Friday, December 30, 2011

how to prove bigotry

If someone wanted to prove that I'm a bigot, the easiest way to do that would be to have evidence of me doing something bigoted, or saying something unequivocally bigoted.

And by "unequivocally bigoted," I am referring to context, tone, content, and most of all -- INTENT.

I've used the example of Norman Lear --> All in the Family --> Archie Bunker before, and I'll use it again here to suggest what would be "unequivocally bigoted" or not.

Lear wrote Bunker as a closed-minded, shallow and mean-spirited bigot.  Thus Lear employed Bunker and did so approvingly -- that much is obvious from the central role Bunker played in the show's various episodes.  Lear approved of the role Bunker could play in telling the stories Lear wanted to tell.

Did Lear approve of the bigoted positions Bunker took?  Did Bunker's utterances, gestures, facial features show Lear to be unequivocally bigoted?  Did they show Carroll O'Connor to be an unqualified racist?

Or was Bunker a point of reference, providing context for the various stories Lear wanted to tell in that show?


Guilt-by-association is one of the weapons used by people who have little to no evidence of personal guilt on the part of the accused.  Without evidence of the accused's malicious or otherwise wrongful acts or intent, the accuser is left with character assassination in service of the proof burden.

Those of us who have been through Ancient Papyrus School and entered the world of litigation know that you can't use character assassination in court, at least not overtly.  Trial lawyers will occasionally use innuendo or clever word-traps to imply guilt-by-association, but these tactics are subject to procedural objection.  We've all seen TV and Hollywood movie "legal" dramas where an indignant attorney jumps up and says "OBJECTION!" and the audience waits with held breath to hear the judge say "overruled" or "sustained", but I'm pretty sure most non-litigator viewers don't really understand the meaning of those terms of judicial declaration.  They may guess that the literal meaning holds --that the objection is validated or ignored-- but they may not know what such validation or ignoring actually means to the course of the trial, or to the persuasive power wielded by the witness who is being examined.

A credible witness who has gained the jury's listening ear and perhaps even the jury's empathy is pretty hard to undercut.  Think of it as if you were trying to tell your friend Steve that someone you know mutually --let's call her Katie-- is a real jerk, unworthy of friendship.  If Steve's already disposed to be friends with Katie, your attempts at undercutting the friendship probably won't be too successful.  The friendship will turn mainly on the interplay between Steve and Katie, and not so much on outside voices trying to disparage one in the eyes of the other.

In other words, the real issue of trustworthiness between Steve and Katie depends more on the interplay between them, and not as much on the external voices of (for example) Steve's friend Andy, who seeks to degrade Katie's friendship value in Steve's view.


If I wanted to prove Ron Paul is a bigot, I'd work hard at finding a person who could testify honestly to the bigoted ways in which Ron Paul treated him or her.

And if I was unable to find such a person, then I would have two choices.

I could conclude that Ron Paul isn't a bigot.

Or I could hold fast to my prejudice against Ron Paul, and look for ways to assassinate his character by such devices as guilt-by-association.


A person who plays in the political sandbox at the level of the US Congress tends to have a fairly elaborate framework of employees, advisors, helpers, et cetera for the running of the political machinery that undergirds one's function as a Congresscritter.  For example:  Legislative aides help the Critter review pending bills for the Critter's position-taking (the volume of legislation often means the Critter usually can't read them all cover-to-cover on his/her own) and help the Critter draft legislation that he hopes to offer solo or as co-sponsor or co-signatory.  That's a pretty big task in itself, the purely legislative role.

At the grassroots level the Critter needs assistance talking to existing and potential constituents.  And here by "existing" I mean those who support the Critter already, whereas "potential" means those who are either opposed or on the fence.FN

In a modern Congressional seat, the volume of constituents is pretty large, and maintaining communication with them can be a daunting task if the Critter takes communication seriously enough to not simply consider himself a rank proxy who need not check his constituents for approval.  Critters get snail mail and email and calls from constituents, and they have staffers to handle such constituent communication.  It's rare indeed for a Critter to personally respond to each letter, call or email -- though you might get the impression that the Critter is doing that when his name is signed to a boilerplate email response or snail mail letter.  But in truth they're usually ghost-written form responses with a stamp or e-signature affixed to them to give the impression the Critter is personally handling every single bit of communication.

In most cases, he's not.  Or she's not.


Constituents are not robotic thinkalikes who agree on every single issue, even if in bulk the group of them support the Critter.  They'll disagree on the whys of political positions, the whats, the hows, and the whens. And if the Critter wants to keep working at the Congressional level he needs to keep somewhat in touch with those various supporters.  To do so he'll often assign canvassers or similar people to do "outreach" or whatever you'd like to call it.  He'll probably have a staffer doing the vetting of such "outreach" people because he's busy working on the treetops level --policy-- and not day-to-day machinery of operating a Congresscritter's office duties.

In this context it's quite possible to have a Critter engage someone who may use stinky tactics that offend Politically Correct liberals and progressives.  Not every constituent is Politically Correct and some people (I'd even say most people) view the world through a skewed lens of personal prejudice.  Imagine trying to reach everyone in your constituency with the methods of communication necessary to speak in terms those various constituents prefer or understand at a personal level!  I found it very hard to do with a mere jury of 12, and I'd be intimidated at the idea of trying to communicate at a personal level with a hundred, let alone a thousand, let alone a hundred thousand or more people!  I'd want help from people who speak the language of those who don't talk or think exactly like me.

It's an exercise in human psychology and, if I'm feeling sinister, I'd say it's also an exercise in human manipulation.FN2

Thus it should come as no surprise that Critters employ people who may use underhanded and distasteful approaches to dealing with various constituents or groups thereof.  We don't live in a perfect world where everyone holds identical values.

(Okay, that sounds a bit like Rumsfeld's "you don't go to war with the army you wish you had" nonsense, but hopefully you understand the context and meaning here.)


All of the foregoing is a very long way around to this point:  the tactics used by a canvasser or "outreach" person on behalf of any Congresscritter are not conclusive evidence that the Critter clearly endorses the tactics or language used.

At most they are evidence that the Critter hired and used a person who employs such tactics or language.

And I don't think anyone who's run a business, or has held a supervisory role in an organization, would rush to agree that every employee or underling is without exception a mere conduit of the business owner or supervisor.

I'll break that down more simply:

In a team sport such as American Soccer (elsewhere on Earth = "football"), when a player fouls an opponent and earns a yellow card, is it fair to assume that player's coach instructed the foul, ordered its occurrence, mandated its execution?

Or is it more fair to recognize independent agency on the foul-committing player's part?

Think about that one before you go assuming Ron Paul is a "bigot" or "racist" by dint of what an outreach person did.


FN -  "Potential" also would refer to the whole flock of possible constituents for a new proto-Critter making his first run at the Congress, but that's irrelevant where Ron Paul is concerned.

FN2 - The extent to which it moves toward manipulation would obviously depend both on the Critter and the individual constituent or group of constituents -- the Critter's tendency to manipulate rather than communicate, and the constituent's ability to talk honestly versus needing to be led by the nose toward a position.

toe the rubber, balko

Jeezus, dude. What do you do, Google your name every 5 minutes?

Narcissus, meet reflection. Reflection, meet Narcissus. Bask in each other's company!

fake pitch

I think it's more than serendipity that the word balk is almost the whole of Radley Balko's last name.

Balko holds a stature similar to that of a lesser OCL in many people's eyes. But I've rarely read anything from him that shows he really understands much --if anything-- about civil rights and how those in power trample such rights. What Balko resembles more than anything is a smug little pimplefaced geek who is really impressed with his high marks in trigonometry and calculus, and believes those "impressive grades" equate to expertise in all matters.

His recent attacks on Ron Paul pretty much sum up the whole of Balko's smug irrelevance.


If a person thinks voting is essential and the POTUS is the wielder of the political Skeleton Key, she's gonna have a hard time showing who among the current POTUS candidates improves on Ron Paul where most of the country's most damaging problems are concerned.

Shitheels like Radley Balk-master are making a huge deal about some newsletters that were written by people employed in some capacity by Ron Paul's political managers.

They're claiming that Paul has ultimate authority over such newsletters and therefore the bigotry inherent in these troublesome newsletters automatically is Ron Paul's fault.

Do you really think that's accurate?

Let's see.

I have worked for very large organizations in my adult lifetime.  Some of my positions have been pretty high up in the organizational hierarchy, and I had underlings working under my charge.

I also had people who were my bosses or overseers.

If someone working under my charge ("Person X") issued an incorrect position statement after I'd given him free rein to work on such statements and issue them, would it really be my fault that the incorrect position was stated?

Or would it be the fault of Person X, who issued the statement?

The hierarchical authority would be mine, but I would not be the wrong statement's author. Isn't that clear?

My authority would be limited to my assignment of the duty to write and issue position statements. So the worst someone could pin on me is a bad choice to allow Person X the freedom to write and issue such statements.

Oh but Ochstradt, someone's head must roll here! So we're going to pick on the person whose rolling head would delight the largest number of whining critics!

No doubt you'd see it that way if you were authoritarian and a PowerNoggin to boot!


Is the Speaker of the House responsible for the utterances of the lowliest Congresscritter's staffer?

Let's say Representative Pete Powernoggin from Oregon (representing the most "progressive" populace within the "progressive" valhalla called "Portland, Oregon") employs 15 staffers in his Capitol Hill office.

One of those staffers is responsible for reading and issuing boilerplate responses to constituent emails. And in the course of such response-writing, Lowly Staffer wrongly words something and includes a gratuitous statement about an Evil Rethuglican Senator P. Woggy Nemesis who has been thwarting the legislative do-gooder efforts of Rep. Powernoggin.

Is that the very same thing as Rep. Powernoggin saying critical things about Evil Rethuglican Senator Nemesis?

protect and serve!

An off-duty police officer has been charged with executing a man in a sports bar - after an argument over a game of darts.

Riverside County sheriff's deputy Dayle Long, 42, allegedly shot Samuel Vanettes, 36, three times, leaving him to die on the floor of the bar in Murrieta, California.
I'm sure that's precisely what Riverside County, CA expects from its piggies!

more here.

George Blanda's revenge

nyctaper's series of YLT's Hanukkah shows at Maxwell's this year is great, Dec 26 show is up today and original members Dave Rick and Dave Schramm joined them that night

I downloaded the Dec 22 show a couple days ago and have listened to it several times now, Lee Ranaldo and Alan Licht joined them that night.  it reminds me of seeing them live 20 years ago.


elsewhere in America, yesterday I finished a 3-day kids lesson with a group of 5 kids.  one of the kids' parents booked me for a private 2-hour on Monday.  apparently those who think my e-scribblings define my personality as mean, hateful and sociopathic are missing something essential in their appraisals!  could it be that someone's adopted e-persona is entirely different from his core self?

naaah.  a PowerNoggin has accused me, therefore the accusation must stand!

Sunday, December 25, 2011

For Christmas, let's destroy Marxism.

Are you tired of PowerNoggins who offer "analysis" of various domestic or global events, but use the "analysis" to brag on their warehouse of trivial facts that don't relate in any meaningful way to the events being "analyzed"?

When someone writes about current events but uses pretentious, never-heard-in-conversation words it's safe to assume the writer isn't trying to help you understand the events being "analyzed," but instead is trying to impress you with his/her vocabulary.  Sadly, in many corners of American society, this gambit works a treat.  People will assume a writer or speaker is "intelligent" and "educated" if she uses words that must be looked up in a dictionary.

Communication isn't about impressing the audience with words that must be researched.  If you send your audience to the dictionary, you're not communicating.

A good communicator knows how to talk simply about complex things.

A good analyst knows how to break down complex things, to make them understandable in simple words.

However, among PowerNoggins, talking simply is considered "redneck" or "reactionary" or the like.  PowerNoggins have their little secret handshakes with words like "reactionary" and often you'll find, if you dig around, that the secret handshakes originate in Marxist dogma.

There aren't many systems of belief that are more closed and self-impressed than Marxism.  The writings of Glossy Karl are some of the best examples in modern publication of PowerNoggin thinking and expression.  They are so dense, so over-complex, so absurdly loaded with insider jargon that they function as a Secret Password for entry into the PowerNoggin Clubhouse.

Whenever you find a writer or "analyst" using Marxist jargon or code-phrases that originate in Marxist jargon, you know you are in the company of someone who seeks to exclude others, rather than include them, in the communication.

Of course, PowerNoggins are impressed with Glossy Karl.  They find it impressive to say that they have read and understand the works of someone who required multiple books to say a simple thing --

Capitalism is destructive because it depends on humankind's most destructive impulses.

Look at this sentence and think about it.  Does it require four or five books to explain?

If a system of commerce relies on greed, rather than fair exchange, how will it benefit the society where the commerce happens?

Greed is a selfish drive.  It requires the greedy human to ignore all fairness impulses and set aside any notion of sharing the resources of his society.

Greed is about taking as much as possible, as quickly as possible, to exclude others.

It requires a person to destroy all sense of commonality and community, so that the self can be enriched.

A society that works on greed will end up as a society of individuals who view all others (other than themselves) as enemies, as competitors, as people who must be destroyed, weakened, subdued -- or else I can't take it all for myself!

Why would someone need 4 or 5 books to explain this?

I'll tell you why.

To create a cult.  A cult of closed thinking, secret handshakes, cryptic passwords.

An exclusionary cult.

This simple point is why you shouldn't ever trust nor give deference to any PowerNoggin "analyst."


On an unrelated note, the above comment is post number 1,000 at this particular blog.

Whenever some protector of PowerNogginism comes by here to drop her flaming Gucci bag full of kitty poo on my front stoop, I'm always wondering:  how many of those 1,000 posts have you read, Miss PowerNoggin?  Are you seriously trying to pretend you understand why I post here based on the single post that made you angry and defensive?  Do you really think sampling 1/1000th of this blog's content is a great indicator of what this blog is about?  And have you made allowances for my fictional creativity, which I use to inform the various perspectives from which I post?

If you're a PowerNoggin, you probably do.  PowerNoggins like to think they can understand the full context of another human's outlook based on one statement.  A PowerNoggin will tell you that someone's act of belonging to the Republican Party automatically makes him worthy of disregard, deserving of venomous spite.  A PowerNoggin will suggest that a Marxist is a more elevated human than someone who mocks Glossy Karl. A PowerNoggin will tell you that being opposed to fetal murder means you are a thuggish reactionary who thinks it is his right to "control women."

It's amusing, this game played by PowerNoggins.  They pretend they are masters of subtle intellect, but in nearly all cases they are as beholden to false dichotomies and absurd rule-based decision-making as the most obnoxious Pharisee.

Saturday, December 24, 2011

degrees of difficulty

Teaching an eager-but-only-three 3 year old or a reluctant-and-wants-to-be-elsewhere 7 year old to ski is almost tougher than passing a bar exam, and about as tough as getting an A in Constitutional Law.

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

it's one of those days

...when I have the microscopic hint of regret for leaving Gnu Joizey.

The regret never lasts long. While I still enjoy music, my love of music-listening (live or recorded, I feel the same about either and am not really a foaming-mouth rabid fan of live music like some of my friends) can't in any way trump my desire to be in the mountains and away from asphalt canyons with concrete skyscraper walls.

I'm not sure why people like living in completely artificial environments, because I've never liked it. But clearly many humans do, since most of our populace lives in cities, or suburbia. And suburbia is just like a city, just with more structures sprawled farther outward, in squattier heights. Suburbia adds the soul-killing lack of centralized creative energies that one finds in cities -- no places to see/hear live music, or if you're into the visual arts, no museums where you can stand around and pretentiously act as if you know exactly what the artist was thinking when he or she made that paint-splattered canvas or manipulated bunch of earth or metal or whatever medium.

I'm pretty glad I never became that sort of pretentious pompo, the artsy hipster. Missoula has an "art walk" on the first Friday of every month, and it's the surest place to see the massive changes that have happened in our human landscape. Hoity-toities stroll around in their $1,000 "technical outerwear" jackets that are used only to strut around town. They think that donning the costume of "an outdoor lifestyle" is the essence of what being in Missoula means. They think it's about image. So they dump lots of money into the artifice, and practice it daily.

Up on the ski hill you'll see them in a completely different $1,000 "technical outerwear" jacket, this time it's one with a Recco beacon integrated into the shell, because they are afraid of the ski hill's near total lack of grooming. They're lately getting into real poseurdom with AT gear, which only a tiny sliver of them ever use to walk up the hill and ski back down. Most of them just use it at the ski hill on the lifts, to give the appearance (once again) of "an outdoor lifestyle".

I'm aware that these people are hollow, and trying to feel more integrated into a culture they don't understand. I'm aware that it's uncomfortable to not "fit in" for these people.

But I swear I wish it were a lot more viscerally painful for them to be such phonies.

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

cue up the Peggy Lee

When I was just a little boy...

I was rockin' the house with sleeveless acid-wash and full-on MULLETUDE!

It didn't take long before I got hooked on the Hard Stuff:

After gaining a parchment or three, I entered the trade of Corporate Galley Slave:

Naturally, the pressure of pulling oars all day and night in the galley led to a need for recreation.  So I got me a jetboat and started doing a lot of hold my beer and watch this:

Of course you can't beat The Christ, but I gave it my best.  For Him, though, the fun was just starting.  Some of his Acolytes couldn't help themselves.

The signals were everywhere:  it was time to quit the church before Rape Culture took over.  So I took up hunting, which led to drinking:


Reference to Peggy Lee explained.

Monday, December 19, 2011

we're upping the wattage here, edison

Lemme tell you something, fuckface.

NOBODY should have to tell you what I'm about to tell you. You should know it because this is what happens when people assume military action is the solution to any problem. And it fucking pisses me off that there's one or two (hundred million) of you out there who still DO NOT GET THIS SHIT.

Fuckface, this is what happens in war:

Formerly innocent Iraqi male treated to
the gift of  Enduring Freedom
Not to fret, mon frere.  We have liberated you
from Saddam Hussein and modernized your
oil infrastructure for the benefit of Everyone.

Stop it, Karl!  Those pictures are heinous!, you say.

I say, fuck off.  Those pictures are REALITY.

Those pictures are what you are allowing to continue because you, fuckface, are busy justifying your complacency and complicity, because you'd rather work hard to earn a nice income to send your fucking son or daughter to a Prestigious College, or because you'd rather argue absurd keep your laws off my body feminismFN about whether we need to murder another 65 fetuses this week in order to Promote Vaginal Freedom for the careless sluts who don't bother thinking about contraception in their Fully Sexually Liberated Lifestyles.

You stupid fucking PowerNoggins and your pompous triangulations of reality.

But Karl! If we didn't support Obama, we'd have President McCain which would turn into President Palin which would turn into ChristerCrackerRedneckPigWorld.

You and your fucking childish symbolism, your pathetic pseudo-intellectualism... you can't stand to see the real world impacts of your "lifestyle" of yuppie privilege or PowerNoggin pontification-without-action, can you?

You'd rather sit back and write an essay with references to Macedonian culture and dead languages and the semiotic fulcrum of lingual variables, proving your supposed intellectual calibre. You know what, PowerNoggin fuckface?

WE DO NOT CARE about your fucking Stanford-Binet score.

Your masturbatory essay stroking your glorious fucking IQ score isn't helping that Iraqi with the defenestrated skull in the pictures above, is it?


Didn't think so.

And while you pretend to deconstruct things with ever-more-removed references to dead cultures and events of millennia ago, you're not really doing anything more than bragging, long-form.


Fuckface, do you realize what this all means, what with the recent legislative advancements of the current POTUS admin and the MICFiC-servient Legislature? Innocent Americans, whose only supposed "crime" is wondering why other Americans tolerate and, like good Germans, quietly allow such barbarism, will be treated as was the young Iraqi in the two photos above.

That's what it means.

Do you still think you should be devoting all your energies to making a fat salary so that your Precious Child can go to Harvard or Haverford or Humboldt State?

Do you still think that your masturbatory essays bragging on your eidetic memory by referencing Macedonia and Sumerian symbols and customs are the best way to prevent such things happening domestically?

You probably do. You're just a selfish fuckface, selfish and self-impressed. 

Nice work.

When you've finished dislocating your dominant arm's shoulder joint by that continual patting of your own back, try clicking on this link and reading the entry.  Read what Our Glorious Defenders and Promoters of Freedom did to innocent Iraqis, just 'cuz they could.

And ask yourself:  what is to stop them from doing that here, to people like... Karl.

Hell, you might even cheer!  A few of you fuckfaces probably have already called in my URL to Homeland Security.

FN - Nice triangulation there, too. If it were really about "laws" impacting "a woman's body" then NO law would be valid, ever, because every law restricts the use of one's body in some way or another. That's what laws do, fuckface. If women were free to keep "laws off their bodies" then they would be free to murder their newborn babies, or their toddlers, or their young children -- hell, they could even murder YOU -- and it would be "legal" in your feminist valhalla, fuckface.

casa verde

It's always late Spring in the eyes of Nuke Kooks.


I are We are Me!

I have to say I'm impressed with certain blogs where there's the pretense of multiple "writers" and various "personalities" commenting, yet the whole fuckin' thing is written by one person.

An exercise in MPD seems the best ticket for someone who thinks himself one of our nation's most powerful noggins.

I can be this guy, then I can be that guy, and after that I can be the freakazoid way over there!  Everyone will think I have lots of blog traffic with interesting visitors, when actually NOBODY is visiting me at all!  And NOBODY is commenting!  It's all just me!

Occasionally I'll drop a bit of wisdom like suggesting I'm above those who adopt false personae as "journalists."


1500 brownie points to whomever identifies what blog I have in mind with the above commentary.

stepford wives

On the Donkey side we have Elizabeth Warren, noble protector of middle class America's lifelong fantasy of moving into the upper middle or upper class, savage economic penalizer of the poor, sanctifier of the consumerist dullard.

On the Elephant side we have staunch protectors of the Entrepreneurial Spirit that Made America a Republican Paradise, people like Marsha Blackburn.


Sadly, from my travels as an adult, I have watched many female friends mold themselves after these Stepford Wives -- grasping, striving and hungry for fame & power, but behind the mask of "professionalism".

What made Sarah Palin take off in the minds of some people was that she is decidedly Anti-Stepford-Wife.  She doesn't resemble the "I belong to the finest country club in the region" attitude that you'd find familiar to people like Elizabeth Warren, Hillary Clinton, Jane Harman, Nancy Pelosi, or Phyllis Schlafly (zing!  memory lane beckons!).

The reason Sarah Palin was an overnight phenomenon was because she gave hope to the poor and tacky (as someone like Swillary would call them), people who are far enough down on the food chain that they harbor no fantasies of the type that Bettybitch Warren feeds on.


I predict the InterWebToobz will be heavily censored if not shut down within the next 5 years.  Sammy and his chambermaids like Warren, Blackburn, Clinton, Harman, Pelosi will eagerly do that.  The Stepford Wife cadre will probably carve an exemption for smartphones, which will be sold in new formats.  They'll be multi-tasking devices that carry make-up of some type so that the Stepford Wife can apply make-up and talk on the phone and text while driving.

Put on the war paint before going into socio-cultural battle!

Sunday, December 18, 2011

oh really?

...and here I thought it was only "christers" and "crackers" and "pigs" who did this shit.

David's kids have their sexual way with youngsters, claiming the King of Jews made them do it.

Wonder how many little ones Binny fucked.  I hear Tzipi was there trying to teach little girls how to eat pussy, by forcing herself on them and ragging their poor bodies with her strap-on.

Certain PowerNoggins probably praise this shit because it's breaking sexual taboos, or whatever.

Friday, December 16, 2011

wilkommen Spookistan.

as I said, it's just water let's take it for granted.

1) tacit admissions by the Top Of The Food Chain people... we realize oil is peaked out, what's the next resource we should try to control so that when demand spikes, we control the access?

2) apathy -- dangerous, humanity-hating apathy -- about geological impacts of fracking. I read a story last night about an Ohio town whose fracking efforts nearby found the town experiencing unprecedented quakes from the plate shifts caused by the water pumping and the aquifer being depleted... I guess water buffers spaces between plates?


If you ever have lived in a place where it's "developed" but surrounded by "undeveloped" land, you may have witnessed how people flush with cash and blessed (heh heh, they'd thank Jesus for it at their annual Prayer Breakfast) with longer-term views than the majority of the populace will busy themselves buying open space at low prices, so that when the town expands further, the land that would be used for "development" is controlled and therefore the price asked for "development" is hostage to the landowner's whimsy.FN

Maybe I don't need to tell you this but from the looks of the American landscape apparently I do -- one of the best ways to make money as an investor is to get a position early when the subject of the investment is dirt-cheap and nobody seems to be interested in it, but you can see where things will be in 10 years. Real estate magnates control "development" this way.  They look at a town's outskirts and who owns the surrounding lands, and they go far enough out, radius-wise from town center, that landowners feel something like "nobody wants this land."

Prices of acquisition are much cheaper than, for example, buying a parcel within the town limits where it's already "developed." The real estate magnate and his "developer" friends then angle to push "development" at a faster pace, so that the formerly "worthless" land now looks primo for the Upscale Yupsters who see the pinnacle of home ownership as "in the country, but close to town".  (See, e.g., the pattern of "development" that happened in Montgomery County MD and Fairfax County VA... farmlands turned into manifold McMansions.)

Typically investors do this for generational wealth.  If you go far enough out from the town's essential populace, farmers and landholders see themselves as distant from town, not part of town, and therefore not accustomed to the town's price structures for land etc.  You can buy land now, so that when your children reach the Age of Majority the land is worth many multiples more -- especially if during your children's youth you are pressing for "development" outward toward that land.  You push the "development" outward so that "the market" forces the prices on your formerly dirt-cheap (heh heh) land into the stratosphere.  What you bought for $1.25/acre now is worth $10,000/acre.

Tidy profit.

You can do the same with water if you are high enough up on the food chain (Carlyle Group).

Imagine the power you'd hold over the populace if you owned the drinking water supply and the town in question is booming with population growth.  Eventually the "development" pressure will cause the population's water... uh... needs to outpace the town's water supply.

At that point you have the residents at your mercy and you can charge whatever you like. It can help speed things along if your "developments" emulate golf courses and require severe watering of lawns and landscapes in the town's arid climate.  Lots of water use by towns in arid climates goes to watering, rather than drinking or personal hygiene.

Can you see how "developers" and their upchain neighbors in the financial sector can manipulate resource access to maximize their own profits while putting the resident populace further and further under the thumb of those who own the resources?


FN - So you may say, "well when the farmer/rancher wants to sell the land, the buyer is "hostage" to him too."  Well think again, Smart-Alexei.  At this stage in most situations, the farmer/rancher is looking to get out because in most cases he can see that farming/ranching is a dead enterprise and besides the town is pushing further outward, crowding him and making him want to be elsewhere.

can I fix your pots and pans, ma'am?

I'm just a humble tinker going from village to village looking for little, even tiny, things to do.

for the 3d time

Thursday, December 15, 2011

looks like the rabbit's gonna die

Sammy said he would pull out on time, but he went back for more and the seed got spilled.

When accosted while on his way to the corner store to buy post-coital cigarettes, Sammy said

"well sure, World... we planned to pull out, but it just felt so good screwing that Persian wench."

we dehydrated the solution and were left with salts

My hero, Briney-O'-the-Sea:
It's good to see that Karl continues to relive the 8th grade. 
Have to admit that his kind of smug, reactionary "Humungus" style small group power gaming is one reason "anarchism" is distrusted by many. If I saw a gang of (as self defined) Karls running towards me down the alley, I might be glad that 911 is not a joke for a white boy like me. Even iof that makes me less "manly" to the likes of Karl.  
Of course, Karl was probably the swirlee, not the swirler, but that's the value of the intertubes for TOUGH GUYS like Karl.
Poor Briney. He thinks my whole persona is wrapped in being "tough."

I do wonder, what is it like to go through life as an Eternal Victim?  To deny one's self the power of efficacy, of finding meaning in something other than poor, poor me... someone help me... I can't help myself.

I'd remind Briney that it's Crackhead Blowjob who has the history of bullying others. How in Hades could Briney confuse me and Crackie Blowbar? I didn't spend my youth "kicking in faces" because someone "mocked my poverty."

What kind of psychosis causes one to be so insecure and so maddeningly frustrated to the point of projecting his worst childhood experiences onto someone he's never met and therefore has no ground from which to assess that someone's personality, tendencies, etc?

I'll tell you what kind.

Feminism, as practiced by men who wish they were women.

Briney -- you're a man.  Deal with it.  Identifying with victimized women isn't making you honorable.  It's just pathetic.

Maybe you and Crackie and Stan "murder for hire" Goff can have a troika of Man-Hating Feminist Men!

Let's destroy maleness forever!  It will solve all problems!

Yes, Briney.  I'm part of the Patriarchy.


for context:  Briney gets it wrong and so does Nonny.

rocky road

Rocky Anderson got some positive press when he criticized Bush-Cheney.

He's thrown his hat into the 2012 POTUS ring.

People assume that electing him will bring a big difference from Obama-Biden.

I guess if you believe in the SuperHero myth, the deus ex machina, you can assume that if we saw Rocky Anderson as POTUS in Jan 2013, all our problems would resolve, or at least be somewhat mitigated.

Such a view assumes that the problems we see now are solely the fault of SuperBarry, and not the fault of the whole Fed Govt's way of doing things.

Reminder:  none of what's happening now on any nefarious front (warmongering, lost civil rights, economic collapse, bailout bullshit, police state legislation) is solely due to the POTUS.  I'm pretty sure there are two other branches of government working in concert with the Executive these days.

It's nice to see an alternative, but I'm not sure a "progressive" (what Anderson is, no matter how he's labelling himself) is the solution.  "Progressives" are PowerNoggins -- they are haughty and they want to use government to reshape society.

They don't want to do what's needed -- the opposite, really:  use society to determine what kind of government should exist.

I don't dislike Rocky Anderson as a man.  Hell I don't know the guy.  But I've read the things that made him somewhat prominent during Bush-Cheney and they seem awfully GooGoo to me.

GooGoo is not our path out of this mire.

Stated differently, when the patient presents with a sucking chest wound, you won't help him heal by merely putting a band-aid on his left foot.

broken crowbar

Preventing the murder of a human fetus is not "regulating the uterus."

It's preventing murder.

Some PowerNoggins want the freedom to murder human babies because their household income depends on such murder.

Nice to see fucktard PowerNoggins putting money before human life, while at the same time complaining of such when others do it.

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

it ain't camping!

...and therefore it's finally doing something!


Of course there have been multiple arrests! That's how Power wields itself!

"Respect the rights of the 99% who are trying to work today"?

FUCK YOU, spokes-midget!  "Working today" is the problem, you moron!

faithful servant of the moneyed

it's only water

Fatboy Falstaff sucks Carlyle's cock, swallows, and asks when Carlyle will be ready to come again.


This is what I said about the above to a friend in an email this AM:

Engen's view of what Missoula should be is nothing like mine!  His deal is this:  he identifies with whatever or whomever he sees as having power.  He wants to serve them, and in the process enrich himself.  He's a toady for the Lambros family locally.  On the national stage there are bigger more powerful players and Carlyle is a HUGE player, financially speaking.  So he'd focus on serving them, and not really on the bigger, longer-term issue of water rights being pivotal.

It's really ironic because Engen (and those who love him) want to over-develop Missoula, which will put a strain on water supplies here.  Which will further empower Carlyle and further disempower Missoula's residents.

But Engen doesn't mind -- he'll be serving Carlyle, which is an entity he sees as powerful.  It might even give him a leapfrog to a new job with Carlyle.

I wish Engen would have some sort of experience or comeuppance or whatever that made him quit his post.  But he won't.

He's just following what Kadas did, he saw how Kadas changed Missoula into Yuppieville and he's determined, like Kadas, to Aspen-ize Missoula.

He's got a lot of Missoula residents backing him on that.  A lot of people want it to happen because they want to be "in on the ground level" when the Aspenization happens -- they want their house value to increase.  And they really don't think of much else other than $$ and "prestige".  They want the "prestige" of being able to brag that they live here, and that they are raising their kids in "the next Aspen" or whatever.

They want other people to envy them for being here.  It's not really that different from GoPro!**

To them, "quality of life" means Yuppie Paradise.

If I were to feel generous and sensitive toward them, I'd say it's because they want to ignore what's happening in the USA and around the world, economically and socially, and pretend they can build a little Safety Bubble here.


**"GoPro" is shorthand between me and this particular friend for the new Ego Projection aspect of American society, where everyone uses such things as Twitter or facebook to supposedly impress others with their doings.  What GoPro literally refers to is the video camera used by people to "document" their outdoor exploits, to supposedly impress others with their whateverness.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Treblinka, Bergen-Belsen, Dachau, Auschwitz

Yep, there's nothing but tinfoil hat conspiracy nonsense in that paranoid worry about FEMA camps.

For your protection
Now is the time we see the benefits reaped by those dipshit propagandists who would jump down the throat of anyone who dares to draw comparisons to Nazi Germany, Adolf Hitler, the Weimar Republic, the Night of the Long Knives, the SS, the Totenkopf, the speeches of Joey Gerbils.

Cuntfaces who invoke Godwin's Law should come have a chat with me.  In person.  Please leave your PowerNoggin Holier-than-Thou-ness at the gate.

Go on... be a good German and utter "meh... not worried" at this development.  Clearly they will only arrest and imprison real criminals, and nobody who's innocent could possibly be held-punished-disappeared.


Save us from rank naivete!

A poorly thought-out reference to AIG.


How Jeff St Clair, "investigative journalist," shows he has no chops where AIG is concerned.

Saturday, December 10, 2011

your father's still perfecting ways of making sealing wax

Bernie Sanders (Fake Independent-Fake Nirvana) introduces legislation to reverse Citizens United v FEC's effects via Constitutional amendment.


Can't say I saw that one coming.

Here's Bernito Gasolini from the above-linked story:

"Make no mistake, the Citizens United ruling has radically changed the nature of our democracy, further tilting the balance of power toward the rich and the powerful at a time when already the wealthiest people in this country have never had it so good," Sanders said. "In my view, history will record that the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision is one of the worst decisions ever made by a Supreme Court in the history of our country."

Sorry to say I disagree, Senator, and find your ignorance of constitutional law pretty pathetic.

Friday, December 9, 2011


Pitbull Pat Buchanan is offering some criticism of FDR and Pearl Harbor here.

Pat's a little late to the game, probably because he's an ideological puritan and jingoistic to boot.

Of course Pearl Harbor was no surprise. The plan was to instigate Japan's ire. The plan worked a treat. As I said at ICH:

Building a base on Hawaiian land = provoking the Japanese
Throwing American money around in Hawaii = provoking the Japanese 
Trying to take over Hawaiian agriculture for the benefit of American businesses to the exclusion of the Japanese = provoking the Japanese 
The plan all along was to have a fight with Japan over Hawaii. 
Imagine this: 
You move in next to Joe Smith. 2d month, you build a fence that is 5 feet into Joe's property, while he's away at work. When he comes home from work, you ask him, "Like my new fence, Joe? It's a beauty!" and refuse to move it to reflect real property lines. 
Joe's house has an apple tree and a pear tree, and you regularly steal his apples and pears. Your wife takes an apple pie over to Joe's and presents it, saying "look at this fresh apple pie I just baked, Joe! Thanks for growing those apples for me!" 
When Joe goes away one weekend, you hotwire his car and assume control over his car. He returns to find the car in YOUR driveway. You tell him, "finders keepers losers weepers!" and pretend not to hear his complaints.   
How do you think Joe will respond? Do you think he'll be happy?


My favorite dipshit perspective offered in connection with the Occupy:__________ game is that of the person who offers opinions involving experience as an "organizer" and suggests the "movement" needs more "professional" people who know "organizing."

Look, Mister Organ Eyes 'er, the fact that you once coached a bunch of 4 and 5 year olds in tee ball doesn't mean you are qualified to play professional baseball.



As a former player of the game lacrosse I think I can offer a better analogy.

Lacrosse has its roots in a challenge between tribes known as bagattaway.  The original contests didn't use marked-off fields with managed play.  It was simply one tribe against another, with cooperation among fellow tribesmen being spontaneous and situational.

This, of course, bothered the people who decided to Anglicize the game and so the Murderous Palefaces imposed their own rules to the play. They limited the playing space (field) and created zones within that space for certain legal and illegal behavior. They imposed referees.  Out of this grew the "team spirit" well known in America culture, the learning of kowtowing to a coach's demands, not too unlike military hierarchy.

The "organizers" who want to "organize" Occupy:________ are like the palefaces who wanted to bastardize bagattaway to make it more comprehensible to their orderly, structured hierarchical preferences and natures.

They can't stand to see people playing at something they enjoy, playing freely. They must impose order! Rules! Legal and illegal zones!

How is that different from the government in question telling Occupy:______ where, when and how they can "protest"?

Thursday, December 8, 2011

stupid fuckin' pwoggies

HalterNut suggests "corporate personhood" is the fault of Lewis Powell.


The very existence of the corporate form of doing business implies separate legal personhood, and the corporate form pre-dates Lewie Powell by many decades.

The source of troubles on corporate personhood would be the original notion of creating a corporate form, rather than a partnership.

In partnerships, the persons gathered for a business purpose share the liabilities and benefits of operating the business.

In corporate entities, the liabilities remain the entitlement, obligation, property (or whatever) of the corporate entity, which stands apart from the people operating the business. The fault lays with the notion that people should not be responsible for their own behavior.


The idea that "entrepreneurs" feel more free to be inventive, creative, notional, whatever in the absence of personal liability is a clever ruse that has gulled millions. To this day you can hear Americans repeat the mantra "it frees up capital" and by saying that they're talking about both money and "human capital" -- and if you don't believe me on that, try discussing the benefits of the corporate form with a zealot on corporate personhood.

These notions existed well before Lewis Powell got hold of them.


HalterNut is just trying to lay more blame at the feet of Evil Rethuglicans because HalterNut is a Dembot Stooge Outlet.

Wednesday, December 7, 2011

deeeessss? dees ees faaaaaaaahhhhkt aaaaahhhhhp!

Many many moons ago, about 22-23 years worth, I did a little scrivening for one of Empire's adjudicating officers. One of the three projects that saw me researching, scribbling and composing was the notion of trade dress infringement.

Trade dress is, loosely stated, the packaging of an item, the way it is sold indirectly through its presentation. Trademark is different and is more formal. We all see trademarks daily; those of us old enough can recall the little signifier (TM) after words or phrases, the signifier indicating the registered trademark status.

The things that are relevant to trade dress infringement have to do with whether a buyer of the product in issue would be confused by the competitor's trade dress. An example of what might give rise to actionable trade dress infringement from my Toobz travels memory banks is this one here.

You know the logo of AMD, the computer processor maker?

That's the current one.

The older one was a bit different. It looked a lot like this one used for several years by Precision Cycling for its adjustable seatpost. Just change the P to a D and delete the 3 words All Mountain Post and you have AMD's old logo. The fonts were even so similar as to leave me (a graphic arts layman) thinking they were identical:

The thing that saved Precision Cycling from any trade dress infringement beefs was the fact that while the logos were so identical as to be a clear ripoff by Precision Cycling, the area of commerce was completely unrelated. Advanced Micro Devices doesn't make bicycle seatposts, nor any other bicycle component. And Precision Cycling wasn't making computer CPUs.

What made me think of trade dress infringement?

This entry by Joe... which leads to this story by the Blue Dork Crimes.

Muller-Moore is not even remotely infringing on Cooked but Formerly Tortured Birds for Lunch and Dinner's trade -- no aspect of it.

He's not operating a franchise selling cooked chicken.

He's not operating any food chain with a name that resembles Chick-Fil-A in any way.

He's not doing anything remotely like what Chick-Fil-A does.  Nobody's going to confuse Muller-Moore for Chick-Fil-A, and conversely nobody's going to go to Chick-Fil-A thinking they're getting a t-shirt about kale ingestion from Muller-Moore.

Now, some smart-Alexei is likely to say this is just "corporate" and therefore if we just got rid of "corporate" the whole field of IP related litigation would stand idle, rather than brimming with bullshit threats and actually begun litigation concerning nonsensical allegations arising from a complete lack of IP infringement.

It's not because of "corporate."

It's because in America, money is power. It's because we use money to value too many things and because we reduce too many things to their mere accounting entry relatives.

It's because we are a Bottom Line country and culture, where even human beings are mere "resources" to the employer -- corporate and non-corporate alike, "human resources" treats human workers like shit, because it treats them as ledger entry data sources, and little more.

I don't know why anyone would eat at a place called Chick-Fil-A, but if you have a habit of eating there I'd suggest you stop buying their dead bird preparations.

You can make better chicken at home anyway. Shit, if I can cook a chicken breast to tasty satisfactory result, anyone can.

tinker, tailor...

Once again something I read has me thinking of battle victim triage.

-What do we have here, Corporal?

-Well his left leg is gone below the knee, it looks like shrapnel in his right eye and right nostril, a few bullet holes in his chest with a strong gurgling in the lungs, his right hand looks burned by something, and his right foot is... well... shattered I guess.

-Fine then.  Take his temperature and pulse, give him an aspirin and a small cup of orange juice.  Next?

not a louse in sight

our son is brilliant, willful, and assertive

Interesting thoughts by Cuneyt here.

Monarchy does have its appeal, but I think if imposed on America it would not yield any significant difference.

I think the problem is merely that the USA and Israel -- the two global bullies -- are, respectively, over-excited adolescent and newly-walking toddler in human analogy.  Both are doing destructive things because they are male children.

The USA is like a very spoiled 16 year old named Chad Wicznewski-Bledding whose parents went to exclusive trustafarian-specialist colleges like Bard and Reed as first-generation achievers in their respective working class families.  Nouveau-riche in every way, they are -- monetarily, culturally, and maturity-wise.  Very entitled, and they've passed that onto the precocious, brilliant, boy genius Chad.  For his 16th they gave Chad a powerful new Audi, and he's gone out drinking and driving.  He's weaving, bumper-car-ing his way down a crowded highway at rush hour, hitting other cars, knocking some off the road, killing other drivers and pedestrians, but everyone's afraid to stop him because he's behind the wheel and lethally driving.

The other kid --David-- is also very spoiled and has grown up in a house chock-full of weapons and instruments of torture (his father was a tyrant's kill-and-torture specialist, now retired but the blood still courses) and now that he's walking he's discovering daddy's tools.  Mommy and daddy are so proud that he's walking and "discovering" that the idea of Junior picking up the tools and dangerously using them is off the radar.

I've known kids like each.

Each kid needs to make some dangerous mistakes, possibly nearly lethal toward himself, before we can hope that he gets a clue as to his behavior's undesirability among those with whom he shares the world.

Older cultures are more like adults of various middle and older ages.  They've made their stupid youthful mistakes, destructive ones that hurt the self, corrosive ones that hurt the immediate environment, and purely misanthropic ones that hurt everyone involved.  If you're around for a thousand years you're going to develop a collective memory of these things, whether you make it an academic history or not.

That collective memory is what prevents the re-occurrence.

In most cases, I think.  Though Germany's a very old culture and look what they did in the middle of the 20th century after a few millennia.  So maybe my analogy isn't well founded.

But I think it is.

It's the main reason why I hope to leave this country.  For the same reason, I don't like being outside near roadways on New Year's Eve or St Patrick's Day, when the amateurs are out in their cups and behind the wheel.

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

I wanna know

the Keel saga

Keel has reached Level 41 and achieved mastery (100 out of 100 skill points available) in sneak. He has cleared numerous tombs of their semi-dead guardians within, looting those tombs of their valuables. Many of the valuables have been pawned in order to do these things:

* buy improved weapons
* buy improved armor
* buy raw materials for further improvement of weapons and armor via smithing and enchanting
* pay skills teachers for lessons
* buy food, potions and poisons
* buy various arrows

It's a lot like life in America, at least for me. Maybe a PowerNoggin would spend less money on everything except lessons. A PowerNoggin would increase skills via lessons alone, amassing lots of theory about how to do things. Hey, look at me! 100/100 in archery! Wait... how do I adjust for wind effects and the curvature of flight? How come I can't kill anyone with one shot even though I have 100/100? I'm a master!

By contrast, Keel's mastery of sneak involved probably a total of 20/100 skill points spent on lessons.  His current archery rating is similar -- I think it's 71/100 and probably 10/100 of those points are lessons rather than practice.FN

What has Keel paid for?  Alchemy training. Smithing training. Training in various magical skills. As fits a mostly theoretical knowledge, Keel doesn't use these skills very often. He has others that he has not developed at all. What are they?

* two-handed weapon
* medium armor
* heavy armor
* conjuration magic

...are the ones I can think of immediately, based on accumulated game time spent and what I haven't spent any time doing.

Keel joined the Thieves Guild during yesterday's activity. His initiation was this: he had to intimidate 3 merchants to pay some debts --tribute, he suspects, but it wasn't specified what type of "debt", only that the collection was required-- and he achieved this without violence in each of the 3 cases. Two he did with mere verbal intimidation; the 3d required him to steal a debtor's beloved statue and threaten to destroy it. He returned the statue upon payment of the debt.

Keel has his eye on a position with the Dark Brotherhood, the league of assassins working in Skyrim (and elsewhere in the Elder Scrolls series of games), but wants to finish some work for the Thieves Guild first.

On the socially benevolent side of things, Keel also has:

* enrolled at the Bard's College and has halfway completed his requirements toward graduation
* worked his way up to leader of the Companions
* enrolled at the College of Mages and has finished half of his requirements there
* completed his Thu'un training with The Greybeards
* foiled a pair of sinister plots hatched by and ongoing with the Thalmor
* saved two towns from dragon attack
* killed many necromancers, other dark mages, vampires, thieves, bandits, thugs, trolls, sabre cats, bears, and, with no offense toward Craig Stadler intended, a few horkers
* earned a favorable reputation with every Jarl in Skyrim

Obviously he's a 21st century American with all that over-achievement. Still, it might be a good idea to ask how many hours were required to reach this level of resume/CV saturation. Smart bets are on it taking a long time. Pundits suggest it may be due to Keel's reliance on mere cleverness, rather than true intellectual brilliance of a type which basically slows down time because the noggin is so much more powerful than that of the average Homer Sapienza.


FN - It's possible to completely artificially advance your skills via practice alone.  Go here and scroll down to Leveling Tips and see the different ways people "gain experience" by locking their player in a static move that, by tricking the game, enables an artificial skill improvement.  There are other ways that are "halfway house" cheats, like the one where it suggests you just sneak behind a barmaid for an hour non-stop.  That's not real practice -- it's really more a full cheat.  Real practice is limited to sneaking around live adversaries who will try to kill you if they detect you.  That's how you learn to sneak.  But I've known people who were high mark achievers all throughout my schooling, who tried to game the system and get more for less. Cheating is as American as plastic tits and show-off cars/trucks/SUVs/whatevers.

Occupy: Myself

I have a few lifelong bad habits that don't just piss me off -- they alienate others too.

I think I have the best route for repairing these habits.

I'm just going to hang out at my house -- long-term loiter, if you will -- and hope that by my presence, I force myself to fix those bad habits.

It's a long shot, sure -- but it feels like doing something!

Sunday, December 4, 2011

up the hill

The Congress' eagerness to impose full lockdown (the broadband domestic-terrorism-is-our-biggest-threat assumption inherent in this pending legislation) and Saintly, Noble Barack the Magnanimous and Imperial solidifying his stance that it's his prerogative to kill any American he finds problematic suggests that the Occupy:___________ idea isn't enough and a lot of uphill slogging is standing before Americans who would like to see the current socio-political-economic system reformed in any meaningful way.

up the hill!
Por ejemplo - Notwithstanding the optimism in Naomi Wolf's communication from the Occupy: Wall Street personnel, reversing Citizens United v FEC will not be a meaningful reform, just as Obamacare is not meaningful reform of the health care problem, bank bailouts have not meaningfully repaired economic money-access and money-movement problems, large entity bailouts haven't positively affected employment/economic problems, and more significantly on the larger scale, just as the "service economy" idea hasn't bailed us out of the post-WW2 economic dumpage. blew up, health care is blown up (it's just on artificial life support thanks to Obamacare), and "real estate development" is kaput.

If our government's competence were in issue, I'd say their competence is not the problem -- rather, their problem is that their goals are entirely different from mine.  I think they are quite competent at keeping their own power, expanding the bureaucratic scope (which, of course, expands their power), and using the government (Fed, State or local -- doesn't matter) as their private cash cow (again, obviously expanding their power).

What they are not aiming to do is level the playing field.

I think most Americans suffer the sadly wrong assumption that politicians mean well, that bureaucrats are meritful and honorable but often thwarted by Evil Rethuglicans Trying to Deregulate, and that we just need a bit of tinkering.

Many seem to think we're in need of New Deal 2 -- and in so thinking they mistakenly assume the New Deal was about helping the powerless gain a stake in the game.  Naively, they think we can reinvest the powerless with an enhanced stakeholding by implementing some new New Deal-ish sort of thing.

If you are looking only 1 year down the road that probably sounds good.  If one year is too far down the line for you to see, a New Deal 2 probably sounds like some sort of gift from the Godz.

But if you look back at WW2 and then forward, you can see that Uncle Sammy's Spending is not the way to fix things.

You are pretty well forced to see that Uncle Sammy himself, he's the problem.

And if you can't see that?

You're not looking.


I tend to like what I read from William Blum.  But after reading his recent entry at Sibel Edmonds' site, I wonder how he got to his big conclusion in that essay.

For example, he's wise in observing this:
Yet, the 1960s and 70s were also a marvelous movement adventure — for me as much as for anyone — but nothing actually changed in US foreign policy as a result of our endless protests, many of which were also innovative. American imperialism has continued to add to its brutal record right up to this very moment. We can’t even claim Vietnam as a victory. Most people believe that the US lost the war. But by destroying Vietnam to its core, by poisoning the earth, the water, the air, and the gene pool for generations, Washington in fact achieved its primary purpose: preventing the rise of what might have been a good development option for Asia, an alternative to the capitalist model.
Now that sure looks like he's suggesting something other than a capitalist system. Right?

Look again here, from his opening paragraph:
When the Vietnam War became history, and the protest signs and the bullhorns were put away, so too was the serious side of most protestors’ alienation and hostility toward the government. They returned, with minimal resistance, to the restless pursuit of success, and the belief that the choice facing the world was either “capitalist democracy” or “communist dictatorship”.
...which suggests there are yet other alternatives beyond those two, correct?

So why does he conclude in this way? --
...more and more people can learn more and more about these matters, and get more and more angry, but have nowhere to turn to, to effectuate meaningful change. Money must be removed from the political process. Completely. It is my favorite Latin expression: sine qua non — “without which, nothing”.
He isn't suggesting that Citizens United v FEC is the linchpin, is he?

I sure hope not.  As I said earlier... that leaves Buckley v Valeo, which permits money's role in political process. Money's always going to be there, unless we do away entirely with money as a culture.  Even if we eliminated PACs and private campaign finance, politicians would be bankrolled in some way or another by those who want certain interests advanced.

That's how a capitalist system works.  Money is the thing.

But it's also what happened in a planned socialist economy (USSR).  Money became the thing, although more covertly because the State owned production.  But what is the State other than those who operate it daily from the positions of decisive power?  If the State owns production, then those emissaries of the State who run the production are analogous to the executives who run private production in a capitalist society.

No real difference... except maybe it's harder to fire the guy in the planned socialist economy, some might say.

But I don't recall the last time in a large American business's shareholders meeting the peons ejected a sitting executive for malfeasance -- so maybe it's more theoretical.

From where I sit, neither is an advantage to me as the citizen/pauper/peon.


My attitude toward and relationship with money is a bit different than most everyone I know, so while I'd enjoy a freewheeling barter/trade/whatever economy, I'm not sure many Americans would.  Americans are some greedy fucks, pal.  They need their gadgets, they need to regularly upgrade their gadgets.  And for a surprising number of Americans "gadgets" includes the motor vehicle driven, the house lived in, and other big ticket items.  Americans love to spend their money -- and most of all they love spending money that's not yet earned.  They love credit!

With people holding low income positions in the American economy, you'd expect the upgrade-itis to be a rare disease.  But no sir!  Nay, madam!  Everyone spends!  It's how you show your value as a human being in America -- your swanky new cell phone, for example!  Put it on the table when you meet friends for a drink -- how cool is that?!  Hold the cell phone 3 feet from your face and talk via the speakerphone function -- how cool are you now?  Just like an "executive"!!

Such people baffle me.  I wonder... do they sit alone and ponder whether the Congress and Obama really need to be able to detain, punish or kill any American at whim, and then halt that thought and say, "but shit, look at this badass cell phone and all the shit I can do with it!"...?

Do they actually feel safer when Obama promises he'll kill any American who spits sideways?