Saturday, January 8, 2011

Intellectual Incoherence and the Arizona Shooter

Today 22 year old Jared Loughner went to a grocery store and started shooting people, and since two of those people were public officials, we will now have the requisite over-analysis, replete with musings on whether or not Loughner was a leftist or a rightist or whether or not the Second Amendment should be disposed of altogether.  Let us be clear: Jared Loughner was a disturbed young man, and his political leanings have little if anything to do with what occurred today in Arizona. I have read Mein Kampf and The Communist Manifesto, and I own a gun.  I have a long-documented and oft-lamented history of fulminating and fuming to no end about the U.S. government and monetary policy.  I will not be killing any public officials any time in the near future, if ever.  

People on both sides in the rapidly boiling debate over various issues need to realize that using a mentally ill 22 year old as a brush to tar each other simply doesn't work to provide a coherent pictures of why Loughner did what he did.  It doesn't work, because your average liberal or Tea Party enthusiast does not pick up a gun and go to a public event with the intention of shooting other individuals. Your average mentally ill individual who expresses sentiments about the United States government controlling minds through grammar, on the other hand...

We have a problem in this country, and it isn't that we disagree politically.  We're intellectually incoherent.  Everyone seizes on to these events as a means of explaining the problem with the world at large, but this events do not illuminate anything other than the importance of trying to get obviously disturbed people help before they act.  If you know someone who posts Youtube rants linking mind control with proper grammar, it behooves you to notify family members and authorities about their likely unhinged state. At the very least, you ought to go and talk to them in order to persuade them to get help.  

The intellectual incoherence of this nation stems from the inability of average folks to reason through matters in order to see the obvious absurdity in blaming the Second Amendment for what a mentally unbalanced 22 year old did.  Hell, the average pundit on CNN can't reason through matters to see such absurdities. Jared Loughner had what in hindsight were obvious mental issues, and he made a decision based on his impaired cognition thereof to go shoot people at a public gathering.  The entire matter begins and ends with that analysis.  Anything beyond that simple summation is speculative and risks maligning other people who may share a few book selections and beliefs in gold backed currency, and even though they may have a few things in common with Jared Loughner, the overwhelming majority of those people are not going to go shoot anyone.  

The average leftist in this country, while abhorred by myself and others, is not a murderer.  He does not aspire to be a murderer, any more than your average rightist or Tea Party enthusiast does.  We have a common commitment to the idea that human life should not be destroyed by senseless violence, and 99% of us are capable of understanding that it is inappropriate and even asinine to go shooting individuals you disagree with politically.  It's not going to advance your agenda, and it certainly won't reflect well on your ideas.  

To those who have lit up the blogosphere, the Internet, Twitter, and other forms of social media and mass media with such irresponsible speculation and tit-for-tat today, I say this: stop it.  Have some decency.  Good people died today while exercising a legal, constitutionally guaranteed right to gather publicly.  This is not an opportunity to bludgeon your political opponents and ideological nemeses.  It's a tragedy.  It's not a means to an end.  Shut up and say a prayer for the families of those who died, and for the family of Jared Loughner, because their lives are about to be turned upside down by a culture obsessed with picking over every little detail of their past in order to make sense of an event that makes no sense at all no matter how much information you have.  It's the decent thing to do, and I'd like to believe that no matter how ideologically or politically divided we are, we all possess some sense of dignity and compassion which enables us to take the simple, quiet, and decent route through this event.  God bless the victims of this shooting, and God have mercy on their families and Jared Loughner.  




Posted via email from momus1978's posterous

Friday, January 7, 2011

Selective Enforcement and the End of the State: How Occupying Positions Leads to the Power of Non-Prosecution



The great issue confronting non-statists is this: most of us aren’t skilled at anything other than picking up a book, reading it, and blogging about it after the fact.  When it comes to basic trade skills, many of us don’t know the difference between a circular saw and jigsaw.  We certainly can’t go into much detail about the differences between arc, mig, and oxy-acetelene welding.  We have even less experience in self-defense.  


What strikes me about the stateless movement is how full of idealism it is while simultaneously being empty of any sense of practical reality.  Anarchists have an inflated sense of what they can accomplish through protest. The absurdity of thinking this ought to be obvious: while anarchists may feel they accomplished something in Toronto, the truth is that the power mechanism behind Toronto went unimpeded.  The G20 wasn’t stopped, no was it really even obstructed.


The truth of the matter is that the damage to anarchy’s reputation was incalculable.  Not only did anarchists look quixotic, they also looked like rioting fools at Pittsburgh and Toronto. For most of the citizens watching at home on their televisions, there was no context to the footage of people running and crawling through tear gas which didn’t seem compatible to their accepted norms and standards.  The general reaction was that people who show up and attack or threaten lawful gatherings get what they have coming.  


The largest problem with Toronto, with Pittsburgh, and with nearly every other gathering of the sort is that there are no anarchists on the inside of the building.  This is metaphorical: anarchists don’t get a voice at the table because they categorically rule out any sort of involvement or engagement with the state and its affiliated organizations as selling out.  What anarchists have to realize is that one voice representing a stateless point of view on the inside of these gatherings in an articulate, reasonable, and acceptable manner would be like a thunderclap.  It would stand out from the din and drone, and it would do more to place anarchy in a positive light than 20,000 protesters marching through Toronto.  


What is more, we need to face reality about what we’re dealing with: the State is the world’s largest criminal enterprise, a syndicate that finances intelligence operations throughout the world with drug running, an organization that specializes in legalized murder, torture, theft through confiscation, the accumulation of information through surveillance outside and inside of due process, and an organization that exists solely to transfer wealth from you and me to the plutocrats of the world.  In any given modern nation, the State is the largest consumer of goods and services.  It is entirely appropriate for anarchists, minarchists, and libertarians to infiltrate the State through subterfuge in order to engage in obfuscation that prevents State power from being deployed against citizens who attempt to farm locally or develop businesses along the lines that advocated by PunkJohnnyCash in his article Revolution: Obtaining Anarchy, How Do We End Government?  


In the aforementioned article, several statements are made that I disagree with vehemently: 


“We are not a movement to overthrow the government. We are a movement to create a society that functions without a government.”


How is the former not the latter and vice-versa?  If you’re involved in a movement to create a society that functions without a government, how are you not involved in a moving to overthrow government entirely?  As a minarchist rapidly coming to grips with the idea that the State no longer works, and has never really worked as advertised, I’m fully cognizant that I am becoming part of a movement to overthrow the government as it currently exists.  I’m in a revolution.  


As someone who has devoted some time to studying the topic of revolution, I understand that successful revolutionaries do not rule out means that could expedite their progress, or at least prevent their enemy from deploying its full power against the revolutionary in his efforts.  It is a revolutionary act in today’s society to grow your own food, and it is an act of sedition in today’s society to be either a producer or a consumer in the locavore movement.  The federal, local, and state governments are challenging locavore farmers as unsafe in order to defend a hegemony of factory farming.  These same governments offer billions in subsidies to those factory farming operations. They erect subsidies which effectively render corn cheaper than the costs of production.  


Challenging this through individual action independent of State approval means coming into conflict with State authority.  Succeeding at these actions on any level virtually guarantees a conflict with the bureaucracy of State.  Now, I ask you this: do you want a tried and true statist drone in the position of determining whether you can continue selling or operating, or you would rather have an anti-statist in that position to prevent the State’s full power from being deployed against average individuals producing and buying their own sustenance outside of a State-erected and supported factory food operation?  


It’s called selective enforcement, and it happens all the time.  Take a look at our current economic crisis: banks have every incentive to go forward with future abuses, because the fines they paid were merely a part of doing business.  They still made a gigantic profit.  BP will escape gross negligence as a charge for their role in the Deepwater Horizon disaster.  The reason these and other companies get away with their egregious behavior is because they’ve invested the time, money, and manpower to occupy the positions of the State with supporters who choose non-prosecution.  The law is therefore rendered moot where fraud and negligence are concerned.  


The power of non-prosecution is the most significant aid to corporations offered by those who occupy the State.  You’re at war with this if you’re an ordinary citizen.  The State is enabling these banks to come into your homes and foreclose on them, even if you have paid for them in cash beforehand.  Even if you have never missed a payment, even if you have never been late on a payment, as a practical matter, these banks and the servicers they retain are equipped and enabled to foreclose on your home regardless.  Do you have the money to contest the issue?  Most of us live paycheck to paycheck!  


Even if you win a civil case, the reality of the matter is that what these companies did was criminal, but they won’t be prosecuted for their behavior.  They own the lawyers who make up the judges and the prosecution!  It is no action that we went from bare-bones pleadings as the standard of keeping a case in court to a requirement that facts plead in a complaint had to be plausible.  From Conley v. Gibson to Bell Atlantic v. Twombly and Iqbal v. Ashcroft, you saw American jurisprudence evolve to make the bar of filing a complaint by itself rise to the level which previously determined whether or not a case could proceed to an actual trial.  The net effect is that you may not even get to file a civil suit!  


This is not an accident: companies have been paying for lawyers to run for office, or to get in a position where they could be noticed for a judicial appointment, and they’ve been doing what they can to line the positions of the State with those individuals whose views are conducive to selective enforcement and non-prosecution.  Those lawyers wrote rules of procedure designed to keep you from ever being able to approach the civil and criminal justice systems without their aid, and once they became judges, they interpreted those procedural rules in a such a way as to ensure that the average complainant never gets his or her day in court.  


We in the anarchist, minarchist, and libertarian movement are at war.  You don’t take options off of the table when you’re facing extinction where your individual rights and due process are concerned.  You do what you have to do to ensure the survival and perpetuation of your way of life.  If you recognize that factory farmed foods are processed and contain ingredients harmful to your health, or you just object to eating ground beef bathed in ammonia, you’d likely seek alternatives outside of that system of food production.  You’d have to drive to get them, and you’d pay a higher amount not because of any real market force other than the State’s distortion of markets through subsidies, tax breaks, and tariffs.  You’re at the mercy of the State’s choice, which has made regular, natural food too expensive for most people to buy.  Even if they have the money to buy it, who has the time to prepare it?  Most of us work multiple jobs.  


The State has so thoroughly permeated our lives and lifestyles with its regulatory consequences that many of us do not even have the time or wherewithal to sit down and make a meal for ourselves and our families that isn’t loaded with unhealthy additives and preservatives.  Even if you do make the meal, you’re likely going to use a plastic dish loaded with BPAs that are released when the dish is exposed to heat.  Let’s say you use a pot or pan coated with Teflon: you’re faced with the prospect of eating the Teflon in your food.  It does come off, and once it’s in you, it’s extremely hard to get out.  


The water you use is likely loaded with chemicals and pollutants, even traces of various prescription drugs.  Even if you have a filtration system hooked up to your faucet, it can’t get it all out.  All of the aforementioned items from the food ingredients to the Teflon to the BPAs are a direct result of selective enforcement and non-prosecution that arises as a result of who sits where in a State.  


Don’t doubt the efficacy of holding a seat within the State: it obviously works!  You have only to look at what corporations get away with on a regular basis!  But what’s important is this one realization: to be an anarchist, minarchist, or even a libertarian is to challenge a paradigm of criminal behavior that is daily exempted through selective enforcement and non-prosecution.  You’re on the right side, but the question is this: How do we change things?  


You put your people in a position to where the laws which are deployed against locavore farmers and consumers aren’t prosecuted.  You put your people into positions to refuse to enforce the myriad regulations that tie ordinary people up in chains each and every day in this country.  Bit by bit, episode by episode, you play your part in watching the power of the State recede.  You empower ordinary people to act in their own interest again without fear of State interference or overreach.  


You realize that by marching the streets, parroting slogans, and waving your fist around you’re not actually going to accomplish much beyond the symbolic.  Why would you take armed and armored riot police head on when you could be the elected official or appointed bureaucrat giving the riot police their marching orders?  Hell, maybe the riot police stay home the day of a protest instead of going into the streets.  Maybe they stay back instead of charging forward.  Maybe you write their rules of engagement, or their training manuals.  Maybe you determine whether or not they’ll be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for their abuse and corruption.  


But what you can’t do, if you are ever to have a hope of succeeding, is to rule out engagement or infiltration of the State itself.  Every revolutionary movement has spies and saboteurs at the very least.  You can tie the State up from within and without, but don’t take a viable and valuable tool to the cause off of the table by categorically ruling it out.  Occupying those positions could determine whether or not anarchist and minarchist protestors go to jail, and how long they stay in jail.  It could determine whether or not those who are attempting to build a society outside of the State have to face the coercive power of a State that seeks to quash local markets for food and goods outside of State permitting and licensing controls.  For these reasons alone, we ought to be taking the State for ourselves in order to undo it from within in the manner outlined in the preceding sentences and paragraphs.  


This is the revolution, and the only question is whether or not you’re going to fully engage to the same extent that the other side has.  Your answer to that question will determine whether or not we succeed or fail in arriving at a stateless society.  I personally refuse to rule out any means. I’m investing tens of thousands of dollars worth  of my own money, and years of my time in positioning myself for a future where I can effect change from within the State as outlined above.  If I can prevent one individual from facing an abusive prosecution or a group of individuals from facing State persecution by virtue of my position, it will have been worth the sacrifice.  However, I’m looking for something much larger.  


I’ve worked a metal press, a drill press, various types of welding machines, and I’ve built bookshelves and cabinets.  I’ve done graphic design and print work.  I’ve been fighting in one form or another my entire life, and I read voraciously.  I’ve changed brakes and oil, I’ve grown food, and I’ve built and repaired computers.  I’ve worked on HVAC units, and done a little plumbing work around a hotel.  I’ve smashed drywall and put up new drywall.  I’ve been employed as a painter.  Don’t be afraid to engage new and practical experiences that build skills conducive to life on the outside of the state.  There’s no law that says the State won’t collapse under its own excess.  If that happens, you and I need to be prepared to help ourselves and others.  The great legacy of the State is that it inculcates dependency rather than self-reliance on the part of individuals.  Regardless of what happens, you and I and others who share our views need to be in position to provide an alternative to individuals that empowers them to live their lives on their own terms apart from the State.  Go take a class or two at the vocational school in order to develop your skills.  Go camping.  Learn to fire a gun and learn to hunt and fish.  Grow a box garden on your patio if you don’t have a backyard.  


Most of all, don’t rule anything out.  Go down to City Hall or the Elections Supervisor’s office and see about signing up to run as a candidate for office.  Get involved in the process of effecting real change.  You could be the difference in the life of another person whose life could be obliterated by State power and abuse.  You could be the one obstacle that prevents enforcement of a ludicrous law or regulation with drastic consequences for their life or their livelihood.  This is why it’s important to target the local, state, and federal levels of government for our cause.  It has ramifications for ordinary individuals and their lives.  Their families. Their communities.  It means everything to them, even if it is on the same grand scale that you and I might envision. Liberty can come in smaller, less grandiose packages than you’d think, but to the person who isn’t facing jail time for possession or a massive fine for failing to get a permit to build an addition to their house, it’s as grand and epic as it gets.  Don’t rule it out.  Fight the state using any means at your disposal, and live your life as a means of accumulating new means to fight the state.  

Posted via email from momus1978's posterous

Thursday, January 6, 2011

The World According to Monsanto

Thermohaline Currents, Oil Plumes, Cold Snaps, and Animal Kills: A Theoretical Explanation for Recent Events



When you think of the oceans and their effect on the Earth's temperature regulation, think of the mechanism for any air conditioner or heat pump.  The temperature is modulated by the circulation of fluid, which is compressed to become a hot gas, which then runs through coils and dissipates heat.  Once the compressed fluid or gas circulates through the coils, it goes into an expansion valve where it evaporates into a cool, low-pressure fluid that can then run through more coils and absorb heat within a building for transport through the coils in the exhaust system, where the heat is dissipated outside of the building.  


Now you must look at the oceans as something of a massive climate-control system, whereby the warm Gulf waters are transported out of the Gulf and into the Atlantic, where their heat is used to regulate temperatures in Europe to prevent the continent and the outlying islands of the United Kingdom from icing over completely.  As the heat is released, it counteracts the seasonal effect of a winter whereby rays of sunlight are no longer direct and therefore not as effective at heating Europe.  This is because the revolution of the Earth throughout the year around the sun results in a tilt at various points in the Earth’s orbit, and depending on where you are in the Earth’s orbit around the sun, you are receiving either more or less direct sunlight than you would have received.  


The ground acts as a gigantic radiator, absorbing heat energy and then radiating it back up into the air in order to produce the temperature you feel in your day to day life.  But when the sunlight is not directly on the ground, but the angle of sunlight is different due to the Earth’s progress through its orbit and the tilt of the planet, the heat transfer isn’t as potent.  That’s where the thermohaline current comes into play: it provides water heated by more direct sunlight from the equatorial latitudes which is then circulated northwards to counteract the the chilling affects of reduced heat transfer owing to the winter tilt of the Earth’s orbit.  


There’s a basic science experiment that you can duplicate in order to understand how this mechanism works: you can pour cold water into a container, and then take some warm water dyed with food color and pour the warm water into the container of cool water to see how the circulation works.  


Now, there’s an additional step to take to understand how to break that circulation down: take some vegetable oil and pour it in with the warm and cold water, and watch as the circulation of the warm dyed water through the cold water gradually breaks down and dissipates.  The net effect is that the heat transfer doesn’t occur as efficiently without circulation.  


Understand that we recently had a massive oil spill at the Deepwater Horizon well, and millions upon millions of gallons of oil were released into the water.  The use of dispersants lessened the surface evidence, but resulted in gigantic underwater plumes and a great deal of sea floor oil.  Let’s say one of the plumes managed to get caught up in the circulation that is the thermohaline current.  The result would be a thermohaline current that didn’t circulate as well.  Eventually, it would break down, and with the breakdown record low temperatures would result as the heat transfer between the equatorial regions and the northern regions failed to take place.  


The net result would be massive cold-snaps in the northern regions, unmediated by the modulating effect of the thermohaline currents.  You would see sea life unaccustomed to extreme cold in their habitat begin dying off from the temperature decreases. It’s possible that the temperature decreases would also result in the death of various species of birds.  


Combined with the toxicity of the plume, the plunging temperatures could and would have catastrophic and very visible effects for wildlife and agriculture alike.  Conversely speaking, it would be likely that algal blooms would occur in the southern waters because the mediating effect of circulating cold water from the northern regions through the thermohaline currents would not take place as it normally would.  


Now, that’s the theory, but what hard evidence do we have that it’s actually occurred?  We have satellite imagery showing that the Loop Current in the Gulf broke down around May 18th, thereby separating into a circular, clockwise eddy apart from other currents.  Temperatures in the Gulf were seven degrees Celsius above normal.  This progressed into a situation where the North Atlantic current dissipated as well, and the Gulf Stream began breaking up around 250-300 miles off the Outer Banks of North Carolina.  The NOAA and US Naval Satellites data conclusively showed the breakdown of the currents, and while the media has yet to cover this in any serious fashion, the data is there on the far reaches of the Internet and in journal articles.  


It’s the largest unreported story of our time.  Moreover, the implications for our food supply are staggering, and no one is making the connection between disparate events like the the breakdown of the thermohaline current and the cancellation of wheat contracts by Russia, which has announced it will not export wheat.  Futures prices are rising on crops, and it is largely due to disruptive weather which can be traced to the thermohaline current disruption.  


Part of the problem is a media which stubbornly refuses to look at larger picture, instead simply choosing to dismiss events as unconnected and coincidental.  It is no accident that media consolidation under corporate ownership has led to a homogenized version of events.  The fireworks blamed for thousands of bird deaths in Arkansas have now been exported as an explanation in Sweden as well, and one suspects that mass die off of turtledoves in Italy will also be explained away with fireworks as well. Year in and year out, people set of fireworks on New Years without thousands of birds falling from the sky days after the fact. 


The death of fish along the Eastern seaboard and in the rivers and estauries of Arkansas and Florida cannot be explained by fireworks, unless you can document a historic discharge of fireworks both in the air and on the waters of those areas.  There’s very little evidence to indicate that such a discharge took place.  


While oil may not be responsible for this crisis in the typical sense that we’re used to seeing oil affect wildlife, it could be the direct cause in a much less visible way through the breakdown of the thermohaline current.  While the Exxon Valdez disaster resulted in oil covering shoreline 1500 miles away from the accident, and therefore produced a visible signature that the public could see for themselves via television footage, the Deepwater Horizon spill was managed with dispersants and driven beneath the surface of the water.  There is very little in the way of a visible signature that relative to the Valdez spill that could be beamed into American living rooms via visceral images flickering across television screens.  


However, those fish kills and bird deaths you’re seeing may be due to cold temperatures caused by breakdown of ocean currents that would have modulated temperatures within normal ranges absent a major oil spill.  But because those birds and fish aren’t covered with oil on television, the public isn’t inclined to assign guilt to British Petroleum, even though it is entirely plausible and within the realm of possibility that the oil plumes impeded and ultimately destroyed the ocean currents which modulated temperatures, thereby resulting in cold snaps that caused massive death of fish species who couldn’t survive in colder waters and birds who couldn’t tolerate the colder temperatures on land.  


And that’s sort of the problem: you can’t identify a likely culprit without an open investigation that takes into account the wide variety of occurrences from algae blooms in Florida, crop freezes around the world, and bird and fish die offs.  And you can’t reach the public with the message through a corporate-owned media that parrots from the same script to dismiss these events as merely regular occurrences rather than linked events with one macro-cause underlying them all.  The end result is that we have a theoretical explanation on blogs written by independent scientists, bloggers, and laymen striving to the do the job that ought to be done by governments and a strong media with an emphasis on actual investigative journalism rather than propaganda.


Posted via email from momus1978's posterous

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

Do you think this Constitution loving is getting out of hand?

How We Know Obama Will Be Re-elected



The Republicans aren’t serious about the 2012 presidential election, and there are any number of metrics we can look at to see as much.  The first hire on the ground took place recently when Rick Santorum hired Mike Biunda to be the New Hampshire state director for his PAC America’s Foundation.  By this time during the 2008 political campaign, every serious candidate had entire organizations on the ground in Iowa and New Hampshire.  


It says a lot that Rick Santorum is the first candidate with an actual hire on the board in either of those two states.  This is the guy whose biggest challenge will be defeating Google analytics which return a variety of sites which mock his name as the designation for “the frothy mixture of fecal matter and lube that is the sometimes byproduct of anal sex.”  Don’t even get me started on the story of his child’s stillbirth: Santorum and his wife bought their stillborn child’s corpse home to their children, allowed them to play with the body, and even posed them for pictures in what had to be the most macabre family portrait ever.  


The Republican establishment, for all of its nonsensical ramblings about Sarah Palin, isn’t doing a lot to impede her progress towards the nomination.  In point of fact, I’d say the establishment wants Palin to win the nomination.  She’d be the perfect discrediting of the Tea Party and its supporters as lunatics who can’t produce serious, viable candidates.   


When you look at the rest of the potential candidates, no one I know believes that any of those candidates has an actual shot at winning beyond the primaries.  Sure, Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney, or Ron Paul could win the nomination.  Can they win the general election?  No.  Will they win the general election?  No.  This is a continuation of the GOP’s asinine effort in 2008, where the Republican establishment allowed John McCain to achieve the sort of seniority-based coronation that Bob Dole was allowed to achieve in 1996.  In 2008, the Republicans weren’t serious about winning, not with a pro-banking candidate by the name of Obama or a Clinton waiting in the wings.  Either of those candidates would offer up cosmetic attempts at reform that could be gutted by a GOP majority before their measures even took effect, and the GOP knew it.  


Moreover, the Bush tax cuts were a brilliant piece of legislative sabotage.  Republicans knew that when the tax cuts expired, they could portray the Democrats as the party of tax hikes, even though the Republicans  themselves were the ones who designed the tax cuts to expire.  There were plenty of opportunities for the GOP to really fight Obama and fight him dirty if they wanted to, but tellingly enough, they didn’t.  This is the party of Willie Horton, and robo-calls back in South Carolina’s 2000 primary which implied that John McCain was guilty of miscegenation.  


No, the Republican put forth a candidate who could not and would not win to face a man who arguably should have been easy to beat.  Obama, for all of his rhetorical ability, is no Bill Clinton.  He has no masterful command of policy or any ability to come across as anything other than his generation’s Herbert Hoover: a wonderboy gifted with fantastic rhetorical ability and apparent intellectual heft, who is utterly useless when it comes to empathy and compassion for the little guy.  Obama’s world exists in theory, but when cold reality overpowers his theoretical worldview, he retreats into cold aloofness and shows his virtual tone deafness  when it comes to making average people believe that he really gives a damn.  


Bill Clinton was good at a making people believe he understood and felt their pain as his own, even as he presided over cuts that gutted the socialized infrastructure built by his party over the previous sixty years.  Moreover, because he favored the financial industry to a degree that made bankers forget about Reagan, the Federal Reserve provided monetary stimulus to prop up his administration. There hasn’t been quarterly economic growth absent monetary expansion in this country since the mid 1990s.  Look it up: the entirety of Bill Clinton’s economic boom was nothing more than an inflationary mirage, built on easy credit and made on the indebtedness of American consumers.  Here was a guy who could come across as a liberal while cutting and deregulating like a fiscal conservative.  He was the best liar to ever occupy the White House, and he gave us telecommunications deregulation, financial deregulation, and energy deregulation under his administration.  Clinton had a legislative record that beat Ronald Reagan hands down for giving business and industry their wish list of deregulation, cheap money, and lowered enforcement of regulation.  


It is no accident that end program pushed by Obama and his allies bore a striking resemblance to a Heritage Foundation proposal on healthcare reform, right down to the individual mandate.  At the end of the day, the Republican establishment doesn’t stand for smaller or limited government, it stands for the sort of government that can rifle through your email without a warrant and eavesdrop on your phone calls with impunity.  The GOP stands for full body scanners that show the next guy in line your wife’s breasts.  They stand for warrantless arrests, and indefinite detentions without hearings or a trial.  Due process is a suggestion, not a constitutionally sacrosanct principle of jurisprudence.  


And today, you can read how Jeb Bush has categorically ruled out a 2012 run while Huckabee, Pence, Romney, Palin, Santorum, and Thune are all ruling in a 2012 run, and Ron Paul is waiting in the wings with his choice, even though his election to White House won’t undo the fact that he won’t have a dime’s worth of support in a Congress that regards the Constitution in the same light as toilet tissue.  But Jeb’s not ruling out a 2016 run at all, is he?  No.  What Jeb Bush knows is that four more years of Barack Obama is exactly the sort of thing that could render him electable in 2016 and discredit the only viable opposition that could prevent him from achieving his coronation.  


The general attitude of the GOP towards the Tea Party is one of supercilious hauteur: let it run its course and eventually run out of gas, and then we’ll have our way in 2016, as we’ve had our way throughout the Obama Administration thus far, all the while fooling like we’re really at the Obama Administration’s throat.  When Citibank and Goldman Sachs make up your advisors, you and Republican Party of the present day have a lot of common ground.  End of story. 


While the current crop of likely GOP candidates for 2012 run themselves headlong into the barricades, destroying each other and any viable opportunity to challenge the GOP establishment that represents the real problem for liberty-minded, small government, fiscally-minded conservatives, libertarians, and anti-statists, Jeb Bush sits and bides his time knowing that in 2016, his time will come.  2012 is already a joke, and anyone with eyes, ears, and a brain knows it.  Barack Obama is going to be re-elected in 2012, barring an act of God.  


Even if you organize a viable grassroots opposition that galvanizes support for one candidate in particular, you aren’t going to win.  The elections as they exist are nothing more than shams: so long as you have electronic voting machines, they can be stolen without a paper trail.  There’s no law that says you even have to have enough machines in your precinct to accommodate the number of voters who show up.  The fix is in, and you have only to look at the crop of candidates running on the GOP side to know as much.  The race for the GOP nomination is a race where the people who aren’t running are more significant than the people are.  


Between a Congress that isn’t going to make any real headway in tackling the debt, and a Federal Reserve that stands ready to kickstart the economy with monetary expansion and a cessation of the interest payments that currently keep banks from deploying nearly a trillion dollars in excess reserves into the wider economy, Barack Obama is poised to be the comeback kid.  Charles Krauthammer is even calling him as much.  


Get ready for nothing in 2012, because short of a mass uprising that overwhelms the political collusion between Democrats and Republicans to fix outcomes, you aren’t going to achieve real change in the 2012 elections.  The problem is the two party system, and people need to realize that this isn’t about giving either party a chance. They’ve had forty years of chances.  The results are clear: forty consecutive years of real deficits, with more to come.  Your only choice is to begin taking over the two parties from within from the precincts up, and even then, the national organizations will do everything they can to obviate your attempt to take the parties as your own.  


In the meantime, you can believe that the Republican Party has something of a shot at redemption, but most of their leadership have no principles to speak of whatsoever.  I am utterly disgusted with what I am seeing, and I am utterly disgusted at the prospect of a GOP that paves the way for the re-election of Barack Obama by refusing to put out a real candidate backed by a real effort.  What a joke.  

Posted via email from momus1978's posterous

Leaked EPA document links disappearing honey bees to Bayer pesticide