Arianna Criticizes the Criticism of the Obama Critics, Sanctions Obama’s Flip Flops and is not Mad.

HuffyPuffer apparently criticized Obama and offered him Seven Sacred Steps to victory or whatever he is seeking. I reviewed this analysis in a previous blog:

How Not to Blow the Obama Job in Seven Easy Steps by Arianna Huffington

http://rycksrationalizations.blogtownhall.com/2008/07/03/how_not_to_blow_the_obama_job_in_seven_easy_steps_by_arianna_huffington.thtml

In standard Greek circular logic, the brand that usually returns the original assumptions regardless of the facts, Huffington has nothing to say that she didn’t already say and now mumbles.  It is unclear if she understands what she is saying, but that not need deter a liberal.

Here is proof:

“In the last two weeks, there has been a flurry of stories, both in the traditional press and in the blogosphere, that has tried to portray criticism of Barack Obama's recent stands as the sole province of disenchanted members of "the left" -- also referred to as "the far left" (New York Times), "left-winger bloggers" (also New York Times), "the liberal blogosphere" (USA Today, Christian Science Monitor), and "left-wing supporters" (The Telegraph). -- The Latest Media Blind Spot by Arianna Huffington July 14, 2008.[1] This link references all quotes in this essay unless otherwise noted. [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.] 

But, her item 7 in her previous essay is:

“[7] Heed the old Texas advice of Dandy Don Meredith and Molly Ivins: "You got to dance with them what brung you."

That apparently means stay left. But, this is Huffy.

“And many of these stories have cited me, using the two posts I wrote urging Obama not to water down his brand and tack to the middle in an attempt to attract undecided swing voters as examples of the "fire from the left."

Note how confusing it gets here. Her Seven Wonderful Steps encouraged Obama to look in the magic mirror, read old speeches and play the liberal game. She said, in effect, don’t stray to the center or move right or appear to be non progressive. He wandered off anyway in search of votes, or, at least his speech writers did.

“They must not have read the posts carefully. Actually, they must not have read them at all. So allow me to repeat a key graf[sic][2] from the first of these posts:”

She quotes herself with:

“[I've] looked at the Obama campaign not through the prism of my own progressive views and beliefs, but through the prism of a cold-eyed campaign strategist who has no principles except winning. From that point of view, and taking nothing else into consideration, I can unequivocally say: the Obama campaign is making a very serious mistake.”

Logical error here. Somebody is seriously confused and it may just be me. It is difficult to show that when you want O’Bozo to cling to the far left and then  he wanders toward  the center that that is, as you say, a very serious mistake’

“Therefore, I am not "angry" or "outraged" or "howling that Mr. Obama is selling out the left." And his "policy switches" haven't given me "whiplash." I am not offended that he isn't marching in lockstep with progressives. I'd be worried if he was marching in lockstep with anyone. Other than himself. And that is the point I was trying to make.” [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.] 

 So, she wants him to stay far left so he can win and then using a rigid analysis that suggests that he might get more votes if he steals a few bodies from the middle that that is a mistake. “selling out the left” cannot mean anything other than drifting toward the middle or approaching some issues championed by the right. So, she is not offended that he insults her and the left.

“He needs to remain true to himself -- and, above all, to make it clear that he will not lead by sticking his finger in the air to see which way the political wind is blowing.”

Yet, he reverses hisslef on numerous issues. Perhaps he is a butterfly and his base theme is political expediency and will embarace any stance on any political point that will get him votes.  Perhaps he has no beliefs other than those scribbled down by his speech writers in haste. That conduct might be simple vote whoring and a lot of Dems celebrate this. Does Huffy huff this point for us in some  obscure and hidden cipher?

“So nothing is more important, especially for real leaders, than doing whatever it takes to stay true to themselves.”

Reagan did this  and Kerry did not.  So, Obama is a chameleon and such bugs are true to that sector of the bug world.  Switcheroo and Obama too! Does that explain Arianna’s position? I don’t have a clear handle on this one. My fear is that here there is some other explanation that satisfies the left that cannot be safely extracted from a strict reading of her words, thoughts or lack of anger. Perhaps Shirley MacLaine [3]knows .

Apparently, this incoherent analysis  from Arriana  that begs and insults and does violence to  the definition of logical analysis itself is based on circular logic and appears to be an apology for Obama’s affrontery to the far left. She must be having a fit.

Here is my translation of HuffyPuffy’s mumblings:

Stay left like a zombie and remain true to the narrow political precepts of the far left, but if you need votes and need to appeal to the middle then do so and Arainna will announce that you have not done so or if you actually  did so then she is not mad at you yet.

O’Bozo’s Flip Flop Follies:

He flip-flopped in FISA[4], he flip-flopped on Iraq[5], he flip-flopped on the Second Amendmant[6], flip-flopped on his own public financing[7] and, to limit the view here, flip-flopped on the Death Penalty.[8]

And, of course, he flip-flopped on Jermiah Wright and his phony church.

 But Arianna Huffington, puffing away on her few remaining  neurons, has remained true to her stilted view of his loyalty to himself and is not mad.

Check. Got it.

Only in California

rycK [a 5^th generation Californian in Exile and removed from this mental infection. ]

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

Krugman of the NYT Explains Fannie and Freddie and Failure

We are always excited to take delivery of the facts by reading the egalitarian minutiae from the latest political proclamations from the New York Time. We expect little else from essays of the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]. Today, the emotional and financial demise of the quasi-government corporations are the issues and we will be educated on their proper role in the government, their imminent but probably concluded bail-out and more. Watch your taxes soar.

We always need to be alert for ringers and phony political facts by using our usual diagnostics for the pedestrian–level propaganda from the Times. These NYT staff types are simple  automatons[2] who thrash about their cages while mangling the basic elements of reason and history for their essays and are crude redaction artists that can command the rapt attention of the compliant future because they can manipulate the present or the past as necessary. Our krugmaniacal hero from the Times graciously explains Fannie and Freddie and their failure to perform because of  the overt corruption of capitalists. The capitalists must be punished by high taxation. Bastille Day [3]is always a proper occasion to discuss filling the baskets and confiscation wealth. There were only 7 prisoners in that slammer that day and the real reason for the riots was inflation when the price of a loaf of bread rose above the pay for  an average man’s work day. [4]

“And now we’ve reached the next stage of our seemingly never-ending financial crisis. This time Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are in the headlines, with dire warnings of imminent collapse. How worried should we be?”[5]-- By Paul Krugman Published: July 14, 2008. [Emphasis is mine in all quotes. This link references all quotes in this essay unless otherwise noted. ]

Of course not! This pair of government wreckages, the two faces of Baucus from the Franklin Delano[6] Roosevelt's New Deal[7] to ‘help out’ with the mortgages during the Great Depression, was only great for socialists. Successful and honest citizens always lose on such phony programs. This brand of marvel is exactly what a socialist would, and d0es, slobber about when exalting such governmental monsters. This must be preserved and our krugmaniacal tax monger will put out clarion calls for money from the tax payers to restuff this bag of pus.

“Well, I’m going to take a contrarian position: the storm over these particular lenders is overblown. Fannie and Freddie probably will need a government rescue.”

There is nothing contrarian about tax whoring. This is standard NYT fluff.

As to their quasi corporate privileges:

“The most important of these privileges is implicit: it’s the belief of investors that if Fannie and Freddie are threatened with failure, the federal government will come to their rescue.”

Did we need to hear more than this?? This is a license to steal, or better, to be an incompetent financial parasite and bask warmly in the soggy glow of socialism as your pay and retirement bennies are assured and lashed to the backs of the tax payers, 97% of which are in upper half of the population. Power to the people!

“This implicit guarantee means that profits are privatized but losses are socialized. If Fannie and Freddie do well, their stockholders reap the benefits, but if things go badly, Washington picks up the tab. Heads they win, tails we lose.”

Stark and accurate facts from the Times. But, Krugman does not mention that such profits are taxable.

“Investors have been dumping shares and buying the bonds of the government sponsored entities (GSEs) instead in anticipation that a state takeover would effectively give their combined outstanding $6.1 trillion in debt a clear government guarantee.”[8]--Wikipedia

Sometimes, Krugman gets it left but accurate. We can salute his candor and concern for the moment.

“Such one-way bets can encourage the taking of bad risks, because the downside is someone else’s problem.”

He abbreviates here. This is the norm for ALL GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS because if they fail or mess up things they call on the tax payer to wipe up the scattered offal and they keep their phony government jobs. The propagandistic element of choice here for the left is to balme capitalism and ingnore the ecnompassing and intrisic symptoms of of a sick government and questionable socieity here.

A major part of the problem is the hopeless tax situation for inner cities where  victims and muggers live in close proximity and the city needs  somebody to buy run-down houses and pay exhorbitant taxes. Flop houses would be cheaper and more effective. Some of this phantasm  is faciiltated by a leftist process known as that the Greenlining[9] [10] project. The credit ratings of deadbeats, muggers, druggies, prostitutes, felons and street crime types had their credit ratings masked so that they could buy a house for nothing down and live there at the expense of the tax payers. Then, there are the flippers who bought house in the hope of quick profits. The cities need tax revenues from such dumps and getting bank monies to do so is just fine. Money from banks and honest people are not marked as such. Neither is the drug money that supplies so many jobs to inner cities like Baltimore or Philly or the ChocolateCity.

“Still, isn’t it shocking that taxpayers may end up having to rescue these institutions? Not really. We’re going through a major financial crisis — and such crises almost always end with some kind of taxpayer bailout for the banking system.”

Not really. The liberal Democrats also fixed the system in Social Security where they could barrow 1 bln dollars and stick it to the tax payers.[11] [12] They also spent the highway trust fund of about 30 bln dollars.  So, now they whine about the ‘infrastructure.’

“And let’s be clear: Fannie and Freddie can’t be allowed to fail. With the collapse of subprime lending, they’re now more central than ever to the housing market, and the economy as a whole.”

This Freddy, Frumpy, Floppy program is another socialist disgrace from the FDR era just like Social Security, and related to similar LBJ wreckages the Great Society, War on Poverty and HUD, HHS, Department of Education and other phony government programs. The only solution to any problems of government outlined by the New York Times is more government, higher taxes bigger and more taxes later to cover up the blunders.

The expected political and financial outcome outlined by the Walter Duranty Papers here is to bribe ignorant liberals, criminals, druggies and other losers to buy homes [whether they have the cognitive skills to understand the mortgage contracts or not] and then reward them with a subsidy at the expense of the tax payers.

This but another variant on the ‘redistribution of wealth’ nostrums from the Communist Manifesto, Frenach Revoltion and incohernt yowlings from those in California.

 Grunt and Grab

The liberals will say and do anything to get more political power and grab more wealth. Anything at all.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

Krugman Praises the Degenerate Ted Kennedy and Pushes Higher Taxes, of Course.

We are always presented with coy laments over the Bush Administration, the loss of trillions of missed tax opportunities and are always graced with new and egalitarian details about the latest political views from the New York Time. We expect little else from essays of the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1].  Today, the Bush win on FISA is brushed away in an attempt to shower grace upon Ted Kennedy. The terrorists, favorites of the left since the commies rotted away for the most part, lost one. The Rule of Law and justice might just whack a few more terrorist to the soggy dismay of the rabid left.

We will employ the usual diagnostics for the pedestrian–level propagandas as we always do with those automatons[2] who struggle with reason and history at the New York Times. Our krugmaniacal hero from the Times crafts these wondrous ‘economic’ schemes that are a cut above sausage machine tautology, the kind we get from Frank Rich.

Most of this screed is a moan and howl for socialized medicine and how Ted Kennedy could make the difference. As usual, there is no salient account of how to pay for this terminal tax episode so we will just take the Kennedy Celebration and comment on that. The rest is standard krugmaniacal fluff and pedestrian tax whoring.

As for Ted Kennedy: It seems that the left can salute and trumpet a person like Ted Kennedy, the degenerate inheritor of the Kennedy Crime Machine. His father was a disgusting Nazi boot licker who was so enamored with Hitler that he gave a press conference telling the world that democracy was finished. He later realized that praising Marxism made more political sense so he switched as fast as anybody could spit.  There is little difference between Fascism and communism although the left struggles hard to ignore the fact that Nazi means nationalist socialist. Teddy is a racist,  bigot, parasite, drunk, murderer and has fostered a generation of inbred socialist bozos in his image.

 Apart from his older brothers who failed later in life, and unfortunately in the Oval Office[3], Teddy started out as a loser and got worse. Much of this is detailed in the book The Dark Side of Camelot, a piece from a liberal that is still generating hate and contempt for the truth,

Ted Kennedy may be compared to other disgusting parasites and murderers like Mumia, Walter Duranty, Susan Sontag, Jane Fonda, Angela Davis, Fidel Castro, Kim, Mao, and Stalin and to his supposed relative Patrick Kennedy.[4] The dirty Kennedy money has bankrolled numerous crimes and sleazy operations. There are several books on the subject.[5]

I think this guy Teddy is a disgusting degenerate and the praise he gets from the New York Times shows us to what depths the liberals will dredge the latrines to get power.

The liberals will say and do anything to get more political power and grab more wealth. Anything at all.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

 San Francisco, Protects, and Adores Sleaze and Illegal Aliens.  This Effort will launch a Parasite to the CA Governor’s Office.

 We know that San Francisco is a 4^th World arena of sloth, sodomy and drug addiction[1] much of that aided by welcoming illegal aliens, especially those with criminal records and skilled at selling drugs, and now this cadre of true believers may provide the votes to get Gavin Newsom [2]elected governor of the state that is going bankrupt.[3]  Crime is celebrated in San Francisco.[4]

It seems that when the usefulness of the drug dealers and other convicted juvenile offenders  and perverts from Honduras and parts south of Tijuana, the Mecca of Sin, have been exposed for their services to the city they are frequently  placed on a plane and sent back home. This lets them escape  incarceration and also the federal rap of felonious reentry by a deported person and gives them multiple chances to go  home, stock up on drugs and guns and come back to a  welcome parade in the Tenderloin or South Mission Districts.  They are so progressive in California, especially with their finances and taxes.

We can all guess where the money came from to protect these slime[5].

“On Wednesday, Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands) demanded that San Francisco officials turn over all convicted illegal immigrant drug dealers to federal authorities instead of shipping them "out to San Bernardino County, where they can escape and victimize the neighborhoods in my district."[6]

Aren’t these people, when sober, blabber and howl about the Rule of Law?

Some Fruit Loop who defies the law and celebrates perversion is just the candidate for governor of California. But, why not just bump one of the ‘girls’ and take the Senate seat?

Isn’t this a blatant case of obstruction of justice??[7] Is this our system of justice? It must be.  Some guy can loan a gun to a friend and it malfunctions and fires multiple shots at a firing range the swat teams converge on his little home, but some slime bag who services the seedy and perverted in San Francisco get a pass?

The whine of a typical leftist in public orifice goes like t his:

“"These kids have really been victimized, most of our clients," said Patricia Lee, who manages the public defender office for juvenile court. "They come from incredibly dire circumstances. Their families are starving."

Lee said drug lords sometimes promise the youths construction jobs in California, then force them into "slave labor" retailing drugs. "They're not murderers, they're not rapists," she said. "They're trying to survive and their families live under threat of harm.

"We have a duty to defend these kids, zealously."[8]

This is so sad. But, talking about slavery and exploitation of the masses, we might wonder about the 13-14 year old Asian girls who give ‘special massages’ in the seedy massage parlors in San Francisco, The Beautiful City by the Bay? No problem here? Do the drug lords get a second chance to outfit their boys and try again?? Experience counts in drugs and massage parlors.

What about the dope that comes up the ladders of the ships anchored in the bay at night when the fog is thick? Narcotics, we must admit, provides much of the superior cognitive skills we read about in the Bay Area and is as necessary as bread to perverts and those who frantically want to believe in Marx and Marcuse.

I wonder if the criminals have their 2010 absentee ballots already filled out for Newsom? They should be able to vote in any county where they sold drugs including absentee ballots from Honduras.

‘They're not murderers’ but their drug sales ruin lives. But, then, if those gallant antics are reserved only for San Francisco, the charges should be lightened.  Like abortion, the Friscans need a shorter path to Go Home. [9] This will save the rest of us some taxes and wasted medical efforts.

These degenerates are going to get their drugs into the city by any an all means and justify sloth, sodomy and drug addition to whoever might listen and probably vote.

California deserves some person like Gavin Newsom as their leader.  

You are crazy if you visit this city or  anywhere in Californian in general.

rycK, a 5^th generation Californian in Exile.

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

The Krugmaniacal Baloney behind the Bush Bust: Raise Taxes!! What Else?

We can always discover the salient details about the current vectors that the far left intend to use to destroy our capitalist society from the political essays of the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1].  Today, the hopeful notion that the economy has finally succumbed to leftist political attacks and squeezing oil supplies while employing wild spending on social programs is in full blossom.

We will employ the usual diagnostics for the pedestrian –level propagandas as we always do with those automatons[2] who labor at the New York Times. Our krugmaniacal hero from the Times struggles in a manner very like these wondrous machines and are a cut above sausage machines. Today, he tosses in two mental teasers that might give the mundane the notion that he is skidding toward objectivity, but, fortunately, he recovers and gets back into his tautological screeds on tax whoring and socialism.

“By huge margins, Americans think the economy is in lousy shape — and they blame President Bush. This fact, more than anything else, makes it hard to see how the Democrats can lose this election.”[3] - By Paul Krugman Published: July 7, 2008

The left always wins in depressions, famines, war and during inflationary events.  Let us all hope for a depression! Worked for FDR.

“But is the public right to be so disgusted with Mr. Bush’s economic leadership?”

Here, the propagandistic sleight of hand appears, much a shell game gimmick, where the central premise is self-questioned and then the final conclusion weighted down by the weight of the evidence. We have to slog through this mental muck to get to the final conclusion: raise taxes.

Of course Bush is to blame! He is a tax-cutting capitalist. Raise Taxes!

“First things first: pay no attention to apologists who try to defend the Bush economic record. Since 2001, economic conditions have alternated between so-so and outright bad: a recession, followed by one of the weakest expansions since World War II, and then by a renewed job slump that isn’t officially a recession yet, but certainly feels like one.”

 Can we insert a few items about Democrat spending by Congress and talk about their sorry 12% approval rating? No, this broad view of the economy doesn’t fit into this screed so we will limit the blame to Republicans. Can we pay attention to that?

“Over all, Mr. Bush will be lucky to leave office with a net gain of five million jobs, far short of the number needed to keep up with population growth. For comparison, Bill Clinton presided over an economy that added 22 million jobs.”

Clinton left us with an economic slump [the Clinton Gore Recession] and we should add in the 8-12 million jobs taken by illegal aliens here to be fair. That gives Bush more than Clinton.

Then, the conclusion explodes in song and verse and mystical lights:

“And what does Mr. Bush have to say about this dismal record? “I think when people take a look back at this moment in our economic history, they’ll recognize tax cuts work.” Clueless to the end.”

We knew that tax-whoring[4] could be explained, celebrated and electrified by any and all strange stories and by straining economic statistics through a scraggy, porous leftist filter. There are no other alternatives to tax hikes because the leftist cannot make money in any other manner except, of course, for prostitution, drug sales, slavery, and fast-running abortion mills.

So, we turn the old rusty crank:

And we turn back to the central premise of tax whoring. This sly question as to why many should   “…so disgusted with Mr. Bush’s economic leadership” is apparently inserted to confuse the ignoble and serve as a reference to show that Krugman is ‘fair’ or other such element of subterfuge.  He weights the evidence and make an objective conclusion and politics is never part of his thinking. He is an economist.

“Yet even liberal economists have a hard time arguing that Mr. Bush’s cluelessness actually caused the poor economic performance on his watch. Tax cuts didn’t work, but they didn’t create the Bush bust. So what did?”

The magician now has his hat open for all to see and   what will he pull out?

Here they are!!

“At the top of my list of causes for the lousy economy are three factors: the housing bubble and its aftermath, rising health care costs and soaring raw materials prices. I’ve written a lot about housing, so today let’s talk about the others.”

The housing matter is related to supply and demand, a law that Krugman is loath to talk about as many criminals, persons of low credit and marginal intelligence thought they could milk the system, yell racism or bias and they get their mortgages paid by the government.  When some market turns down it must be something unfair or contrived by the evil capitalists. Some will succeed. Recall that the phony Greenlining[5] project laws allowed the deliberate cover-up of the credit ratings of many dopers, illegal aliens, criminals and dead beats and that does have an effect on the markets. This is just another form of tax where votes are bought by your tax money.  Any mechanism to get money can be justified by the left including sloth, sodomy, murder and    slavery. All they have is your money and they want much m0re.

Krugman cannot handle the notion that markets rise and fall, but when they go down it is time to hike taxes and criticize capitalism and bawl for socialism as usual. We can expect little else.

“Most public discussion of health care focuses on the problems of the uninsured and underinsured. But insurance premiums are also a major business expense: auto makers famously spend more on health care than they do on steel.”

Yes, this is cost-push inflation. From this, we must assume that the government could do it cheaper as they do in Cuba[6] for $130 per person per year!! I wonder why most liberals don’t migrate to Cuba or North Korea, places more in line with their mentality and politics.

Socialism on the way and justified by:

“One of the underemphasized keys to the Clinton boom, I’d argue, was the way the cost disease of health care went into remission between 1993 and 2000. For a while, the spread of managed care put a lid on premiums, encouraging companies to expand their work forces.

But premiums surged again after 2000, imposing huge new burdens on business. It’s a good bet that this played an important role in weak job creation.”

The only thing Slick Willie did that was successful was to diddle Monica with a cigar. Then he blew up an aspirin factory in Sudan! Great Work Billy.

Do we recall the Hillary Scare when or government restricted such things as blood panels to ‘save money?” What that did was to demoralize clinicians and force blood tests to be rerun only on the basis of symptoms. But, where is the cost projections from Hillary on how much her program would cost? It is still absent. Nobody can talk about this. Where is he Krugman essay on Hillary Care costs?

A complete lie then justifies the previous fluff:

“If Bill Clinton’s attempt to reform health care had succeeded, the U.S. economy would be in much better shape today. But the attempt failed — and let’s remember why. Yes, the Clinton administration botched the politics. But it was Republicans in Congress who blocked reform, as Newt Gingrich pursued a strategy of “coagulation” designed to “clot everyone away” from Mr. Clinton.”

A lot of Democrats voted against Hillary Care too! The leftist use of the the word ‘reform’ means tax increases. Tax Tax Tax.

At a minimum, the cost if implementing socialized medicine would have been 200 bln per year as she wanted to hire a mere 160,000 pen pushers to run her programs. She would also have limited medical procedures [except abortion of course] and illegal aliens would have been welcome to sponge on the system.

Hopefully, California will default soon[7]  as will NJ[8] and the reason is the excessive healthcare and benefits of their union state and city and county employees. Their disintegrations can show us some facts about socialism run amuck.

This hopeless screed oozes onward toward the usual socials latrines and summarized today’s lesson in Marxism with:

“And bear in mind that John McCain has gone to great lengths to affirm his support for Republican economic orthodoxy. So he’ll have no reason to complain if, as seems likely, the economy costs him the election.”

So, we learn, again, that capitalism and Republicans are responsible for all evils and some Democrat, unmentioned here, will win the election because of lousy economics by the left. How about a racist bigot for president with gutter-level Chicago credentials? That works for many on the left.

Krugman fails to address the usual points:

[1] How will you pay for expensive social programs by raising taxes? Who will pay these new exorbitant taxes and fees? The upper half now pays 96% of all taxes. When you increase taxes on the wealthy do they just shift things around to avoid excessive taxes? Does revenue increase when taxes are raised?

[2] How do you wish to handle the national debt, made mammoth and unworkable possible by 30 years of Congressional spending, dominated by Democrats? How do we pay that down?  Raise taxes!

[3] Where is the cost-push essay on oil and how supply and demand effects are raising costs on everything? Shall we tax Exxon and force the gasoline prices down?

[4] Where is the nuclear energy factor here where we can product electricity for 3 cents per kilowatt-hour? France can do it. So can Japan.

[5] What do we do about the War on Terrorism? Surrender and   send economic aid to the Islamo-Fascists.

[6] What do we do about 12 million illegal aliens who violate our laws and there would be 30 million more if we don’t   close the borders?

[7] Where the economic analysis of costs and such for the phony Cap and Trade Follies? Can we save money by taxing energy? Algore and his phony Marxian stooges, known now as EcoNazis, have conjured the biggest tax scam in the history of the world and the simple-minded Brits[9] have bought into his scheme. [10]

[8] What is the price of left liberals and their stooges murdering thousands in our inner cities each year?[11] Philly is now at 406 per annum. Detroit leads the list. What is the social cost here? Do we blame Bush or tax cuts for this liberal spender? New Jersey is now 4^th world. [12]

[9] What are we doing about Social Security going broke? The liberals said we had ‘plenty of time.’

So, we end another leftist propaganda piece by the most famous non-economics of the New York Times. We can commend Krugman here for his sorcery and a bit of entertainment and  for a few tricks that might have misdirected the cognitively disnimble, but the message came forth like an involuntary colonic discharge. Raise Taxes and finance big government. We are always indebted to the Times for their amusing and instructive political propaganda pieces. They are fun and show us that the left have nothing else to do but howl and complain about capitalism and attempt to grunt and grab their share of the wealthy with phony taxes and worse.

The liberals will say and do anything to get more political power and grab more wealth. Anything at all.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

The Intrinsic Degeneracy of Social Liberalism and Other Leftist Political Systems.

We must, at times, make reasonable inspections of how our political systems work and what their goals might be. Just listening to the speeches and reading canned litanies of authorized propaganda have little meaning for the average citizen. The slick ads on TV and radio are mostly designed to appeal and convert a very few persons over to a local candidate. The temptation for the politicians to ‘tell the people what they want to hear” is too successful [and is socially fatal at times] to be ignored by those who work the political levers for fame and power and fortune.

Going to the encyclopedia in search of a clear explanation of liberalism, a once- solid and authoritative reference point of truth and facts of centuries since Diderot and Voltaire created it; we get essentially nothing, or worse. Here is the Wikipedia definition of liberalism:

“Liberalism refers to a broad array of related ideas and theories of government that consider individual liberty to be the most important political goal.[1] Modern liberalism has its roots in the Age of Enlightenment.” [1] [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

This is so phony [and way too broad] as to prompt a frantic search for something to encumber a sudden urge to vomit. The nostrum that the individual might be involved in contemporary liberalism in some places other than as ‘leaders’ or sages or party elders or elected officials is a sick joke. The general error here is based on the necessity to avoid the confusion between 18^th century liberalism and its current perverted form as espoused by the Party of Democrats.

These used to be ‘liberal tenets:’

[1] Freedom of thought and speech

[2] Limitations on the power of governments

[3] Strict enforcement of the rule of law

[4] The free exchange of ideas,

[5] A capitalist market system or mixed economy

[6] Transparent system of government.[2]

These are ‘social liberal’[3] tenets and specifics on what they favor:

[1] Real freedom can only exist when citizens are healthy, educated, and free from dire poverty.

[2] The right to an education, the right to health care, and the right to a minimum wage.

[3] Laws against discrimination in housing and employment

[4] Laws against pollution of the environment,

[5] The provision of welfare, including unemployment benefit and housing for the homeless,

[6] All the above supported by progressive taxation.

This all sounds very good until you get into the implementation and totalitarianism of those who would enforce these principles by confiscating the money and wealth of the citizens who have these rights. [4] Such is the radicalism that leads to millions of people being murdered by leftists who claimed they were liberal and wanted to create a better society.

The French Revolution

This exercise [there were actually two French Revolutions] was triggered by inflation and unrest and hatred against the old feudal class of Europe. There was little noble about this mess as the landholders were marched before the guillotine in the Terror.[5]   A revolutionary dictatorship was installed by people like Jean-Paul Marat, as usual in any leftist revlution, to kill off the opposition and confiscate wealth. They passed ‘laws’ such as Law of Suspects where anybdy could be accused of any crime agaisnt the state and summarily executed by the army or mobs.[6] These people were an utter failure, and inspired Marx and other utter failures to copy their dirty work. We shall continue to encounter the central theme of leftistism, mangled in the soggy nostrum as liberalism, as we dig deeper into history and the outcomes of politifal movements.

The Russian Revolution

It seems like this ought to be a closed matter given the utter failure and degenerative outcomes of this October Revolution and its conjeners since 1917. There were several movements against the Tsar and some provisional government [the Duma] partially set up by him.[7] This thing was a disaster for the world and, not so stra ngely as one would expect, is still revered as the ‘right choice’ for governments by the far left. They cling to the stubborn and wholly unsubstantiated belief that the notion was correct although some mistakes were made. There are a host of perverted apologists who still belileve in the revolution of the prolateriat [now read peasants] and the wholesale murder of capitalists. Examples are Shining Path, Party of Democrats Progressive Caucus, anyhwere in Africa, Cuba and parts of South America, South East Asia and certain parts of Europe.

The liberals still parrot the Communist Manifest in whole or in part for their politial precepts. Many have spun outrageous lies to justify the murder of millions such as Walter Duranty [8], the Patron Saint of the New York Times. The cliché about the pen being  mightier than the sword does actually apply to this social parasite. Many others paved his way by ignoring the excesses of the Bolsheviks, Lenininsts, Troskyites and Stalinists such as Bernard Shaw[9], the most famous person in the world in 1931. George Bernard Shaw moaned about equality as he relaxed on the French Rivera or at his splendid castle in Ireland.[10] Modern day apologists such as Paul Krugman, Frank Rich, Cornel West, Susan Sontag, Noam Chomsky[11] and others with lesser wit and diminutive cognitive skills translate the lust and hatred for power into convenient social ‘equality’ elements as a crude excuse to grab power and exclude capitalists wherever possible. Chomsky, like Duranty, tried to apologize for the Khmer Rouge massacres of probably a million Cambodians with mindless fluff:

“Space limitations preclude a comprehensive review, but such journals as the Far Eastern Economic Review, the London Economist, the Melbourne Journal of Politics, and others elsewhere, have provided analyses by highly qualified specialists who have studied the full range of evidence available, and who concluded that executions have numbered at most in the thousands; that these were localized in areas of limited Khmer Rouge influence and unusual peasant discontent, where brutal revenge killings were aggravated by the threat of starvation resulting from the American destruction and killing.”[12]

This is typical of the left. This is liberalism in flower. They were trying to do the right thing when they murdered people with education and soft hands or who wore glasses. Let us blame America [read capitalism] for horrors created by anti-capitalists in other parts of the world. If the top 1% of the citizens of the US were murdered and their wealth confiscated we would read such an apology by some simpering dupe who thinks like this parasite Chomsky. Space limitations [in my essay] preclude a comprehensive review of such parasitism and ghoulish murder. Castro murdered 10,000 in Cuba and he is only celebrated as a hero who overthrew Juan Batista. Fidel now eats expensive meats and lives in splendor as did Stalin, Tito, Mugabe, Kim and other degenerates who murdered people for their wealth using liberalism as a crude excuse. People like Olof Palme[13]applaud their works and condemn the United States.  Olof called US soldiers in Viet Nam ‘Nazis’ in an article for the Asian Edition of Time about 1967  and in a radio speech in 1972. [14] Of course, the cowardly and pro-Marxist Swedes, posing as peace mediators, sold guns to all sides for 200 years and directly participated in the murder of millions while being more than cozy with Hitler in the late 30s, but all that is beside the fact. Palme was shot in the back probably for reneging on a dirty missile deal with Iran. [15] One of his cabinet gun-running types just fell in front of a train soon after.

Many, like George F. Kennan[16], William F. Buckley, George Will, Phyllis Schlafly and many others  have warned us of the nasty and brutal monsters that hide behind the fluff and counterfeit facades of liberalism and have been denigrated and caustically abused by the left. The phony economics of the left have been exposed many times [by Hayek[17] and others] and still the tax whores grunt and grab for higher and higher taxes, the economic equivalent of the guillotine.

The EcoNazis

The totalitarian types insist on preaching their narrow views on any subject and murder, jail, banishment and, most prominent for the left, confiscation of personal property are predictable political methods. The latest scheme to tax the entire world is the EcoNazi carbon tax. It seems that they have found that CO₂ is a poison and a product of capitalism and needs to be taxed. Al Gore[18], the communist stooge, has flown around the world in his wonderful jet teaching others to conserve energy while he makes $100,000,000 off the phony cap and trade scams that are burying Europe in debt, taxes and social problems. The scientific evidence shows that CO₂ does not correlate with surface temperature changes[19] and this disgraceful fact is ignored by the left who call themselves ‘scientists’ and who, for money purposes, assert that the matter is ‘closed. ‘

This is typical of Marxism: any distortion or lie that allows money and wealth to be confiscated is tolerated. Even science has been dist0rted to gain money and power even though no element of science is every ‘closed’ or off the table for debate and scrutiny.[20] Science does not work that way. [21]

Eternal Racism

No matter what, the political lever of reverse racism is pulled daily and has now converted 98% of the black vote to the leftists of the Party of Democrats. Affirmative Action, busing, quotas, and other phony social programs and statutes do nothing but enhance racism, the very foundation of the left. [22][23] Racists like Jeremiah Wright, Al Sharpton[24] ["What’s wrong with denouncing white interlopers?"[25]], Jesse Jackson, Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton[26], Kamau Kambon [“…exterminate white people off the face of the planet [27] and Geraldine Ferraro [until recently and now the most visible ‘racist’ in the Party of Democrats], Mike Nifong[28], Malik Shabazz[29], Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer and many others are never challenged for their racist and racially biased antics by the left. Senator Barack Obama can tell us about the ‘typical white person’ and denigrate whites[30] for “clinging to their guns and religion’ and escape any accusations of overt racism by the left. Obama is an ideological racist, a bigot, an arrogant elitist and a racism enabler and all this welcomed by the rabid left as they grunt and grab at the tax base. He can listen to the rabid racist howls of Jeremiah Wright and see nothing out of the ordinary. He cannot disown his pastor or church he said. Then, he did.

So, we always find the same clichés and tautological notions embedded in liberalism and some can be summarized here:

[1] They will murder anybody for wealth and power. They have murdered 100,000,000 souls since 1917 alone. They will support any such actions in Africa, South America or elsewhere if they can if they threaten capitalism or western ideals.

[2] They will concoct any lie or invent any scam to get money and power.  They will suppress, redact, fudge, copy, plagiarize or abstract any written materials that they can exploit by turning them into propaganda.[31] They teach far left liberalism as basic education.

[3] They will distort any facet of society like science or religion or nationalism to further their ends and lust for money and power.  They celebrate degeneracy and drug addiction. [32]

[4] To get power, they will deliberately invent and staff phony and unworkable social programs that are designed to fail and only consume more taxes.

[5] They utilize the notion of ‘equality’ where none ever exists or ever could to ‘prove’ that capitalism is unjust and suggest higher taxes and more social programs to force equality upon the masses.

[6] Their best political weapon is reverse racism where inequality is touted and any and all means to achieve equality are phony and counter productive, but politically effective. Second to racism is sloth, sodomy and drug addiction in that order.

[7] The ‘individual’ must be suppressed and those who can circumvent the clumsy rules and governments of the left should be terminated. Liquidation using the Stalinist definition is fine with the left if capitalists are the target.

[8] Personal property is an affront to socialism and the left.  Wealth must be confiscated.

[9] The power of the vote must be suppressed and election results doctored to produce the most desirable outcome for the left. [33]

[10] There is no human act, however disgusting or illegal they might be, that cannot be celebrated and trumpeted by the left for political reasons.

[11] They will worship and foster and aid any enemy of the United States as they did for the Communists and Islamo-Fascisti and lie about their support. They will harbor and celebrate illegal aliens who sell narcotics and murder citizens and protect them from the authorities.

[12] They will distort or pervert any statue or law by the courts or litigation that will serve their interests.  They will substitute their own versions of multiculturalism for the standard rights known as equality and freedom.

And, somehow these parasites stay in power. Vote accordingly.

rycK

 Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

How Not to Blow the Obama Job in Seven Easy Steps by Arianna Huffington

The wealth of advice for politicians might be documented in a mere billion years if all variants and slants on the issues and personalities of each candidate would be fully examined and trumpeted. This explosion of expertise presumably gives comfort and guidance to politicians who rely on ‘experts’ to guide their wanderings in the political latrines with illuminated offerings. Of course, they have scant time to read the details while they pander for bribes, but that is another story. Today, Arianna Huffington, the Huffer and Puffer of Extremist Politics offers us a road map with signs and alarms to guide her anti-Clinton candidate into the White House.

Here they are and we hope Obama is watching this spectacle unfold in its brilliance:

[1] Load up your Kindle [1]with passages from leaders who were looking to fundamentally change the country and following an inner compass, not the latest focus-group results. Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King would be a good place to start.[2] [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

In other words: be a parrot and follow Machiavelli on doing ‘what works.’

[2]  Load up your iPod with passages from your own speeches. They've inspired others; now let them re-ignite the inspirational leader in you.

[3]  Get your campaign to give you a printout of the names of the over 1.5 million people who have donated to your campaign (at an average of $197 each). Give that list a read every day; feel the heft.

Is this like groping? Is this an intellectual hand job?

[4] Tape to your mirror the poll results from July 2004, where Kerry was up by six, and June of 1988, where Dukakis was up by 15... and don't get complacent.[3]

Education by rote.

[5] Go to YouTube and watch the concession speeches of Kerry, Gore, and Hillary Clinton,..

Parrot Parrot in the Mirror!

[6] Don't let the daily petty squabbles of the campaign distract you from the core message that this campaign is not a referendum on John McCain's war record or the level of your patriotism -- but rather on the future of America. Are we a nation driven by hope and promise or a nation driven by fear?

Like the mortgage scandal and Jeremiah Wright’s KKK Amerika speeches.

[7] Heed the old Texas advice of Dandy Don Meredith and Molly Ivins: "You got to dance with them what brung you."

And, that was what? ‘Change?’

Okay! That is great. Thans Huffy.   Now, where is the substance here? We can all quote Aristotle and Macualay and Jefferson and what would that do? Mesmerize the disnimble and cogntive deficient?  The No Blow Danger here is that Obama will be subjected to questions he cannot answer, such as his stance on high taxes on everything, partial birth abortions, high taxes on everything, amnesty for illegal aliens, high taxes on everything, support of Islamo Fasicsts, high taxes on everything, and even higher taxes on everything.

How would Obama pay for all this? Just keep raising taxes? What would Obama do about oil prices in the short, mid and long term? Oh! $4-6 doller per gal gasoline is fine—why the French do it that way! But, where is the ‘altenative’ source of energy we need? A few years out? Really? We can conserve while Castro pumps oil out of the gulf. Sure.

Did you take a bribe on your mortgage from a parasite?[4]

Are you an ideological racist?[5]

Are you an elitist?

Are you a bigot when it c0mes to middle class whites who might have voted for Ronald Reagan? Why did you sit in the pews and howl with Jeremiah Wright for 20 years and then suddenly disown him as you said you would never do.? [6]

Is this taped on your mirror?

"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."[7]—Barack Obama off camera in what he thought was a safe environment to express his views.[8]

Huffington huffs hokey stuff here and tells us that you must avoid the issues even when the NYT laments and blames you for not doing so.[9]

Gee, this is not so simple after all. But, Arianna is probably right left as usual: keep to mumbling and quoting M. L.  King, FDR or George Washington and hope the voters are not watching.  All this in the electronic age too! How reverse existentialist of Arianna! Your far left liberal stance must be obfuscated in some way or the voters will realize that you are just a simple racist and tax whore.

Huffy really puffed this piece with frivolous  fluff. How about:"You got to dance in the pale moonlight with them what brung you."

Vote NoBozo.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

Sleaze, Corruption and Bribery as usual in the Ranks of the Democrats.

We are treated to lofty and elegant speeches created by dedicated political scientists devoted to persuading the public that their candidates are noble and honest and all that blather while they take bribes, slip in ear marks for their friends or use their Congressional committee status to get goodies in terms of special treatment, low interest rate mortgages and another variants of bribes.

The list of human flotsam who take such bribes using their political influence  include the sordid, unwashed and criminal John Murtha, The King of Pork[1], Slick Willie Clinton and Al Gore as a pair who grunted and grabbed Asian Communist funds from the Lippo Group and others. We were assured by Nancy Pelosi [2], upon her coronation as House Speaker, the Queen of the Asian Slaves in San Francisco, the City by the Bay,  wh0 perform ‘special massages’ on tourists in San Francisco that she would have a clean group under her wing. Of course, “Cold Cash” William Jennings Jefferson[3] still sits on important commitees at the feet of Pelosi under the scrutinithy of her cadaverous gaze while under indictment by a federal grand jury on 16 charges related to corruption. Perhaps he is ‘innocent until proven gulilty like Bush, Cheney and other republicans. Nancy Pelosi—aka [Spartacus][4]in honor of the Marxist heroine Rosa Luxemburg[5][6]  who declared that some German City was a Soviet State, and former chair of the Marxist Progressive Caucus[7] or Congress' Red Army caucus.[8] No communists there.

Nancy in her first 100 days was gong to do things like:

[1] Put new rules in place to "break the link between lobbyists and legislation."

[2] Enact all the recommendations made by the commission that investigated the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

[5] "Pay as you go," meaning no increasing the deficit, whether the issue is middle class tax relief, health care or some other priority.[9]

How much of that happened Nancy? The Islamo-Fascists were supported every change she got.

So, Chris Dodd[10]  and Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D. were on a super special The V.I.P. list maintained by super crook and briber Angelo Mozilo. Now, Barack Obama seems to have grubbed for special deals from lenders and book peddlers for their money and mortgages as well and where is the Noisy Nancy??  Where is your kick out the crooks speech? Dodd genetically follows his criminal father as Elder Dodd was he was ‘censured’ by the Senate 1967for using campaign funds for personal purposes.’[11] The elder Dodd also used Nazism to aid him in fabricating gun control laws to help weaken the Second Amendment, a standard leftist political tenet. He copied Nazi documents, had they translated, and rewrote them into legislation.[12] Conrad was so sleazy he even received rare criticism from the New York Times [13] Conrad is the guy who criticizes spending in Congress.  How often do the left rely on Communism or its close cousin Fascism for help in thinking.

Conrad confesses:

“It’s not even clear that the Senate these days is in touch enough to understand how terrible this home-loan back-scratching looks. Senator Conrad said that of 10 or so mortgages he obtained over the years, “in every one of those instances I talked with the No. 1 or No. 2 person” at the lender. Just like the rest of us.”[14]—Kent Conrad   [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

Hello Nancy! Your party is full of crooks! Hello Nancy!

Then there is our Messiah: B. Hussein O’Bozo and his sweet deals:

“* Obama had just gotten a $2.27 million book deal from Random House -- about $1 million more than the value of the mortgage.

* The Obamas each had exceptionally secure jobs that paid them a combined annual salary of about $500,000 per year.

* The Obamas had just sold their condo, on which they had realized a $137,500 profit.

* The Obamas were prominent public figures whose political futures depended in part on maintaining a reputation for responsibility and trustworthiness.

* The Obamas are known to be relatively thrifty and have no credit card debt but substantial savings.[15]

Isn’t it just magic how Demoncraps get into power and suddenly make millions? Slick Willie and his erstwhile consort Colonel Klebb[16] made 108 million recently!

But, don’t worry. Some new hefty tax hikes and fluff jobs for the patrons and fluffers of the Obama Machine will mend the rips in the fairytale fabric of liberalism.

Vote NoBozo.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

The Old Red Lady of the Old Gray Mumbles Incoherently and Says[Almost]  Nothing Today. 

We can usually   derive some historical and future political theorems  from  the political essays of the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1]-- as they attempt to ‘form public opinion’          or justify the antics  with their ideological partners in Congress by suggesting new and sweeping changes that ultimately lead to socialism and the loss of Constitutional Rights.  Today, Dowdy Dowd’s specious feedback from trailing around Obama in New Hampshire like a lost puppy yields essentially nothing.

In saying nothing, the The Old Red Lady of the Old Gray Lady gives no information about anything, rare for her usual electrified literary style and dramatic antecedents.  It must be the dog days of journalism.

Of the Trials and Tribulations of Obama we lament:

“He’s an American who has climbed to the most rarefied stratosphere of American life, only to find that he has to make a major speech arguing that he loves his country. (A new CNN poll shows that a quarter of registered voters say Obama lacks patriotism.)”[2]-- The Wrong Stuff by Maureen Dowd Op-Ed Columnist. Published: July 2, 2008. .” [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

Well, he was badgered into holding his hand over his heart during patriotic songs and wearing a flag on his lapel too. Many liberals hate this country so much they have no regarded for nationalism and, in his case: it shows with trumpets and lights. His recent ‘opinion’ on the Second Amendment argues against his previous standard and tautological stance on gun ownership for honest people is ignored here.

“In the warped imagination of some on the left and right, this is a race between two Manchurian candidates, the Vietnam Manchurian candidate and the Muslim Manchurian candidate.”

Nobody’s imagination has to be twisted to imagine that there is some far leftist stooge ready to get into the White House again and raise taxes and celebrate our enemies. Clinton and FDR showed us what that is like. McGovern and Kerry[3] tried to do the same.

 Translated, this means that, like the yoyo Dukakis, O’Bozo is losing momentum as is customary in our politics. Many American people don’t like his arrogance, his elitism, his Black Liberation Theology nostrums and his tax-whoring speeches.[4] It seems all ills of mankind and womankind [and various variants of both] can be solved by raising US taxes and spreading the money around the world.

High oil prices? Raise Taxes

Sluggish Economy? Raise Taxes

CA and NH are heading for bankruptcy? Raise Taxes

 Inflation? Raise Taxes

Unemployment? Raise Taxes

It was more exciting at the Times when they were trying to convince their readers that Jeremiah Wright was not really a racist.

Then we have to tolerate a rant upon John McCain from several perches until we get to some central idea:

“The 46-year-old is supposed to be the tonic for the culture wars of the 60s. In his patriotism speech, he said that “the anger and turmoil” of that generation had “never entirely drained away,” leaving our politics “trapped in these old, threadbare arguments.”

But it’s Obama who seems trapped, sucked back into yesteryear.”

Now, that is a piece of speechwriting that incorporates revisionism, futurism and references to swamps, wars and our political system. This appears to be some kind of lament couched in the imaginary future past perfect tense. The leftists really do believe that O’Bozo, having been stewed for 20 years in the cauldron of racist ideology and mesmerized by his sick, twisted racist pastor, is some kind agent of change when he offers no change from the politics of the 60: raise taxes—take drugs--end the war—take drugs--put in quotas—dump on whitey—take some more drugs. [5][6]

All these people have is your tax money and they think theyneed more. The solution to their problems is spendingyour money on phony social programs that will fail so they can bawl and beg for more. [7]

That synopsis is the past, present and future of the leftist political movement. After 100,000,000 dead from Marxism and its sordid variants we still have some bozo that will stand up on the stump and parrot Lenin from his slick notes from the Ivy League and be hailed as the Messiah by the drooling left and their Islamo-Fascisti allies. He has Castro’s vote. Hugo Chavez’s vote too.

The indicated tonic here is to vote against Obama and accept the idiot McCain who might blunder into some adequate solutions for the problems we face. As if we needed some black racist with a Marxian elitist view of wealth distribution, disrespect and contempt for guns and religion and warm regard for any enemy of the United States.

Obama is the Wrong Stuff.

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

Huffington Huffs, Puffs and Soars Far Left and Out of Sight.

We are indebted to Arianna Huffington for her ongoing precise analysis of the current political scene and her trendy advice to the politically squalid.  There are few accurate and prophetic analysts who can probe the darkness and see the glow of political success as she can. Today, she blesses us with her analysis about how Obama is erring by trending to the middle.

Here is her latest theme:

“Last Friday afternoon, the guests taking part in Sunday's roundtable discussion on This Week had a pre-show call with George Stephanopoulos. One of the topics he raised was Obama's perceived move to the center, and what it means. Thus began my weekend obsession. If you were within shouting distance of me, odds are we talked about it.”-- Memo to Obama: Moving to the Middle is for Losers by Arianna Huffington.[1] [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.] This link references all quotes in this essay unless otherwise noted.

Yes. It doesn’t take much to light her Greek Fire and launch a new revolutionary counter revolution. She alerts us to the danger with her customary breed of noisy signals that there is an impending disastrous misdirection in the prime compulsory political vector of the left. There is nothing in the centre for the left.[2] Following Lenin, and others, it is clear that tolerating or accommodating even the slightest wishes or nostrums of the nonbelievers is a violation of the sacred tenets of any strict political movement.  And, this makes sense as she explains:

“…I can unequivocally say: the Obama campaign is making a very serious mistake. Tacking to the center is a losing strategy. And don't let the latest head-to-head poll numbers lull you the way they lulled Hillary Clinton in December.”

 And, she backs this up, conically, with history:

“In 2004, the Kerry campaign's obsession with undecided voters -- voters so easily swayed that 46 percent of them found credible the Swift Boaters' charges that Kerry might have faked his war wounds to earn a Purple Heart -- allowed the race to devolve from a referendum on the future of the country into a petty squabble over whether Kerry had bled enough to warrant his medals.”

This is true. However, there is his early exit from the war theatre [only served 4 months? I served 12 in the same brown waters] , his emotional and far leftist false  testimony before Congress, his book on the new soldier where he advocates the UN controlling our forces and his flip-flopping on numerous issues while voting against nearly all military  weapons spending bills in his terms. Those didn’t affect the vote? We also need to realize that his fellow officers called him out for his antics in Viet Nam—not some paper pusher in a right-wing think tank. The officers and men at  Swift Vets and POWs for Truth [3] have detailed Kerry [Vinegar John [4]] and his lies [5] have shown his actions and comments to be untruthful and strictly political. But, I digress.  Frequently the facts must be set aside to emphasize a political truth. She did make her point: he lost. No other evidence is necessary. Blame the right.

Arianna could have mentioned Ronald Reagan, who never budged a millimeter in his eternal war against Communism, and all this effort is detailed in a book entitle Reagan’s War.[6]  He is still the eternal target of the anti-anti Communists. [7]There is much to be learned about keeping faith with your views and many politicians seem to still believe that they can shift and bob and weave and tell the suckers who vote ‘what they want to hear.’ Kerry and Dukakis flip flopped too much and were seen as phony and lost. But, Ronnie won! Did Dukakis get too close to the middle with his tank pictures?

Arianna could have mentioned Al Gore, the eternal EcoNazi[8] who never budged from his leftist grubbing for money from Asian Communists, as his father did in a similar way with the assistance of Armand Hammer[9] and his Soviet allies, and his eternal quest for tax hikes. Al actually succeeded in winning the popular vote and would have won the White House if only he had carried his own state.  Ralph Nader did his small bit in sharing votes from fellow EcoNazis, a political problem that Al failed to solve. Al’s presidency was clearly stolen as the ‘people spoke’ and the Supreme Court torpedoed his good work.  Blame the right.

But, then, Arianna could also have mentioned George McGovern, the ultimate experiment in stressing tautological ideologies who carried only one state and Washington, DC.  George, like Ronald Reagan, never swayed from his narrow political path. There is a lesson there, but we must omit it in this discussion.  One would have thought that his $10,000 guaranteed income, per person, could have carried the day over a rabid anti-Communist like Nixon with all the starving and abused lying around in the streets moaning. But, we need to drop the details and salient points if we are to appreciate Huffington and her logic.

But, also, before refining her politics in the Huffington Post she had fashioned a website called Ariannaonline.com. [10]Here, she attacked our plurality President Bill Clinton, called for his resignations[ plural since Hillary was a 2-fer] and created a cabal of determined  conservatives who opposed  Clinton. That didn’t work. Her marriage fell apart as well. This was not a miscalculation on her part we can be assured. Blame the right.

It is interesting that she maneuvers as a Juno-style revenge artist and can flip flop from one political pole to the opposite without missing even one bongo beat or a single slice of salmon sushi. She is consistent and compelling when she haunts the lunatic fringe of whichever political party, because she appeals to those extremists described by Eric Hoffer. [11] His research, unique and novel, showed that mass movements are not created by individuals but the leaders of such activities merely fall in front of the rushing crowd. Arianna senses the rush of the crowd and wants to lead the charge.

But, enough with reason and analysis because we can get back to basics:

“Throughout the primary, Obama referred to himself as an "unlikely candidate." Which he certainly was -- and still is. And one of the things that turned him from "unlikely" upstart to presidential frontrunner is his ability to expand the electorate by convincing unlikely voters -- some of the 83 million eligible voters who didn't turn out in 2004 -- to engage in the system.

“… Barack Obama in February of 2007, announcing his run for the White House. "I know I haven't spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington," he said that day, "but I've been there long enough to know that the ways of Washington must change."

We can speculate and wonder how Jeremiah Wright fits into this scenario in terms of ‘change.’ Since racism is the central underpinning of liberalism[12], Obama must have miscalculated in distancing himself from his pastor. Racism has given him more than 90% of the black vote. This is a change [??]and he is supposed to change other things.  Is a change-back a change at all if you were right left the first time? Would Arianna wish Obama to get back to the base tenets of Black Liberation Theology and denounce Amerika as KKK Kountry? I wonder if Huffy thinks he should ‘change-back to his leftist theology. That does tend to keep the middle types at bay.

But, consistency or facts are never valid points of criticism for the left and particularly those of Greek Origin. Aristotle guessed on everything and got everything wrong with the possible exception of the political arena so she is safe so far. If Obama loses the election then other factors, aside from Mz. Huffington’s  political analysis, must be sought  or synthesized to explain her discrepancy. She can always blame the right.

So, Arianna Huffs and Puffs and patently offers everlasting advice to Obama. We can all hope he listens to her and gets back to the far left aisle where he is at least comfortable with the rhetoric and logic.  He is uncomfortable in the middle.

She ends with an obvious element of logic:

“Realpolitik is one thing. Realstupidpolitik is quite another.”

We can all agree on that. Thanx Arianna!

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com