Joe Biden: Slip slidin' away
Greetings fellow swampers and those preferring to remain dry.
Don't believe I wasn't thinking about this motley lot when I went for extended swims in FL and LA. Don't like those TX beaches much--too much Cruz control. But I digress. A digression upon the previous digression, to which I invite comments to solve my question: can a digression begin before the subject is even broached? Or, is it grammatically necessary for the topic of digression be inserted in the middle of the former essay?
Those who are observant enough will have noticed that my digression paragraph is actually a deflection paragraph ¶. And one other point, is ¶ considered an acronym? Acronym lovers, please let me know.
Unlike China Joe, I have not forgotten of what the main intent of this essay consists. The title has a dual purpose.
1. Joe's marbles are slowly leaking from the cloth bag underneath his scalp.
2. Joe's polling is dropping faster than his dentures.
Gaffes galore
"Gaffe" is an old word, 'bout as old as China Joe. It's kind of a polite word to say fucked up. Fuck ups come in many flavors: verbal, visual, olfactory (I suppose). JoJo has been a famous gaffemeister for decades. Like your eccentric brother-in-law or uncle. So, as a world-renowned medical master, holding a self-bestowed M.D. degree, I shall now not commit a medical ethical error by diagnosing at a distance*. Instead I submit for your input a couple of common neurological assessment instruments. These two include the Galveston Orientation and Amnesia Test (G.O.A.T.), which is often administered acutely after neurotraumatic events capable of interrupting awareness and personal competency. The other test is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA), designed for either acute or chronic situations impacting neurological functions.
This gets you the GOAT
If one does need a more cognitively aware assessment, one can use this--MOCA
So, as non-medical people ( those of you already in the field will know this already) just think about how one is to consider the observed behavior of China Joe and then grade him on whatever measures you, individually, consider appropriate. Is this to be your President?
Call me an elephant but I'll be goddammed if that demented corrupt "public servant" ever becomes our President. Hey, Vlad, can I move to the Crimea, huh?
Now, for those who have read this far.
Part 2 of Joe slipping and sliding from consideration of controlling anything
Assume, Mr. Biden passes our armchair diagnoses of sanity (compis mentis or some-like crap), then we consider his current popularity. Apparently China Joe dropped 10% on the Monmouth Poll, with the Bern and Pocahontas splitting those jumping China Jo's ship. Apparently none of the lesser candidates, which include Tulsi, got a benefit from JoJo's impending disintegration. His mind is shot. A single glare from El Trumpo would shred ByeDone* like a light saber through butter.
*h/t snoopy
The outlook of this Primary is getting cloudier as we go along. Yet one thing is crystal clear, the DNC will rig everything needed to ensure neither Tulsi or Bernie get the nomination--as of right now! I predict Tulsi will be President in 2024. She will need a growing cadre of adherents to support her. Her appeal is to the moderates of both parties. This is not a secret.
Yet one thing about remains as bright and shiny as JoJo's dentures: the DNC will be eternally anti-Tulsi. The Cult of I'm for Her is the DNC. If Tulsi doesn't get the race in 2024, then it won't be long. Look for Ro Khanna to hook up with Tulsi, I hope.
.........................................................................................................................................................
Introducing a new semantic technique I have learned from the Dem Partei, I will now attach modifiers to be affixed to words previously not needing modifications. In the same vein as soft porn and hard porn are two different types along the same theme, thus introducing "soft pedophilia" as opposed to what is now correctly labelled "hard pedophilia". Thus, when viewing this meme, please understand that in my limited mind, I consider China Joe a soft pedophile. Examples of soft pedophilia: which includes fondling and sniffing hair, grabby hands with young girls not yet nubile.
Comments
A Musical afterward
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x01ZVRPxAhM]
Much medical science at magical midnight.
Not everyone could pull it off.
Speaking of which, I can't believe Biden did as well in polls as he did.
Even if Biden were not a perve, his sense of entitlement to put his hands on whoever he feels like putting his hand on would nauseate me. But I have zero doubt that he is a perve. Surely, a normal person would think twice before assuming women and children would welcome stroking, handling, etc. from a total stranger. Obviously, he doesn't care if they would welcome it or not. He wants to do it (ewww) and therefore he does. And the quality of his mistakes is sad, until you think of him in the Oval Office, whereupon sad immediately flips to scary.
Of course, I get why the DNC would want him to be President (or lose to Trump). But, what is it about this guy that is supposedly so impressive to ordinary Americans responding to polls? His love of banks and credit card companies? His performance on the Judiciary Committee? Prison policy? Iraq War vote? New ideas?
Trump or Hillary. Trump or a sundowning perve. The US Presidency has jumped the shark. To think, we started with Washington who defeated the mightiest army in the world with a bunch of farmers and no money, then chaired the Constitutional Convention, then ran a brand new kind of country for eight years! And a mere 227 years later, the U.S. Presidency jumped the shark.
Best concise biography of JoJo I've seen
A perfect capture of the man's essence, which is kinda sorta sad in a way, in view of the man's rapidly declining ability to eliminate his by now well-known problem. Ain't no secret, ain't no lie. The man is on a relatively rapidly progressing of memory loss, lack of planning and the need for foresight as well. These are big negatives--but no Diagnosis at a distance (DAAD).
Pick a source, any source of JoJo videos and tell me about his compis mentis?
Pssst ...
it's compos mentis.
Of which he has non.
Of course, the corporate oligarchy PTB are non compos mentis, as well. A bunch of psychopathic addicts, with no common sense and no ability to think logically or rationally, leeching off of the planet Earth and everyone and everything on it.
I've said this before, but I believe that the human race is gearing up to shake the leeches off. If for some reason we don't, Mother Earth will do it for us.
"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi
"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone
Remember when Obama used his mother's dying of cancer
and said that no family should have to deal with insurance companies while they had loved ones who were dying? Joe went even further.
The thing is that Obama gave Biden money to help his son's medical bills. ByeDone wrote about this in his book. Then there's the fact that his plan of building on the ACA will still leave millions without health insurance and do nothing to rein in costs of medical treatment. Nothing! Nada. Nope!
Plus he's lying about Bernie having to tear down the insurance industry to start his own plan. ByeDone is being slammed on twitter as is Symone who is defending him.
It's good to see him falling in the polls which were most probably rigged in the first place.
Putin isn’t going to make you homeless or kill you or deny you health care.
Your government will allow it to happen though.
How slimey is he?
Obama also had a little kid present at the signing into law of Obamacare. I've now forgotten whether the little boy was sick or if his mom was sick.
To whom were you referring as sick?
Your list of choices did not include the real culprit--which is Hussein himself.
Don't get hung up on Hussein.
Sorry, bad Saddam execution pun.
I did mention the real culprit. Including the kid at the signing, and therefore in the signing photo and media coverage of the signing, was a very cynical move. That very cynical move was, at a minimum, done with Barack's consent and participation, whether or not it was also his bright idea.
The message, after all the stuff about Obama's mom, was "I didn't get to do this for my mom, and now it's too late for that dead woman. But it is in time to save your mom;s life." And since the kid probably never made it through over 2000 pages of legislative legalese, the kid was happy. Cue the media.
BTW, if you can't find the kid, he's on Obama's right--and right under Unca Joe Biden's hand. Talk about compulsion! The only kid almost within arm's reach of Biden who escaped was the little granddaughter Sessions kept from Joe, by swatting Joe's hand away from the child. That was the biggest tell that members of the Senate were well aware of Joe's, um, persistent "invasion of that allegedly new-fangled personal space" thingy with which Biden seems to have a problem. Only if you were aware of it and his peer could you prevent it. Wives and kids of people he swore in were not his peers and probably were not expecting a mauling anyway.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zK3FDIOcEoU]
Sessions helping his granddaughter to a clean get away (no pun intended)
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4_D5D3oj-4]
Thank you for the evidence
which proves JoJo's soft pedophilia, as mentioned in the essay above. It isa a compulsion, not a choice.
To be fair....
he is, um, at least as physically inappropriate with adult females as he is with children. Anyone who doesn't seem likely to be able to punch his lights out. I wonder if he'd stroke a female boxer?
But, he gets it. He GETS it. The concept of personal space has changed. (No, it hasn't, Joe. It's just that phones take videos now, so memorializing you in the act is so much easier. And then there was that whole bit for a moment back there about women who finally speak up getting supported instead of condemned. And you got outed while it lasted.
Anyway, right after he got it, he asked a little boy for permission to touch him and got it. (Apparently, "age of consent" means nothing to lawyer/lawmaker/POTUS wannabe Unca Joe.) And he thought that announcing the alleged permission in the kid's presence while groping him was funny.
Good grief.
Gotta question for you, snoopy et. alii
How can one build anything on top of an extravagantly deployed assemblage of compost? Please, any city planners or builders tell me.
San Francisco is built on landfill
which was really PU when I was a kid, the Bay did stink to high heaven because that's where all the garbage went. I am not kidding.
How's the leaning tower of salesforce doing again. no cracks here, move along? dot com
I'm sorry we can't do bigly good things in California, it's highly financed death penalty for poors from here on out. No public transportation infrastructure built, no good manufacturing jobs, financialized buzz crops posing as agriculture, water exports, immigrant population frozen in fear, impotent politicians doing nothing but electioneer. Wall Street West degradation.
Saving the Bay
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H0sY37CUK1k width:480]
that was then this is now
Now I know it is not "a huge thing for all of us" thanks to the Ds. It is a "huge thing for rich people" first and foremost. Wait for the trickle down, vote D.
Please Give
lol
I'm neither Snoopy nor a city planner, but
are you trying to tell us that you are not a neoliberal/excrementalist?
Doctor, Biden's speech is slurry.../nt
https://www.euronews.com/live
Now, mimi, you know our ethical code
To refresh your memory, we medical types are not supposed to diagnose individuals without in person interviews. You did not misread one of the tags--which coincidentally found its way to the bottom of this essay.
From a strictly lay perspective,
slurred speech is not a medical diagnosis, but a possible symptom and lay people with a good ear for speech can identify it. For example, a lay person who coaches actors in dialects might be able to spot the slightest slur before any other kind of professional.
Not trying to give you a hard time this morning, AE, just calling it like I see (hear?) it.
BTW, I don't have a good ear. Well, actually, the right one's ok. The left must have been too close to the people who yelled at me when I was a kid.
ETA: Oops. After posting this, I came to the post in which mimi said she had edited her comment.
okey, dokey, doc, I edited my thinking ... /nt
https://www.euronews.com/live
Reagan was demented for years, go to Joe
"Win one for the Gaffer" is my obummer prediction for the next flix head washing session streaming entertainment from the duopolist's retread machine. parks and recreation will and grace. Put a comma wherever ya wanna.
Joe Biden is Uncle Ernie. His behavior is shameful and I'm glad he is failing under public scrutiny, again. He is an evil greedy asshole, the epitome of Democratic politics today. CORRUPT and SENILE
down with the bedclothes up with the knightshirt(sic, maybe) fiddle about fiddle about
Lowered Expectations 2020
Get Out The Predator Vote
go to Joe Baaaah or else Trump
omg wtf
Obama has not exactly been out there stumping for his VP.
Then again, inasmuch as he would have been considered a moderate Republican during the Reagan Era, as was Reagan himself at that time, maybe Obama is following the Reagans' example. During the 2008 primary, Nancy explained that she and Ronnie had refrained from endorsing anyone until someone had won the Republican nomination and then they'd endorse that Republican for the general. O
Gee, if only the DNC were that neutral in a primary, especially since its own charter requires it to be.
f course, rumor was that the Reagans and the Bushs had contempt for McCain over what he did to his first wife. But Nance did indeed give McCain a tepid endorsement anyway. Which is more than Trump got from the Bush crime family or from Romney, until Trump endgamed Romney by pretending to consider him for for a cabinet post.
Good times.
Dem Charter, schmarter
Who gives an f* at the DNC. They just go into their smoke-filled rooms and pick a winner. Then, the anointed one is announced to the world at the freak show called the DNC National Convention.
@Alligator Ed Smoke filled rooms
Smoke filled rooms are no longer PC. Superdelegates and electronic voting are the way it is done now. You need to get out from under that rock from time to time in the swamp you are living in.
So, it has always been and so, I suspect, it always
shall be.
Ted Kennedy's "memoir" reminds us that, when JFK was nominated, only sixteen state primaries existed. So, the idea that primaries pick the POTUS is a relatively new one. And just about when it threatened to become reality, Democrats started pushing for super delegates.
Back to the memoir: One of the state delegation was split between JFK and LBJ. The plan that the JFK delegates had made with the campaign was that the state would go to JFK on the second ballot. However, the Kennedy's wanted JFK nominated on the first ballot. So, one of the campaign people, maybe a Kennedy, went over to that state's delegation and said, loudly enough for the LBJ delegates to hear, that the state might have to go for JFK on the first ballot. For whatever reason, the LBJ delegates did not protest. Maybe, they assumed it would not happen, that the head of the delegation would go with the plan when the time came. However, when the time came, he named JFK, giving him the nomination. As usual, all happy hell broke lose in the hall when the nomination was clinched and the LBJ delegates of that state were shell-shocked, but could not do a thing. (And this is Ted Kennedy's version, not moi being cynical.)
Yadda, yadda, it did, and that gave the JFK the nomination on the first ballot.
That was 1960. The DNC took its first vote on super delegates in 1972, proponents using McGovern's loss as an excuse. The vote did not carry, but was taken again in 1984, with proponents pretending that Mondale lost to incumbent electoral juggernaut Reagan because centrist Mondale was too left. And it carried then. Sic transit gloria primaries.
As I've posted, the more I learn about the Democratic Party, the more ironic the name "Democratic" Party seems. But, even smart people keep believing that, this time, it will be different.
Not to counter
anything you've said, but to supplement (mostly from memory). While there were 16 primaries in 1960, only a small number were meaningful and contested. NH for instance -- was conceded to JFK as it was on his own New England turf. I can only recall two, Wisconsin and WV, where announced major candidates, JFK and HHH, went head-to-head. Some of the 16 primaries were conceded to the popular state pol running as a "favorite son". I think Gov Pat Brown did this in CA, so the state primary was conceded to him.
The few contested and meaningful primaries were a way for JFK to show he could win support in heavily Protestant states, while Humphrey sought to end Kennedy's candidacy by beating him in those same states.
Meanwhile, wiley LBJ sat out all the primaries and sought to win the nom strictly through working delegates behind the scenes. Unfortunately for him, he was outworked, outsmarted and outmaneuvered by the Kennedy forces even behind the scenes.
One very interesting side show was the "debate" with Kennedy before the MA and TX delegations (should still be available on YT) requested by the increasingly desperate LBJ as the convention opened as he realized Kennedy was very close to a majority. Kennedy accepted and the result was quite an entertaining event -- 20 minutes of Lyndon waving his arms and pointing his fingers (but not, JFK noticed, at JFK) and proclaiming himself the greatest majority leader ever, then Kennedy getting up and cleverly dispatching Johnson in 5 minutes by endorsing him -- for another term as majority leader.
(thx for the heads up on the TK memoir, which I plan to check out)
Weren't all the sixteen states majority non-Catholic?
(BTW, non-Catholic Christians do not self-identify as "Protestant" and did not do so then. Evangelicals, Baptists, Pente)
Democrats did have some shrewd and colorful Speakers and Senate majority leaders--until Democrats went (almost) "openly" neoliberal and their dominance of Congress (FDR's long, long coattails) ended after only two years of a New Democrat President. They included Sam Rayburn, Tip O'Neill and most definitely Lyndon B. Johnson, Johnson arriving in Congress at about the same time as FDR but initially in a staff position.
Wrangling from the Oval Office, LBJ used those skills to get the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, even though the then Democratic strong suit, the Solid South, wasn't with him.
Yes majority non-C,
but the 2 states (that I can recall) where the only head-to-head occurred happened as a result of a challenge to JFK from HHH (who skipped the first primary contest, NH). As I see WI, it offered Kennedy a 3-fer, a primary challenge beyond just Catholic and Protestant: a) show convention delegates nationwide he was the most popular among those candidates competing in primaries; b) show he could win outside of his home region, and in HHH's backyard to boot, and c) show that as a Catholic he could win in a heavily Protestant state (religion being a huge issue that year).
As it turned out, though Kennedy won, he felt he hadn't won by as much of a margin to convince skeptical delegates, so the campaign would have to win big in WV coming up.
As for majority leaders, I preferred Mike Mansfield (1961-77), overall the most able in terms of legislative skills and considering the moral/ethical aspects (he didn't bully or threaten as ML Johnson did, wasn't personally corrupt/on the take like Lyndon was). In 1964 it was through the clever legislative strategy of Mansfield, not Lyndon, which got the CR bill passed (MM quietly overrode LBJ's recommended traditional approach). With able assistance on the bill from Sen Humphrey.
He wasn't perfect (see, e.g., his vote for the GoT Res, which, like McGovern, he likely later greatly regretted, as he was against military intervention over there; for party unity reasons likely, he also chose not to challenge the war publicly during LBJ's tenure), but overall very effective as a ML. And didn't sell his soul to be effective, as Lyndon did.
Re the '65 Voting Rights Act, it didn't take a legislative genius to get that one through, with a new liberal working majority then in Congress after the 1964 landslide. Liberal working majority -- not since the ND days I believe had this occurred. Interesting that at the time, Johnson was deemed to be stalling, and was being called out in public for his delaying by the likes of Geo Romney (Mitt's dad), gov of Michigan, a Republican. When even Rs are pushing for a Dem bill, it is a certain done deal and no expertise in legislating is needed, only a good typist to type up the bill, a competent vote counter, and a president sober enough to sign the bill.
My two cents.
Your comment is worth more than two cents
even accounting for inflation. Very nice summary of D. politics when liberal D didn't mean far-left nut cases like the Squad.
Thx AE,
very kind of you.
My remark about all sixteen 1960 primary states being
non-Catholic was a response to this statement from your prior post:
So thank you for elaborating.
Again, though, the relevant electoral issue for JFK was not whether a state was Protestant or not, but whether or not the state was majority Catholic. A Baptist or an evangelical (non-denominational Christian) would have been opposed to JFK whether or not Protestant, per se. IOW, Christianity is not divided simply into "Protestant" and Catholic, nor was it in 1950.
As far as Mansfield being responsible for the Civil Rights Act, I agree to disagree.
What’s interesting to me
Is that it looks like parts of the MSM is paying attention, enough so that Biden got spooked into reacting anyway. Like when he made some jokes about his hansyness, he felt the need to come out and say “I am not going nuts.” Not a good sign, especially this early in the season.
I figure like when the stories of his roaming hands came out, his people are going to pull the plug on appearances for a while and hope this blows over. Unless they can keep him out of debates, or have the moderators really shield him, I don’t see how they get this one to go away.
And, as many have noted, his poling is going the way it always has. He peaks early and then drops. It also looks to me like the rats are jumping ship to Warren, at least for the moment. There have been a suspicious number of “party bigwigs impressed with Warren” articles coming out recently which feel like both tipping their hands and manufacturing consent.
The final thing I think of at the moment are the leaks from the Obama camp more or less washing his hands of Joe. I don’t believe for a second those “leaks” weren’t planned and it also tells me Joe doesn’t have the support Her had internally to assure he’ll be the one.
I think the Democrats who love seniority and petty politics above all else will step back and let this play out. I think they are starting to see the ship is sinking so they’re just going to quietly man the lifeboats. I think we’re going to see more pro-Warren stuff, though they won’t call her the front runner just yet. Eventually, I think Joe is going to get a phone call from Obama letting him know it’s time and he’ll find some way to bow out gracefully.
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
As JoJo said in debate numero dos
.
Clue for ya, China Joe--your time was up when Obummer stored you in the WH broom closet.
2016 Obama-Trump voters don't like Biden either
-- https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/08/obama-trump-voters-like-trum...
That said, I still think Biden is still going to be the toughest to beat in the Dem Primary as long as Bernie and WARren are splitting the "progressive" vote and a tiny pool of lefties keep dissing Bernie, the chance of our lifetime. The Monmouth poll was one of a kind and probably mighty skewed. And Biden and the DNC and Obama still have a buncha tricks up their sleeves.Such is life.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQSmfR1_SVE]
The same "tiny pool" of leftists who "diss" Bernie
"diss" Warren even more. and "diss" Biden twenty times more than they "diss" Bernie. So, I don't think they're the ones who will tip the balance of any tie in Warren's or Biden's favor. Like Democrats in general, you need to be far more concerned about the rightists who are gung ho Biden or Warren or Harris, or even Trump, and pray for Sanders's exposure to ebola. Sorry to say, but I think the logic-defying, counter-productive habit of punching left dies hard, if at all.
As far as "dissing," it's not as though leftists are calling Bernie a poopyhead and Warren an even bigger poopyhead, especially on this board, just to use a random example. They are posting facts about words and deeds, some of which seem unfavorable.
And the unfavorable facts were not the result of the alleged "dissers" forcing any candidate to, for example, give Trump a standing ovation (Warren, not Bernie) or to vote for his military budget that was larger than the Pentagon's own bloated request (again, Warren, not Bernie). They are the results of conscious, calculated decisions made by the candidate. People who run for President (or "the decider," as Shrub would have it) should, at a minimum, expect to be accountable for their own decisions, no?
IMO, people ought to consider facts when they vote or decide to refrain from voting. If they don't, it's just a beauty contest and Buttigieg would likely win.
You're probably right
. . . about proportionate dissing and definitely right about the bigger problem.
And I wasn't being specific to folks on C99%. I have long time friends doing the same thing.
Sometimes facts are used by dissers. Othertimes, extreme hyperbole and namecalling, sometimes humorous but also sometimes imo vicious, unnecessary, and very counterproductive to any kind of progressive movement.
Also like you, I think, there's a big difference between Bernie and Warren/et al.
edit/missed context, so "
Pray for Sanders' exposure to ebola?" What? I guess you meant Trump?? Rightists don't pray for Trump's exposure to ebola.
As far as name-calling, many of the posters here have been posting together for years. If someone calls Bernie, for example, a sheep dog, that person knows that the the validity (or not) of applying that name to him has been batted around on this board since he endorsed Hillary before the Democratic National Convention. Facts, impressions, etc. were posted then. Some posters didn't see a need to repeat everything that's been ventilated every time during the last two years that they've referred to him as a sheep dog.
I've written four essays about my mixed feelings. Sometimes, I will link to one or more of them; sometimes I'm too lazy to dig back in my essays until I find the right essay. (The search function hates me.) So, if I say "I'm voting for him, but he's no saint" or "He has a deal with Democrats", I've backed that up in the past.
Also, this is not a single candidate board. The price you pay for posting on a board where you can say anything about any politician is that you may read posts expressing a view of "your" candidate that doesn't agree with your view.
Just as an aside, when I first wrote some of those essays, I got a good amount of flak. Now, some of the posters who gave me the most flak are the most angry with him; and I'm voting for him. When I joined another board, I was so gung ho Obama it was unbelievable. By the 2010 midterms, I refused to vote Democrat* ever again. And so it goes on message boards.
As for the progressive movement, all over the internet, I very much doubt that some anti-Sanders posts here are going to impact it. If you look at how many board there are, plus reddit, twitter, facebook, etc., thousands upon thousands of things are posted and tweeted every day stating every possible position on every candidate.I think they cancel each other out. I only wish people would vote in accordance with my posts!
ETA: Also, if the progressive movement lives or dies on whether or not a man in his 70s is a sheep dog or can do no wrong, it's not going to make it anyway. People who want something left of Democrats probably ought to think about voting for someone other than Democrats.
*Bernie is a Democrat only when he runs for President, so I don't consider myself voting for a Democrat.
Thanks for the history
It's illuminating expecially re. the evolution of sheepdog eptitheting.
If you look at my initial post (with the old Life is Life video), the bit about "a tiny pool of lefties" didn't specify C99% and in a subsequent post I clarified that it included many close friends. Ant the initial reference was subordinate to the much larger problem of Warren splitting the progressive vote with Bernie.
I don't think posting anywhere has all that much of an impact. Nowadays, with the social media storm, everything is a drop not in a bucket but an ocean. Besides, those of us with adult kids have long ago disabused ourselves of the notion that they pay all that much attention to us, so why should we expect anyone else to do so? So, posting for me here serves something of a carthartic function, unloading frustrations. I have no problem with blowback. But I do prefer a modicum of civility. Just the way I am.
BTW, I had already crossed out the ebola thing having recognized after my post that I misread that reference out of context.
Thanks for all your comments, sincerely. I really enjoy reading your insights. Our political evolution seens very similar although I reluctantly gave Obama a second chance, hoping that a second term would set him free. Well, I guess it did but in too many very wrong ways. Hang in there.
Yes, and...
Yes, and my first reply to your first post said I was using Caucus99 as an example. Many of the things that I said about Caucus99ers, though, apply to other boards and to real life speakers as well. For example, if you talk to a friend or co-worker daily, you may not need to repeat the thinking behind your comments each time. By some point, even an urban legend goldfish will remember your reasoning behind what you said about that last week.
ETA:
Then I somehow misinterpreted your statement about certain kinds of comments being detrimental to the "progressive movement."
Yes, and I obviously saw the long strike through. However, I didn't know what to make of the cross out. Many posters, including me, use the strike through facetiously. Ex.: "The
Dimocratic PartyThe Democratic Party." So, I covered my bases, just in case.Yes, and so did many hope that change would finally come in Obama's second term . You all did not think that because you licked it from the grass. When he was running, we were told that he had to do and say certain things in order to get nominated. Once that happened, everything would be wunderbar. Then he got nominated and we were told that he had to do and say certain things in order to get elected. Once that happened, he'd stop pandering to the religious right with homophobia, fix his FISA vote, etc. Once he became President (and had Rick Warren give the invocation the world watched), we were told to be patient: he'd fix everything (other than Obamacare) after the midterms. And after midterm, we were told to wait until after he was re-elected.
The public option had been my litmus test, though. After I watched the video op of Obama making handwritten changes to Obamacare before the House adopted it BY RECONCILIATION in March of 2010, I was done. (By then, he had also appointed the Cat Food Commission, the first step in his several attempts to make good on his pre-inauguration interview with WAPO about "reforming" entitlements. Luckily, every attempt of Not Ready for Prime Time to "reform" Social Security and Medicare failed. However, he had cut fuel subsidies to the poor, which Austan Goolsbee lied about to Jon Stewart on the Daily Show; and, IIRC, also began his several cuts to SNAP.)
In November, 2010, I voted for every Green on the ballot (one, IIRC) and wrote in the rest. I've done the same ever since, with the exception of voting for Sanders in the 2016 primary because hope for change springs eternal, I guess. I didn't bother to change my voter registration, though, until after the Democratic National Convention of 2016. (In my state, I can vote in any primary if I am registered as unaffiliated.)
There is now a vaccine reducing ebola fatality to 30%
but its too late for Bernie. The vaccine doesn't work in cases of far advanced disease. A delusional state is common. Interestingly, the most common current delusion is a Russian infestation of Washington, DC. Evidence is available that poor Bernie suffers from this disease-induced delusion.
Wonderful to know, AE. Thank you.
Should we all get it? You never know who is sitting next to you on public transportation.
Only available in Africa
but if you're buddy-buddy with Bill Gates, he might get you some--at a price.
Sigh. the rich get rich and the poor get ebola.
But, hey, we have more fun! And money can't buy us love or happiness. Or so they tell us. Me, I think Richard Branson often looks as though he's happy and having tons of fun.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y041-eT6QrI&list=RDy041-eT6QrI&start_rad...
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIDMqq_fH8U]
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeVx1C73o8k]
(covered, of course, by the Beatles, among others)
Van and Schenk
WTH did you find this--in your attic? 98 year old song--still rings true. Nice find.
I don't remember how I encountered it.
It may have been part of a sound track of a film or documentary.
I just have a very good memory for things I hear. However, I always thought the lyric was "the rich get rich and the poor get poorer."
Early in life, I realized that I remembered things better if I heard them. So, I sometimes studied for finals by reading aloud. Once, my father and raced into the living room from the kitchen with a panicked look on his face. When he saw me reading aloud from my Shakespeare text, he looked much relieved. I assume he thought that I had taken up talking to myself.
Which, in a way, I had.
The GOAT
Since dad taught biochemistry at UTMB (University of Texas Medical Branch) in Galveston and I never have heard of GOAT, I offer this explanation for my lack of knowledge concerning this tremendous gap in my medical lexicon.
Galveston is an island in the Gulf of Mexico. The Galveston beach is nasty about 325 days a year. After Galveston got crushed in the 1900 hurricane and lost about 8,000 souls (being very liberal with the term soul) it never regained any of its former glory. The oil pollution from the Gulf of Mexico pretty much wiped out all of its shellfish population whose shells actually made a fairly nice beach 100 plus years ago. And multiple hurricanes later, have only added to its decline, not unlike the situation our hero, JoJo, finds himself in at this point.
I definitely understand the amnesia part of goat. When you go to Galveston you generally want to forget that you have been. So being a person of the elder community myself, I find myself having to claim that GOAT was once in my medical lexicon, but being a long time Galvestonian, I have my own amnesia when it comes to almost anything with the name of Galveston in it.
Please, please, do not link Glen Campbell's tribute to this place. It is brutal.
I fail to see how Cruz could have added to it's decline.
Moving on.
I think the Montreal protocol should have included a picture of a donkey and an elephant to give JoJo the benefit of the doubt. Serious omission in this test.
And finally, I fail to see any ethical problem with diagnosis from afar when it comes to politics. In the case of politics, there should clearly be an exception to the otherwise understandable rule. Ethics and politics, like law and politics, are mutually exclusive concepts.
Okay, you convinced me to get my binoculars
I hereby diagnose the Camel as being an opportunistic whore. You may find this in the current psychiatric bible, called the DSM V, under "character disorders". She is an authoritarian opportunistic tart.
Continuing, since you got me on a roll:
Beto has pica, which is eating foreign objects intentionally, usually dirt but sometimes paint, etc.
Julian Castro has an acute case of doxxing-by-proxy, somewhat similar to Munchausen's-by-proxy.
L. Warren suffered from a chronic case cultural appropriation, for 40 years, the same amount of time it took Bernie to realize he is a Russia-fearing, Hillary-loving Democrat.
@Alligator Ed Those are some serious
Those are some serious disorders. Political sociopathy runs the gamut. Diversity at its finest.
Glen Campbell’s tribute to a soldier whose wife is in Galveston?
I suspect you mean the African American folk song covered by the Highwaymen and the Chad Mitchell Trio, called “Mighty Day”. The lyrics to that one are indeed brutal.
I think he probably meant
the song "Galveston", written by Jimmy Webb, most famously sung by Glen Campbell. It was written and released in 1969, at the height of the Vietnam military action.
"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi
"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone
"Galveston" is extraordinarily moving, for such
a short song. Jimmy Webb (the writer) could do that.
The earth is a multibillion-year-old sphere.
The Nazis killed millions of Jews.
On 9/11/01 a Boeing 757 (AA77) flew into the Pentagon.
AGCC is happening.
If you cannot accept these facts, I cannot fake an interest in any of your opinions.