HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » JackRiddler » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 96 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 24,757

Journal Archives

Media whores create stunt story timed for attention.

A poll of anonymous superdelegates is not the same as the count of elected, pledged delegates, and they timed this to steal the attention from the actual elections, to play as if they scooped something. Fuck the voters, right AP?

Yes. As for Mein Kampf...

It may as well have been cribbed from a series of 1922-24 editorials published under Henry Ford's name in his newspaper, The Dearborn Independent, and then put out worldwide in two dozen languages at his expense in a volume titled The International Jew. This is cited as an inspiration to Hitler, who hardly needed it but was known for looking up to Ford, who later got a medal from the Nazi regime, their highest honor to foreigners (bestowed by the German consul in Detroit, 1938). The Nazis put Ford's book out in 43 editions by 1942 or so. Both authors were probably cribbing from The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, itself a Czarist condensation of centuries of European anti-Semitic beliefs.

But that's not all, it would overemphasize the atavistic side. For highly modern Germany, meanwhile, was a hotbed for both, Taylorism-Fordism as an ideology of getting labor to work properly, and for the "scientific racism" and eugenics that predominated in the Anglo-American elite opinion of the early 20th C. And large parts of Europe broke out into fascisms long before the Nazis came to power. To pretend that what followed with Germany after 1932/33 was all because of Hitler and his coterie, or that no one else can ever be a Hitler (when it's sadly a common personality type whether we call it a syndrome or not) is ahistorical and again, misses the point: Fascisms involve whole societies going insane, in a very "rationalist" way. Thanks for reading.

Hitler's more normal than you think.

I figure about 1 in 50 men fit the bill, and many of them are petty tyrants tormenting their employees.

Luckily not usually in charge of a nation on the brink of insanity. Remember, it was Germany (and its European collaborators) that carried out the war and the genocides, Germany that provided a fertile field without which Hitler would never take power. Nor would we be talking the absurdity that Hitler was some kind of super-genius. He was a sick motherfucker who knew how to play the rubes, like a lot of sick motherfuckers. Like Trump, even.

When you make Hitler into an alien of sorts, you miss the historical point. It's societies that go wrong, not evil men who magically take them over.

Your junior internet gestapo posts are noted.

It's almost as if you intend to present the same false caricature of Clinton supporters that the odious Adams does in his column. Vee komm for YOU in 10 days, vait and see - ha ha ha!

Are you sure you think that what you're doing actually supports the cause you say you are for?

Wait. The GE isn't a closed primary under control of a single party?!

They might just let anyone vote, even Republicans and the simply unaffiliated unwashed masses who have never volunteered in or worked for Democratic campaigns?!

Why didn't anyone tell that to the Clinton supporters?!

God, this game is soooo rigged against her!

"Trolls are the dog-piles in the lawn of life." - Bill USA.

(btw, in context, obviously, you mean dogshit. Dogpiles are fun, and quite the opposite.)

So in other words, this GOP campaign will exactly mirror the logic of the Hillary camp being employed here, of "When did you stop being a Republican?" Except that Sanders never was one of those. He was also never a communist, but he lets you call him a socialist even though he barely qualifies as that. It sure has damaged him so far!

If only he'd been a neoliberal willing to claim any position for votes, armed with 400 politician endorsements ("superdelegates"), a hundred million in corporate donor PAC-dollars, 100% name recognition, the party machines all working for him, and the corporate media treating him 24/7 like he's the single, pre-ordained candidate. All of which was true of Clinton a year ago when Sanders was but an insurgent blip.

Why did he fuck up like that? Play the game and win it the professional way, man! First serve your masters for a few decades, then pretend this is a democracy!

Tuition-free public universities? That might cost 10% of our Beautiful Pentagon! Outrageous!

Nuff said. Kick this. Throw your talking points at it!

Yeah, looks like a real barrelful of fun.

Ah, the Bubble Existence! Soon you'll be here alone, in a cavernous echo chamber protected from the uglier 99% of the Internet, not to mention reality itself.

No, Frank passed a law to prevent the break-up of the banks.

He worked for that exactly at the time when we had the best chance to break them up.

Of course, that wouldn't pass as such, so the deed of saving Wall Street from the pitchforks is packaged as a "reform." Thus it happens that the Dodd-Frank bill to Save the Banksters included a provision that could be used to break up the big banks. Of course, such a thing could only happen in the unthinkable case that a real political leadership comes to power and is willing to do that.

A real political leadership would be something rather opposite to the present-day Wall Street employee ("consultant") Barnie Frank, whose "opinions" (mouthpiece statements) about Sanders should come with a prominent conflict-of-interest label.

PS - Oh and spare me the inevitable "but Sanders voted for it" dodge. I would have fought against it and fought to strengthen it all the way, as Sanders did, and when it was too late, sure, I would have voted for it as the best that that could be done. And then continued the fight - exactly as Sanders has! You think Sanders is going to get a "consultancy" pay off from Wall Street at the end of this? Shame on Frank!

On Sanders, Frank and dog metaphors in place of thought.

A recent post used a metaphor to substitute for thinking on the matter of the Sanders-Frank "feud." (That word by the way is already typical coporate media spin. It takes matters of politics and principle that affect everyone and turns them into personalized, specatacular bullshit, as though the two are in some kind of hair-pulling catfight.)

Metaphors are often used to substitute for thinking, and in this case Sanders was said to "bite the hand that feeds him," evoking the image of a dog ungrateful to its master. This was because Frank, after all, helped design the Dodd-Frank reform bill, which includes the provision that a President Sanders would invoke in initiating a break-up of the Wall Street Godzillas who still roam, burning and pillaging the planet. (See what I did? Metaphors. Always notice them and ask yourself: do they apply?)

So, apparently, Sanders owes Frank, see? But what was Frank's role in the actual history of the U.S. government's shameful accommodation of the Wall Street Godzillas, during the Bush and early Obama tenures?

In the decisive moment of October 2008, Frank played a leading congressional mouthpiece on the Democratic side in gaining passage for the Hank Paulson plan to rescue the Wall Street godzillas.

The next year, he went to work on the "banking reform." Frank (and Dodd and Co., surrounded by lobbyists and sponsors) prevented a true reform by sinking the hope of it into 1500 pages of loopholes and trivialities that almost never address the central issues of the 2007-9 crash brought about by Wall Street fraud.

Now don't get me wrong! Dodd-Frank is a great employment program for hard-working but ultimately powerless compliance officers at the big banks (I've met a couple), well-meaning bureaucrats who still won't get to see the same books as the Dimons and Blankfeins.

Without rebuilding the firewall between deposit banking and speculative activity, the fundamental issues of too-big-to-fail and unlimited casino plays by institutions holding depositors' money are unaddressed, except through evadable provisions.

The individual incentive system that sanctions fraud is untouched. The hullabaloo around Dodd-Frank served to distract how the banksters who should have been rounded up and prosecuted instead were given carte-blanche to rescue their fortunes and continue plundering the nation and the world. Instead of criminal prosecution and seizure of the plunder, their institutions were "forced" into various largely tax-deductible "settlements" that assigned no individual responsibility, and thus amount to a business expense for the corporation and a reward for the actual human perpetrators of high crimes.

The next crash, inevitably, will come. It can start tomorrow.

As befits the loyal factotum, Frank later got to rotate out of the politician's chair he had warmed for decades (often doing wonderful things as long as these did not affect the interests of his financial sector sponsors) into plum "consultancy" work, at many times the salary, on behalf of the very same banksters he helped to rescue as a leader in the campaign for the Wall Street bailouts and preemptive exonerations.

And it is as a consultant to the Wall Street Godzillas that the man speaks today, against Bernie Sanders. Any statement he makes should come with a conflict-of-interest label.

So, since metaphors are such welcome substitutes for thought, how would I tl;dr the above (so sorry for using words!) into a handy metaphor? Afraid I'll have to reverse the dogs.

Today I see a Frank-poodle nipping at the heels of a man who stands upright and tall for his principles - a man pragmatic enough to say he will use one of those Dodd-Frank loopholes to do the right thing that Frank worked so hard to prevent.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 96 Next »