Feb 8, 2017
JK Rowling
I guess you could say she has the courage of her bank account, but Rowling still has plenty at risk by standing up and speaking out.
Chicago Tribune
Guess it's true what they say: you can lead a girl to books about the rise and fall of an autocrat, but you still can't make her think. pic.twitter.com/oB7Aq6Xz8M— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) February 1, 2017
Well, the fumes from the DVDs might be toxic and I've still got your money, so by all means borrow my lighter. pic.twitter.com/kVoi8VGEoK— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) January 31, 2017
Chicago Tribune
Rowling is a dedicated progressive.
She's a strong believer in welfare, which she relied on during a particularly rough period in her life. As she said during a 2008 Harvard commencement speech, "An exceptionally short-lived marriage had imploded, and I was jobless, a lone parent, and as poor as it is possible to be in modern Britain, without being homeless . . . By every usual standard, I was the biggest failure I knew."
More recently, Rowling found herself in the midst of a Twitter battle surrounding Brexit, which she staunchly opposed.
Much of this now-seemingly-endless debate was absent during the height of the Harry Potter craze because she didn't publicly discuss her views until the publication of the final Harry Potter book. A year after it hit bookshelves, though, she gave 1 million pounds to Britain's Labor Party.-and-
"Intolerance of alternative viewpoints is spreading to places that make me, a moderate and a liberal, most uncomfortable. Only last year, we saw an online petition to ban Donald Trump from entry to the U.K. It garnered half a million signatures," she said during the 2016 PEN America Literary Gala at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City. "I find almost everything that Mr. Trump says objectionable. I consider him offensive and bigoted. But he has my full support to come to my country and be offensive and bigoted there. His freedom to speak protects my freedom to call him a bigot. His freedom guarantees mine."I think what's important here is that "Liberals" who make it big are usually trying to reach back and help the next guy up as well. "Conservatives" seem always to be trying to pull the ladder up after them.
Keith
No, dude - Nixon leads it 55 - 11
45* is a perfect example of the classic Weak Salesman - throw enough shit and eventually something will stick.
The overall point is to overwhelm the filter system. We get tired of dealing with the shit storm and retreat.
To reiterate: This guy is no success story. He's spent 40 years failing up. He starts with $200 Million in the late 70s. He leverages the fuck out of it, basically borrowing so much that if he defaults, he takes the bankers down with him. So it's in their best interest to prop him up and help him make it work. After several rounds, he doesn't even have to run his own business - the creditors are doing all the work and he gets to sit back and enjoy the ride.
History Does Not Repeat
...but it sure as fuck rhymes.
” These young men were clearly trained for attack, Zweig recalled. But after the crushing of Hitler’s attempted putsch, in 1923, Zweig seems hardly to have given the National Socialists another thought until the elections of 1930, when support for the Party exploded—from under a million votes two years earlier to more than six million. At that point, still oblivious to what this popular affirmation might portend, Zweig applauded the enthusiastic passion expressed in the elections. He blamed the stuffiness of the country’s old-fashioned democrats for the Nazi victory, calling the results at the time “a perhaps unwise but fundamentally sound and approvable revolt of youth against the slowness and irresolution of ‘high politics.’ “
In his memoir, Zweig did not excuse himself or his intellectual peers for failing early on to reckon with Hitler’s significance. “The few among writers who had taken the trouble to read Hitler’s book, ridiculed the bombast of his stilted prose instead of occupying themselves with his program,” he wrote. They took him neither seriously nor literally. Even into the nineteen-thirties, “the big democratic newspapers, instead of warning their readers, reassured them day by day, that the movement . . . would inevitably collapse in no time.” Prideful of their own higher learning and cultivation, the intellectual classes could not absorb the idea that, thanks to “invisible wire-pullers”—the self-interested groups and individuals who believed they could manipulate the charismatic maverick for their own gain—this uneducated “beer-hall agitator” had already amassed vast support. After all, Germany was a state where the law rested on a firm foundation, where a majority in parliament was opposed to Hitler, and where every citizen believed that “his liberty and equal rights were secured by the solemnly affirmed constitution.”
Today's Tweet
Monday Morning Cirrhosis. I felt like was drawing a tumor. pic.twitter.com/8mw5Vwjd3e— Bill Sienkiewicz (@sinKEVitch) February 6, 2017
Feb 7, 2017
Today's Other Tweet
Sheriff tells Trump that state senator is doing something he doesn't like— Steve Kopack (@SteveKopack) February 7, 2017
Trump: "Do you want to give his name? We'll destroy his career." pic.twitter.com/75y3t9zc54
It's not particularly unreasonable to be afraid.
Outwardly Cranky
Gary, who graduated high school with a smokin' 2.0 GPA, is complaining loudly about how Majeed (a Neurologist) wants to steal his job.
Ever notice how a lotta these job-stealing immigrants are coming from countries where they help kids with the cost of college and shit?
I wonder if that might work here.
hat tip = Vicki W-E
Ever notice how a lotta these job-stealing immigrants are coming from countries where they help kids with the cost of college and shit?
I wonder if that might work here.
hat tip = Vicki W-E
The So Called President
WaPo has a bit today about 45* saying he'll blame the Press Poodles and The Judiciary if there's a terrorist attack in USAmerica Inc.
Second, anybody in any position to know something about such things is fully aware that an attack on US soil is the proverbial "when-not-if" proposition.
But also too, since every attack in the US in the last 15 years or so can be attributed either to homegrown assholes or other assholes who're here legally, we have to conclude the system is working well enough to have been 100% effective in keeping Bad-Apple Refugees outa this joint. So this is a very obvious and very standard play for power.
45* knows people fall for Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc assertions all the time. He's already taken credit for the Santa Claus Rally in December, and more recently, the good jobs report from Obama's last month in office. So he can take credit for "preventing terror attacks" if his Muslim Ban sticks, and he's setting the stage for blaming Refugees for the attack he knows is coming eventually, as well as shifting his own responsibility onto his designated enemies when it does happen.
The only question is - are there enough rubes out there willing to Etch-A-Sketch their way into accepting this bullshit? Well, if November 8, 2017 was any indication - yeah, plenty of rubes. Still plenty of rubes.
And there're plenty of Republican (and other "conservative") office-holders willing to stay quiet while Trump plays the rubes for suckers because they reap nice fat bennies too.
And they're getting plenty of inadvertent assistance from "Progressives" willing to be kept out of the game by going along with guys like Thom Hartman as he slags the US with the generous and freedom-loving assistance of Putin's version of DumFux News, aka Russia Today. Paralysis By Analysis works wonders on reasonable people who feel a little reluctant to jump in and offer a full-throated defense of (eg) politicians they feel are less-than-fully-honorable.
And and and
So the question is - will there be enough people willing to stand up and defend against these assholes in six or eight months when the Outrage Fatigue really starts to kick in?
President Trump appears to be laying the groundwork to preemptively shift blame for any future terrorist attack on U.S. soil from his administration to the federal judiciary, as well as to the media.
In recent tweets, Trump personally attacked James L. Robart, a U.S. district judge in Washington state, for putting “our country in such peril” with his ruling that temporarily blocked enforcement of the administration’s ban on all refugees as well as citizens of seven majority-Muslim countries from entering the United States.
“If something happens blame him and the court system. People pouring in. Bad!” Trump wrote in a tweet Sunday.
Then on Monday, Trump seemed to spread that blame to include news organizations. In a speech to the U.S. Central Command, the president accused the media of failing to report on some terrorist attacks for what he implied were nefarious reasons.First of all, the piece makes it clear that we should all know by now that this is a guy who'll do anything to duck his responsibilities.
Second, anybody in any position to know something about such things is fully aware that an attack on US soil is the proverbial "when-not-if" proposition.
But also too, since every attack in the US in the last 15 years or so can be attributed either to homegrown assholes or other assholes who're here legally, we have to conclude the system is working well enough to have been 100% effective in keeping Bad-Apple Refugees outa this joint. So this is a very obvious and very standard play for power.
45* knows people fall for Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc assertions all the time. He's already taken credit for the Santa Claus Rally in December, and more recently, the good jobs report from Obama's last month in office. So he can take credit for "preventing terror attacks" if his Muslim Ban sticks, and he's setting the stage for blaming Refugees for the attack he knows is coming eventually, as well as shifting his own responsibility onto his designated enemies when it does happen.
The only question is - are there enough rubes out there willing to Etch-A-Sketch their way into accepting this bullshit? Well, if November 8, 2017 was any indication - yeah, plenty of rubes. Still plenty of rubes.
And there're plenty of Republican (and other "conservative") office-holders willing to stay quiet while Trump plays the rubes for suckers because they reap nice fat bennies too.
And they're getting plenty of inadvertent assistance from "Progressives" willing to be kept out of the game by going along with guys like Thom Hartman as he slags the US with the generous and freedom-loving assistance of Putin's version of DumFux News, aka Russia Today. Paralysis By Analysis works wonders on reasonable people who feel a little reluctant to jump in and offer a full-throated defense of (eg) politicians they feel are less-than-fully-honorable.
And and and
So the question is - will there be enough people willing to stand up and defend against these assholes in six or eight months when the Outrage Fatigue really starts to kick in?
Today's Tweet
The hilarious part is, dude, they’re a major company, focus grouped this, got metrics, and concluded your demo was too small to worry about. pic.twitter.com/SnUG6MlEGF— Eric Garland (@ericgarland) February 6, 2017
Ka-boom
Black History Month 7 of 7
From Atlanta Black Star - 7 Lies Taught In American Schools
Slavery Should Be Separated From the Rest of American Capitalism
This popularly taught myth says that as an economic system — a way of producing and trading commodities — American slavery was fundamentally different from the rest of the modern economy and separate from it, notes historian Edward Baptist. He claims the widely disseminated stories about industrialization emphasize white immigrants and clever inventors, but they leave out cotton fields and slave labor, implying that slavery and enslaved African-Americans had little long-term influence on the rise of the United States during the 19th century, a period in which the nation went from being a minor European trading partner to becoming the world’s largest economy — one of the central stories of American history. Baptist explains why this thinking became popular: “If slavery was outside of US history, for instance — if indeed it was a drag and not a rocket booster to American economic growth — then slavery was not implicated in US growth, success, power, and wealth,” he wrote on Salon.com last September. “Therefore none of the massive quantities of wealth and treasure piled by that economic growth is owed to African Americans.”
This popularly taught myth says that as an economic system — a way of producing and trading commodities — American slavery was fundamentally different from the rest of the modern economy and separate from it, notes historian Edward Baptist. He claims the widely disseminated stories about industrialization emphasize white immigrants and clever inventors, but they leave out cotton fields and slave labor, implying that slavery and enslaved African-Americans had little long-term influence on the rise of the United States during the 19th century, a period in which the nation went from being a minor European trading partner to becoming the world’s largest economy — one of the central stories of American history. Baptist explains why this thinking became popular: “If slavery was outside of US history, for instance — if indeed it was a drag and not a rocket booster to American economic growth — then slavery was not implicated in US growth, success, power, and wealth,” he wrote on Salon.com last September. “Therefore none of the massive quantities of wealth and treasure piled by that economic growth is owed to African Americans.”
Feb 6, 2017
Ad
This one dropped this morning.
.@realDonaldTrump, we’re debuting this ad on @Morning_Joe, and taking it to other morning shows you watch, too! pic.twitter.com/LVINhUenaV— VoteVets (@votevets) February 6, 2017
@VoteVets
The Coming Purge
And we thought the Tea Party was bad? We ain't seen nothin' yet, bubba.
McKay Coppins, in The Atlantic:
“The question is not whether he’s vengeful,” conservative columnist Ben Shapiro told me. “The question is how willing he is to use the levers of government to exact that revenge.”He goes on to talk about Glen Beck, and his paranoia, and his worry that people have taken what he said too seriously.
This isn't a fucking game. "The Left" has been trying to warn those idiots for a good long time that they're playing with a loaded gun.
These assholes spent almost 30 years taking a giant shit in their audiences' brains and now they fret because people have done exactly what people do - they came to believe what they were told every day by somebody speaking in a confident authoritative tone.
You can see it every day in the comments sections and on Facebook etc. The arrogance of deliberate ignorance is tough and fibrous and persistent and malignant.
Today's Tweet
Openly bananas
Ah I see we've shifted swiftly into the "openly bananas dictator" phase. Happy Monday, America! pic.twitter.com/FxCudtoGdO— Hadley Freeman (@HadleyFreeman) February 6, 2017
Today's Quote
So now we have in power a man who represents the very worst of the plutocrats - one who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. I shudder to think where this nightmare will end. Even if you voted for Donald Trump for a reason that truly is from your heart, I cannot believe you voted for this. Tell me I'm wrong. Tell me whose side are you really on? The people of America or the cynics and predators at the very top who would climb atop the ruins of the republic for a better view of the sunset?
-- Bill Moyers
It Was A Metaphor After All
So OK, congrats to the Patriots for a pretty amazing comeback win last night.
Tom Brady is probably the best ever at quarterback. And maybe it's because he cheats. Or maybe not.
And you can argue that Bill Belichick is the best coach ever. And maybe it's because he cheats. Or maybe not.
And maybe New England is the best franchise ever. And maybe it's because they cheat. Or maybe not.
I say, "Teach the controversy".
Anyway, the top trending hashtag on Twitter this morning is #NotMySuperBowlChamps, and it's all about setting the game as a metaphor for the election and gloating about it.
We're all so clever.
It's the spectacle that's important - especially to The Daddy State. Bread and Circuses. It gets the blood up and inspires us ever forward.
And yes, I know - the whole bit about drawing the parallels with Rome and the Gladiators is old and tired. But y'know what? If it wasn't so fucking obvious all the fucking time, maybe we could stop doing it. Or maybe not.
I'm just glad I can put it down and walk away again - for a while.
Tom Brady is probably the best ever at quarterback. And maybe it's because he cheats. Or maybe not.
And you can argue that Bill Belichick is the best coach ever. And maybe it's because he cheats. Or maybe not.
And maybe New England is the best franchise ever. And maybe it's because they cheat. Or maybe not.
I say, "Teach the controversy".
Anyway, the top trending hashtag on Twitter this morning is #NotMySuperBowlChamps, and it's all about setting the game as a metaphor for the election and gloating about it.
Breaking: Jill Stein announces demand for a re-match because Russia hacked the football. Send her lots of money. #NotMySuperBowlChamps— Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) February 6, 2017
— Yashar (@yashar) February 6, 2017
We're all so clever.
It's the spectacle that's important - especially to The Daddy State. Bread and Circuses. It gets the blood up and inspires us ever forward.
And yes, I know - the whole bit about drawing the parallels with Rome and the Gladiators is old and tired. But y'know what? If it wasn't so fucking obvious all the fucking time, maybe we could stop doing it. Or maybe not.
I'm just glad I can put it down and walk away again - for a while.
Black History Month 6 of 7
From Atlanta Black Star - 7 Lies Taught In American Schools
Slavery Was Mostly About the Denial of Human Rights
A line of thinking that has gained popularity is that the institution’s worst crime was that it denied enslaved African-Americans the liberal rights and liberal subjectivity of modern citizens, according to historian Edward Baptist. Baptist pointed out that it did those things, of course, but it also killed people in large numbers, stole everything from those who did survive and made them live in terror and hunger as they continually built and rebuilt a commodity-generating empire. Baptist claims that once the violence of slavery was minimized, another voice could emerge, whispering that African-Americans, both before and after emancipation, were denied the rights of citizens because they would not fight for them.
Slavery Was Mostly About the Denial of Human Rights
A line of thinking that has gained popularity is that the institution’s worst crime was that it denied enslaved African-Americans the liberal rights and liberal subjectivity of modern citizens, according to historian Edward Baptist. Baptist pointed out that it did those things, of course, but it also killed people in large numbers, stole everything from those who did survive and made them live in terror and hunger as they continually built and rebuilt a commodity-generating empire. Baptist claims that once the violence of slavery was minimized, another voice could emerge, whispering that African-Americans, both before and after emancipation, were denied the rights of citizens because they would not fight for them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)