HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Laelth » Journal
Page: 1


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Wills Point, TX
Home country: USA
Member since: Sat Oct 16, 2004, 02:36 PM
Number of posts: 32,014

About Me

I am a native Georgian who's currently hiding out in Texas. I am a liberal, and I am extremely proud of the imperfect (but evolving) republic that we call the United States of America.

Journal Archives

I chose "mentally ill," but that's not quite it.

Trump has a Cluster B personality disorder. It’s not an “illness.” It can’t be treated, and it can’t be cured. It simply is who he is—an emotional child—utterly selfish, mean, vindictive, impulsive, reckless, lazy, lacking guilt or conscience, with a grandiose sense of his own self-worth and with a very poor ability to predict the future consequences of his actions. That’s a Cluster B personality disorder. It’s what Trump IS. It cannot change. Calling it a “mental illness” is too kind. Illnesses can be treated. Their symptoms can be mitigated. There is no such hope when dealing with a Cluster B personality disorder.


What is Trump's KGB/GRU code-name?

If the Russians don’t call him “Agent Orange,” I think they missed a great opportunity for humor.


Prison, for Trump, is out of the question.

It is difficult for me to see repeated DU threads and posts advocating for the imprisonment of Donald Trump. I am always tempted to chime in with Yes, but ... .

It's not that Trump doesn't deserve prison. For acts committed while he was President, I thought George W. Bush deserved imprisonment as well, but it is important to understand that no President of the United States has ever, ever, been imprisoned after his term in office, and it's not like all of our Presidents have been saints. No, some of our Presidents have deserved imprisonment. We just don't do it--never have, and I hope we never will. Why?


Remarks of the Hon. Dianne Feinstein upon the Inauguration of President Barack Obama

The world is watching today as our great democracy engages in this peaceful transition of power. Here, on the National Mall, where we remember the founders of our nation and those who fought to make it free, we gather to etch another line in the solid stone of history. The freedom of a people to choose its leaders is the root of liberty. In a world where political strife is too often settled with violence, we come here every four years to bestow the power of the presidency upon our democratically elected leader.

Those who doubt the supremacy of the ballot over the bullet can never diminish the power engendered by non-violent struggles for justice and equality like the one that made this day possible. No triumph tainted by brutality could ever match the sweet victory of this hour and of what it means to those who marched and died to make it a reality.


With the exception of the election of 1860, whenever power has switched hands from one party to another in the United States, it has done so peacefully, but it has done so with one, key caveat. Neither the outgoing President, nor key members of the outgoing party, can be criminally charged for acts committed while they were in power. That's it. That's our only rule, and that's the only reason, historically speaking, that the outgoing party has actually been willing to relinquish power following an electoral loss. If Trump knew that he was going to get prosecuted (and probably imprisoned) as soon as he left office, he would refuse to surrender the reigns of power. On the other hand, if he knew he was going to get a free pass if only he would agree to allow a new administration to control the government, he might actually go peacefully. So we all hope.

So please, drop your fantasies of prosecuting and imprisoning this horrible excuse for a man. It won't happen. It shouldn't happen. No matter how heinous his crimes, the continuity of the republic is more important, and the peaceful transition of power can only be achieved if we give Trump a free pass for everything that he has done in office (and before)--just so that he will go away when his time is up.


I can cook a feral hog.

Where I come from, down in JAWJA, there's only one way to cook a feral hog.

We don’t think that there’s anything wrong with killing a wild hog, btw. They are a menace. They’re naturally mean, and they are more dangerous than anything else that you can find in our woods and swamps (including cottonmouths, rattlers, bears, and gators). Wild hog is the worst.

So, here’s what you do. You dig a hole about 4 feet deep. You wrap up the hog in chicken wire (so as it doesn't explode), and then you lob the hog in the hole. You cover it with dirt. You collect all the loose wood you can, build a bonfire, and, at sundown, you light that bad boy up. Then, you sit around the fire with your friends and drink beer while somebody is blasting country music (or southern rock) from the truck that they have parked nearby. You get a little drunk and have a good time imagining what that hog is gonna taste like when you dig it up.

Next day, in the afternoon, you dig up the hog. Then you skin it, save the brains, eyeballs, and all the tender innards for Brunswick Stew (I don’t eat Brunswick Stew, btw), and then you separate all the meat from the bones. That hog meat is normally tough as shoe leather, but it will fall off the bone if it’s cooked properly—slow, high heat, with 2-3 feet of dirt between it and the fire, so the hog doesn’t burn.

Then you eat it—however you want to. Right now, I could go for a barbecue sandwich which, as any civilized person knows, is made from pork, not beef.

I have other skills, but this one might prove to be most useful in an apocalypse.


THE CYTOKINE STORM (Possibly millions of young, healthy people WILL DIE from COVID-19)

COVID-19 has already killed a disproportionate number of young, healthy people that have been infected with it, and it will continue to do so. Normally with influenza viruses, we are most concerned about potential fatalities among the very young, the very old, and the very weak. This viral infection is somewhat different. While the 2019 Coronavirus will prove lethal to some of the very old and some of the very weak, it is unlikely to prove deadly to the very young. So far, there have been very few deaths among persons in the 0-9 years of age range. The 20-40 range, however, is at particular risk with this kind of virus. Here's why:


This coronavirus can trigger "Cytokine release syndrome" (a cytokine storm) in persons with particularly healthy immune systems. COVID-19 is a disease that you actually have a better chance of surviving if your immune system is slightly compromised. The 1918 flu pandemic (The Spanish Flu) killed between 50 and 100 million people, many of whom were young and healthy. Evidently, the virus triggers the body's immune system and keeps triggering it, non-stop and relentlessly, until the infected person is killed by their own, super-strong immune system. That is the essence of a cytokine storm, and it's why many young, healthy people are likely to be struck down by this disease.

It is believed that cytokine storms were responsible for the disproportionate number of healthy young adult deaths during the 1918 influenza pandemic, which killed 50 to 100 million people.[15] In this case, a healthy immune system may have been a liability rather than an asset. Preliminary research results from Hong Kong also indicated this as the probable reason for many deaths during the SARS epidemic in 2003.[16] Human deaths from the bird flu H5N1 usually involve cytokine storms as well.[17] Cytokine storm has also been implicated in hantavirus pulmonary syndrome.[18]

In 2006, a medical study at Northwick Park Hospital in England resulted in all 6 of the volunteers given the drug TGN1412 becoming critically ill, with multiple organ failure, high fever, and a systemic inflammatory response.[19] Parexel, a company conducting trials for pharmaceutical companies, in one of its own documents, wrote about the trial and said TGN1412 could cause a cytokine storm—the dangerous reaction the men experienced.[20]


Take a look at this graph:

Notice the spike centered on the 25-34 range. Those are our healthiest people, and this graph deals in percentages. Yes, the chances of dying are higher for persons in the 75+ range, but there are many fewer people in that age range than in the 25-34 range. The raw number of deaths is likely to be highest among those who are young and healthy if COVID-19 follows the pattern of the 1918 flu pandemic.

Even if it doesn't exactly mimic the 1918 pandemic, it is foolish to pretend that our most healthy people are unlikely to die as a result of COVID-19. The high number of deaths that occurred as a result of the 1918 pandemic seems to be related to the fact that we actively selected transmission of more virulent strains of the virus. There were millions of troops in the trenches during WWI that came down with that virus. The ones who were only a little sick (ones with the less-virulent strains) were left at the front. The ones who were very sick (ones with the most virulent strains) were sent on crowded trains into the hinterlands--to multiple hospitals across multiple countries, where these more virulent strains were quickly transmitted to the local population and ended up killing tens of millions of people.

Answer: Isolate the more virulent strains. Well over half of us are going to catch this thing. Our best hope is to catch a less-virulent strain that we survive and that will then give us some immunity to the more virulent strains, but please, young people, do not assume that you are invulnerable. We all need to be very careful.




Way back in 1928, Herbert Hoover's surrogates bragged that Republican policy had delivered to America the greatest prosperity the nation had ever seen--a chicken for every pot and a car in every garage. Democrats, led by Al Smith, responded by noting that Hoover's wealthy friends all had chickens in their pots and cars in their garages, but that America's newfound wealth was not being equally distributed. The working class was not getting a fair share of the national wealth, these Democrats argued.

Welcome to modern, American politics. This debate from 1928 remains at the heart of our political discourse.

The "original recipe" chicken story is older. King Henry IV of France wanted to insure that every peasant in his realm would have a chicken in their pots (on Sundays, at the very least). He didn't want his people to be any poorer than that. Suffice it to say that the working people of the Western world have been looking for that chicken ever since. We were promised it. We haven't gotten it yet--not by a long stretch, especially not in the United States.

Those of us who voted for Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders in the 2020 Democratic primaries voted for these politicians because they insisted that the working people deserve THE WHOLE CHICKEN. It didn't matter to us whether or not these politicians could actually deliver THE WHOLE CHICKEN. We were simply pleased to know that they agreed that the American people deserve THE WHOLE CHICKEN. We voted for Bernie and for Elizabeth because they were willing to fight for THE WHOLE CHICKEN ... for the American people.


That, my friends, is THE WHOLE CHICKEN that most Americans want in their pots! It's what the American people need, and it's what they deserve. We know that we're the wealthiest nation on Earth. We also know that we're the hardest-working people on Earth. The primary purpose of the Democratic Party is to give the people some economic justice--to spread the wealth and to make capitalism work for all of us and not just the rich folks.

If the Democratic Party can just give us the neck (Eliminate the Filibuster), I have every reason to believe that Joe Biden can and will be a transformative, liberal President. So I hope. Give us the neck, and we can make some Real Democratic Soup that will lead us to THE WHOLE CHICKEN. Go JOE!

If you're with me, simply respond (here and elsewhere) by saying:


The American people deserve it.


Part 2 will follow with a careful examination of each part of the chicken and why the American people deserve THE WHOLE CHICKEN and not just the bits of chicken that the Democratic Party has served up since the Age of Reagan.

Eliminating the Filibuster.

It is my sincere hope that Democrats will regain control of the Senate early next year. When that happens, I hope we will be able to forward a lot of new, liberal legislation to President Biden’s desk for his signature. In order for this to happen, the filibuster must be eliminated. It’s just a Senate rule. It can easily be changed if and when a majority of Senators agrees to change it.

If this hypothetical Democratic Senate tries to eliminate the filibuster in 2021, the Republicans, naturally, will raise holy hell. This is how I would respond to their objections (and this is the point of this thread).

If our esteemed, Republican colleagues are so fond of the filibuster, they will be welcome to restore it as soon as they re-take control of the Senate. If they do not restore it when they have the power to do so, it will merely prove our point—that the filibuster has outlived its usefulness and no longer serves the best interests of the American people.

What do you think?


Which of these old white guys can beat Donald Trump?

Joe Biden Age 77 (Joe is the youngest of this group!)

Bernie Sanders Age 78

Michael Bloomberg Age 78

Daffy Duck Age 82 (In all fairness to Daffy, he may not qualify as a white guy.)

I honestly can not believe that, in 2020, given the depth of our bench, the diversity of our party, and the obvious excellence of our candidates, my party seems determined to nominate one of these old, white guys. Admittedly, each and every one of them is far better than Agent Orange.

Blue no matter who.


Go to Page: 1