old-fashioned sex scandal can bring down a presidential campaign. (While not as good as Clooney’s “Good Night, and Good Luck,” “The Ides of March” is watchable.)

And then, later last night, I saw the headlines that top-tier Repugnican Tea Party presidential candidate Herman Cain has been accused of having been accused of sexual harassment at least twice in the mid- to late 1990s when he was the top dog of the National Restaurant Association.*

Wow. What timing.

Of course the Cain campaign vehemently denies that Cain ever sexually harassed anyone. (Cain — who, for some fucking reason, many people actually claim is a good speakereven asked a POLICITO reporter who had asked him about the sexual harassment allegations if he [the reporter] had ever been accused of sexual harassment. Yeah, very presidential.)  

While I believe that even a wingnutty scumbag like Cain is (at least more or less) innocent until proven otherwise, the thing is, I still believe Anita Hill, and it looks as though we have another Clarence-Thomas-type of scandal unfolding right about now.

More locally, when he was running in the bullshit do-over California gubernatorial election of 2003, former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger was accused of having sexually harassed — even sexually assaulted — several women during his years in Hollywood. The Schwarzenegger campaign essentially called all of these women liars. Maria Shriver of the Democratic Kennedy dynasty publicly stated that she stood by her Repugnican man, which helped Schwarzenegger to usurp the governorship from the duly re-elected Democratic governor, Gray Davis.

Then, after his governorship ended in January of this year, Schwarzenegger in May admitted, after he’d been outed by the Los Angeles Times, that he had knocked up his housekeeper and that she had borne his son in 1997. Obviously, had the state’s voters known this juicy fact in 2003, they never would have voted for Schwarzenegger in the Repugnican-orchestrated gubernatorial recall election, and Maria Shriver, understandably, is keeping a very low profile here in California these days.

Gee, if he knocked up his housekeeper, do you think that Baby Daddy Schwarzenegger may actually have sexually harassed all of those (other) women after all?

It all boils down to this, methinks: Men who woefully mistakenly believe that they are qualified for high political office, such as the presidency or the governor of the nation’s most populous state, even when they never have held any elected office before — and both Cain and Schwarzenegger fit this description — obviously have issues with power.

Politics is the exercise of power, as is sexual harassment. (Many of us don’t like to talk about issues of power, which is why sex, politics and religion, which are so interchangeable and which all have to do with the exercise of power, are such taboo topics even though they probably are the most important topics that we possibly could discuss.)

Do I know that Herman Cain is guilty as charged? No. I wasn’t there. But if I had to bet a large sum of money on it, which way would I go?

I’d bet that Herman Cain is another Clarence Thomas.

And it’s a slap in the faces of all women to automatically call any woman a liar when she reports sexual harassment — especially when most of the time such allegations turn out to be quite true.

And after the likes of Clarence Thomas and Arnold Schwarzenegger, do we really want to get punk’d again by another sexual harasser, a man who has demonstrated that he cannot wield his personal (political) power responsibly?

*The website POLITICO broke the story, reporting:

During Herman Cain’s tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, at least two female employees complained to colleagues and senior association officials about inappropriate behavior by Cain, ultimately leaving their jobs at the trade group, multiple sources confirm to POLITICO.

The women complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain that made them angry and uncomfortable, the sources said, and they signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them financial payouts to leave the association. The agreements also included language that bars the women from talking about their departures.

In a series of comments over the past 10 days, Cain and his campaign repeatedly declined to respond directly about whether he ever faced allegations of sexual harassment at the restaurant association. They have also declined to address questions about specific reporting confirming that there were financial settlements in two cases in which women leveled complaints.

POLITICO has confirmed the identities of the two female restaurant association employees who complained about Cain but, for privacy concerns, is not publishing their names. … [Full story here.]

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Why the rise of Cain

Republican Presidential candidate, Herman Cain campaigns in Talladega, Ala., Friday, Oct. 28, 2011. (AP Photo/Dave Martin)

Associated Press photo

Herman Cain rants and raves in Talladega, Alabama, yesterday. Recent polls have him at the top of the Repugnican Tea Party field, and indeed, as the photo below of him campaigning in Alabama yesterday apparently demonstrates, many of the overwhelmingly white “tea party” dipshits find him to be acceptable, since he’s not an “angry” black man who poses a threat to white rule.

Republican Presidential candidate, Herman Cain campaigns in Talladega, Ala., Friday, Oct. 28, 2011. (AP Photo/Dave Martin)

Associated Press photo

Maybe the “tea partiers” aren’t racist after all, since Herman Cain is leading even perennial Repugnican frontrunner Mitt Romney* in some recent polls, some are positing.

No, that’s not it.

Repugnican Tea Party presidential contender Herman Cain is more or less acceptable to many (if not most) of the Repugnican Tea Party traitors because he sides with the white conservative argument that if blacks and others are struggling — and they are — then it’s their own damn fault. Cain promotes Ayn-Randian social Darwinism — which contradicts everything that the (little-s”) socialist Jesus Christ taught, but these right-wing fascists call themselves “Christians” nonetheless — which is why so many conservatives find Cain to be acceptable. If he were preaching actual social justice, like Cornel West does, it would be an entirely other story.

And to many if not most of the plutocrats and their supporters, wealth trumps race, in this day and age. Sure, white conservatives prefer that if you are rich you also be white, but so long as you are rich — and support the capitalistic oppression of the non-rich — to some degree it can be overlooked if you aren’t white. So Cain has that going for him.

Another huge factor of Cain’s current success is that for some time the Repugnican Tea Party cynically has tried to match Barack Obama with brown-skinned Repugnicans (of which there aren’t many), such as former Repugnican National Committee chair Michael Steele (who was selected to head the party shortly after Obama took office in January 2009) and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. “See! We’re not racist!” is the entire point of that cynical exercise.

This campaign button that was for sale at Cain’s appearance in Alabama yesterday — which, admittedly, may not have been produced by the Cain campaign but may have been produced by some opportunistic independent profiteer —

Campaign buttons for Republican Presidential candidate Herman Cain are seen on sale as he campaigned in Talladega, Ala., Friday, Oct. 28, 2011. (AP Photo/Dave Martin)

Associated Press photo

— fairly blatantly compares Cain to Obama, apparently primarily because they’re both black men. That seems to me to be a rather perverse form of racism in itself.

It also presumes that most voters are incredibly stupid. (To be sure, a great many of them are, but probably most of them are not.) We were to believe that the selection of (anti-choice) Sarah Palin as John McCainosaurus’ running mate signified that the Repugnican Party is feminist, too — as opposed to the clearly anti-feminist Democratic Party, which chose Barack Obama over Billary Clinton.

Women voters didn’t buy that bullshit, and I wouldn’t expect voters to buy it that Herman Cain is good for the majority of blacks (or for the rest of us who aren’t rich) any more than Sarah Palin is good for women.

There’s also the dumbfuck factor. Just as wingnuts loved the English-challenged George W. Bush so much because he gave them hope that fucktards like they also could be president or otherwise make it big one day, Cain, with his oversimplistic bullshit, such as his “9-9-9” plan (which reminds me of an enraged Adolf Hitler screaming, “Nein! Nein! Nein!” in Quentin Tarantino’s “Inglorious Basterds,” and which, I understand, first was introduced to us in a video game called “SimCity”), appeals to the dumbfucks, who also believe that things are much simpler than they actually are, and that highly complex problems can be solved with simple solutions or even just simple slogans. (Simple minds think simple thoughts.)

Finally, Cain also has going for him the factor that actually also worked in Barack Obama’s favor, and that is that Obama did not have a long history in national politics before he ran for the White House. Obama was a relative unknown, having been elected to the U.S. Senate only in 2004, for fuck’s sake, before he became president in 2008, not even having finished out his six-year Senate term.

Cain has held no elected office at all, which, I suppose, makes him an even bigger unknown that Obama was — and thus, on that measure, an even “stronger” presidential candidate than Obama was, if being unknown is a strength. (Only in the crumbling American empire could it be.) Of course, the wingnuts’ blind faith that an unknown like Cain possesses even the bare minimum competence to be president of the United States (I mean, I don’t think that he could get all of his presidential policies from video games) is about as smart (in retrospect) as was our progressives’ blind faith that Obama the unknown actually would fulfill his ubiquitous campaign promises of “hope” and “change.”

I still expect Mitt Romney to secure the 2012 Repugnican Tea Party presidential nomination. Cain’s surge now is attributable not only to the factors above but also to how much Southerners don’t like Mitt from Massachusetts and to how, as another blogger put it, when he has to speak in a debate, Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who apparently was supposed to have been the South’s Great White Hope, turns into Porky Pig. (The inability to speak coherently seemed to work in Gee Dubya’s favor, but not in Perry’s. Go figure.**)

But, just as the Repugnicans cynically paired McCainosaurus up with a woman to show how “inclusive” the Repugnican Party is, I could see a Romney-Cain ticket for 2012.

In fact, I’d almost bet money on it.

P.S. I visited Cain’s official website’s store, and I don’t see the button that is pictured above. Again, I suspect that the button was produced by an opportunistic independent profiteer, as were these buttons, very apparently, which are available via cafepress.com, which apparently has no standards of decency whatsofuckingever:

Beat Obama 2.25" Button
Crackers for Cain 2.25" Button
Nice.

*A recent Faux “News” poll put Cain at four percentage points ahead of Romney, as did a recent CBS News/New York Times poll.

**Also, the Repugnican Tea Party acts as though the eight, long, nightmarish years of the unelected reign of the BushCheneyCorp never even fucking happened. I remember well that the McCainosaurus-Palin ticket never talked about George W. Bush’s “accomplishments,” but only talked about Ronald Reagan, and the current crop of Repugnican Tea Party presidential contenders also are reaching waaaaay back to the Reagan years and acting as though George W. Bush had never been president.

I surmise that this Gee Dubya stigma is hurting Perry, who, the Repugnican Tea Partiers fear, correctly, is way too reminiscent of the last governor of Texas who went to the White House.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

U.S. now produces only corpses

The body of Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi lies on a mattress in a commercial freezer at a shopping center in Misrata, Libya, Friday, Oct. 21, 2011. The burial of slain leader Moammar Gadhafi has been delayed until the circumstances of his death can be further examined and a decision is made about where to bury the body, Libyan officials said Friday, as the U.N. human rights office called for an investigation into his death. (AP Photo/Manu Brabo)

Associated Press photo

This is all that the crumbling American empire produces and exports these days: death and destruction. Gooooo USA! 

A column that Salon.com’s Glenn Greenwald posted yesterday is pretty spot-on about what the United States of America has become. Greenwald notes that “there is something very significant about a nation that so continuously finds purpose and joy in the corpses its government produces, while finding it in so little else.” (The occasion of Greenwald’s column is the latest U.S.-government-produced corpse, that of Libyan dictator Moammar Gaddafi [pictured above], whom, like other dictators, the U.S. government opposed, then cooperated with, then opposed again.)

Greenwald begins his column by reminding us of the uber-creepy language that President Hopey-Changey used in early May after the U.S. government summarily had assassinated Osama bin Laden in violation of justice and of international law:

When President Obama announced the killing of Osama bin Laden on the evening of May 1, he said something which I found so striking at the time and still do: “tonight, we are once again reminded that America can do whatever we set our mind to. That is the story of our history.”

That sentiment of national pride had in the past been triggered by putting a man on the moon, or discovering cures for diseases, or creating
technology that improved the lives of millions, or transforming the Great Depression into a thriving middle class, or correcting America’s own entrenched injustices.

Yet here was President Obama proclaiming that what should now cause us to be “reminded” of our national greatness was our ability to hunt someone down, pump bullets into his skull, and then dump his corpse into the ocean.*

And indeed, outside the White House and elsewhere, hordes of Americans were soon raucously celebrating the killing with “USA! USA!” chants as though their sports team had just won a major championship. …

Speaking of sports teams, that is all that the Democratic Party has become: a sports team that many Americans identify with. This is evidenced by the fact that even when Barack Obama violates the U.S. Constitution (e.g., denying assassinees and detainees due process, unilaterally declaring war, etc.) and international law (e.g., assassinating individuals on foreign soil without the consent of that sovereign nation’s government) and sits on his hands in the face of catastrophe (Obama handled British Petroleum’s destruction of the Gulf of Mexico as effectively as George W. Bush would have) — even when President Hopey-Changey acts or fails to act in the same illegal and/or immoral and/or ineffectual manner of which the Dems would have been critical had it been a Repugnican president in power — the Obamabots, if they can’t exactly find it within themselves to celebrate Barack Obama’s George-W.-Bush-like ways, at least keep their mealy mouths shut, and thus empower and enable the lawless, immoral, pro-plutocratic and militaristic Obama regime through their complicity.

This amorality and immorality is why, as Chris Hedges writes, the liberal class (as he calls the Democrats in name only, those who claim to be liberal or progressive but who don’t actually lift a fucking finger for progressive causes, and who, if they don’t actually engage in evil themselves, at least enable the evils encouraged and perpetrated by the right wing) is in its death throes.

The reason that Obama’s re-election prospects are dim, you see, is that the wingnuts prefer actual wingnuts to “liberal” sellouts like Obama — no matter how many baddies/“baddies” he assassinates with our tax dollars as though he were some Big Fucking Badass — and the so-called “independents”/“swing voters,” the majority of whom actually are center-right or even pretty far to the right, also prefer the actual Repugnican candidate to the Repugnican Lite candidate (like Barack Obama).

Actual progressives like me and the millions of other Americans (and those abroad) who are participating in or who at least sympathize with the Occupy Wall Street movement also have no use for Obama — stick a fork in him, because we are done with him and his false promises and his true allegiances — which leaves President Hopey-Changey only with his mealy-mouthed Obamabots, who are so fucking worthless that they might as well donate their organs now so that others can make better use of them.

We actual progressives can thank Obama, however, for thoroughly exposing how much the Democratic Party, since Bill Clinton, has sold us Americans out to our corporate/plutocratic overlords. Chris Hedges asks us:

What kind of nation is it that spends far more to kill enemy combatants and Afghan and Iraqi civilians than it does to help its own citizens who live below the poverty line? What kind of nation is it that permits corporations to hold sick children hostage while their parents frantically bankrupt themselves to save their sons and daughters? What kind of nation is it that tosses its mentally ill onto urban heating grates? What kind of nation is it that abandons its unemployed while it loots its treasury on behalf of speculators? What kind of nation is it that ignores due process to torture and assassinate its own citizens? What kind of nation is it that refuses to halt the destruction of the ecosystem by the fossil fuel industry, dooming our children and our children’s children?

An Obamanation, I might answer.

And Hedges answers, I think, the question of why the Occupy Wall Street movement has been so successful:

The liberal class functions in a traditional, capitalist democracy as a safety valve. It lets off enough steam to keep the system intact. It makes
piecemeal and incremental reform possible. This is what happened during the Great Depression and the New Deal. Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s greatest achievement was that he saved capitalism. Liberals in a functioning capitalist democracy are at the same time tasked with discrediting radicals, whether it is [Martin Luther] King [Jr.], especially after he denounced the war in Vietnam, or later Noam Chomsky or Ralph Nader.

The stupidity of the corporate state is that it thought it could dispense with the liberal class. It thought it could shut off that safety valve in order
to loot and pillage with no impediments. Corporate power forgot that the liberal class, when it functions, gives legitimacy to the power elite. And the reduction of the liberal class to silly courtiers, who have nothing to offer but empty rhetoric, meant that the growing discontent found other mechanisms and outlets.

[All emphasis in this block quote is mine. Indeed, the success of the Internet as a political organizing tool is due to the fact that the duopoly of the corporate-ass-licking Coke Party and Pepsi Party stopped addressing the common American’s needs and interests long ago, and thus the common American has found alternative routes, has flowed around the obstruction that is the partisan duopoly that masquerades as “democracy” in the United States of America. And now we see Occupy Wall Street as yet another adaptive response to the utter ineffectiveness refusal of the two parties to represent us, the people.]

Liberals were reduced to stick figures, part of an elaborate pantomime, as they acted in preordained roles to give legitimacy to meaningless and useless political theater. But that game is over.

Human history has amply demonstrated that once those in positions of power become redundant and impotent, yet retain the trappings and privileges of power, they are brutally discarded. The liberal class, which insists on clinging to its positions of privilege while at the same time refusing to play its traditional role within the democratic state, has become a useless and despised appendage of corporate power. And as the engines of corporate power pollute and poison the ecosystem and propel us into a world where there will be only masters and serfs, the liberal class, which serves no purpose in the new configuration, is being abandoned and discarded by both the corporate state and radical dissidents. The best it can do is attach itself meekly to the new political configuration rising up to replace it.

An ineffectual liberal class means there is no hope of a correction or a reversal through the formal mechanisms of power. It ensures that the frustration and anger among the working and the middle class will find expression now in these protests that lie outside the confines of democratic institutions and the civilities of a liberal democracy. …

[T]he liberal class, by having refused to question the utopian promises of unfettered capitalism and globalization and by condemning those who did, severed itself from the roots of creative and bold thought, the only forces that could have prevented the liberal class from merging completely with the power elite. The liberal class, which at once was betrayed and betrayed itself, has no role left to play in the battle between us and corporate dominance. All hope lies now with those in the street. …

Yup. Because although the United States of America quickly is on its way to becoming something like the way that it is portrayed in the very dark movie “The Road,” we Americans aren’t ready to become cannibals quite yet, and we would prefer that the trillions of our dollars that are being used to kill people abroad (mostly so that the oil corporations can steal and profit obscenely from other nations’ oil) instead would be used for necessities here at home, such as health care, shelter and food.

Because even if we were to feast upon the corpse of Moammar Gaddafi, which reportedly cost us more than $1 billion to obtain, it wouldn’t feed very many of us Americans for very long.

*On May 2, I similiarly wrote:

… More chilling than the words and actions of my jingoistic cohorts, of whom I expect precious little, however, are those of President Barack Obama, of whom, despite his string of broken campaign promises, I still expect more.

“Today we are reminded that as a nation there is nothing we can’t do,” Obama proclaimed today about the snuffing out of bin Laden. (“We do big things” is one of the campaign slogans that Obama rolled out during his last State of the Union address, since “hope” and “change” don’t work anymore.)

Jesus fuck.

When we make such feel-good statements as “as a nation there is nothing we can’t do,” are we really supposed to say that about the killing of one individual? Even someone like Osama bin Laden?

Is this what “American greatness” has come to: our ability to kill one man after 10 years, hundreds of billions of dollars and the killing of tens of thousands before him? (That’s a rhetorical question, but I’ll answer it anyway: Yes.) …

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Cops’ right-wing bias is a problem

Image from Joe. My. God.

Yes, indeed, we have a problem of right-wing bias within law enforcement agencies across the nation. (Don’t even get me started on the right-wing bias within the bloated-beyond-belief U.S. military that our tax dollars make possible.)

While I don’t have a dramatic first-hand example, I do recall that when I attended a large pro-labor rally at the California State Capitol here in Sacramento in February, the California Highway Patrol officers (who act as the state police on state property such as the state Capitol grounds) were vigilant in making sure that those of us on the pro-labor side of the street followed the rules, such as keeping the sidewalk in front of us completely unobstructed.

However, the California Highway Patrol officers allowed the “tea party” traitors on the other side of the street (also state grounds) to completely block the sidewalk the entire fucking time — something that I pointed out to a CHP officer, who couldn’t have cared less.

Fact is, the cops are more likely to curtail the free-speech rights of progressives than of conservatives — since most of them apparently agree with conservatives.

Our tax dollars pay the cops’ salaries, yet we progressives don’t get fair and equal treatment at the hands of law enforcement officers, while wingnuts get preferential treatment.

Do we progressives need to have our own law enforcement officers to ensure that our own fucking tax dollars benefit us? And our own military, too? Do we need to secede?

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

It’s just a bunch of damn hippies!

Abigail Garrett, 6, of Hamden, Connecticut holds a sign during an Occupy New Haven march in New Haven

Occupy Wall Street, Nova Scotia

A protester holds a sign during the 'Occupy Toronto' march in the financial district in Toronto

A man holds a sign with Occupy Wall Street campaign demonstrators in Zuccotti Park, near Wall Street in New York

An Occupy Wall Street campaign demonstrator stands in Zuccotti Park, near Wall Street in New York

A girl carried by her father holds a placard during an Occupy Wall Street protest at Times Square in New York

From left, Jamie Carr, of Clifton, N.J.; Suzanne Lauren, of Jersey City, N.J.; and Tirsa Costiniano of New York speak to people passing along Broadway at the Occupy Wall Street protests at Zuccotti Park in New York Monday, Oct. 17, 2011 as the protest enters its 30th day. (AP Photo/Craig Ruttle)

Veronica Borrego of Miami holds a sign as she takes part in the Occupy Miami protest in Miami

Betsy Skipp of Miami takes part in the Occupy Miami protest in Miami

A man holds a sign reading "Freedom" at St. James park makeshift headquarters for the "Occupy Toronto" movement in Toronto

A man behind two motorcycle police officers holds a sign in front of a Bank of America as Occupy Los Angeles protesters march in the Protest Against Corporate Greed on their International Day of Action in Los Angeles

Protester Siew Danewood takes part in Occupy Pittsburgh rally Saturday, Oct. 15, 2011 in Pittsburgh.   The demonstration is one of many being held across the country recently in support of the ongoing Occupy Wall Street demonstration in New York.   (AP Photo/Don Wright)

Reuters and Associated Press photos

These images taken at recent Occupy Wall Street protests in several North American cities show, I think, the diversity of the Occupy Wall Street movement — the true not-so-silent-anymore majority. Not a tea-bag-laden tri-corner hat in sight, because these are real Americans, not self-righteous, plutocratic-ass-licking hypocrites who are trying to out-American everyone else.

But, to be fair and balanced, here is a bongo-beating hippie:

In this Sept. 17, 2011 photo, demonstrators affiliated with the Occupy Wall Street movement gather to call for the occupation of Wall Street in New York.  Monday, Oct. 17, 2011 marks the one-month anniversary of the Occupy Wall Street movement. (AP Photo/Frank Franklin II)

Associated Press photo

And another dangerous hippie:

3 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Cry us a river, Barry!

US President Barack Obama turns away from the podium

AFP photo

President Hopey-Changey’s apparent response to Occupy Wall Street is that we should feel sorry for him and stick with him, even though he allied himself with the Wall Street weasels years ago.

Predictably, after having pissed and shat all over his base since January 2009, and seeing that in response to his utter presidential ineffectiveness the Occupy Wall Street movement has grown long, long legs, President Hopey-Changey is acting contrite these days. (Contrite for him, anyway.)

Obama has whined to ABC News: “I guarantee it’s going to be a close election because the economy is not where it wants to be, and even though I believe all the choices we’ve made have been the right ones, we’re still going through difficult circumstances. That means people who may be sympathetic to my point of view still kind of feel like, yeah, but it still hasn’t gotten done yet.”

And it’s never going to get done. Not under Barack Obama.

It’s too late for Obama to change course. Against the advice of progressive economists like the Nobel-Prize-winning Paul Krugman, Obama early in his presidency allied himself with the Wall Street weasels, and there is no going back from that. And any actually progressive, substantial economic policy changes that he might enact now — but he would never do that — would still take many, many months, at the minimum, to improve the nation’s economy.

Obama had his chance to push through a progressive agenda in 2009 and 2010, when he had the nation’s good will and both houses of Congress controlled by his party — and when he got to decide what his national economic policy would be.

Obama blew it. Big time. And it’s too late now.

There are no do-overs for the U.S. presidency. You get one shot to get it right. And the rare alignment of the Oval Office and both houses of Congress being held by your party is an opportunity that you don’t fucking squander.

Barack Obama — who is arrogant, not audacious — has given us progressives absolutely no reason to believe that his second term would be a substantial improvement over his first.

So cocky is Obama that I surmise that he truly believes that despite his do-nothing presidency, he is so fucking charming that he is going to co-opt the Occupy Wall Street movement. We progressives have broken up with him, and because he is naught but a rock obstructing the stream, we are flowing around him — witness the Occupy Wall Street movement but he refuses to acknowledge those facts.

Even if Obama’s current contrition were heartfelt — it isn’t; it’s purely political — it isn’t nearly enough. Obama’s displays of contrition don’t make up for the fact that over the past three years average Americans — 53 percent of whom voted for President Hopey-Changey — have continued to lose economic ground, not gain it, while the rich and the super-rich have been doing just fine.

The only kind of person I can see voting for Barack Obama in 2012 is the type of person who believes that his or her alcoholic, abusive mate is going to turn things around! Really this time! And that his or her alcoholic, abusive mate is the best that he or she can do, and that staying with his or her abusive, alcoholic mate is better than being alone.

The rest of us, who have some fucking self-respect, prefer our solitude over our continued abuse at the hands of the “Democratic” Party establishment elites, who, instead of actually doing anything for us, only offer us excuses for their ineffectiveness and more empty promises that they’ll do better in the future if only we continue to support them.

The spirit of the Occupy Wall Street movement is that of the person who finally has left his or her abusive partner. He or she doesn’t know what the future holds, but he or she knows that it has to be better than more of the fucking same.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized