Sometimes You Feel Like Electing a Nut

Democrats ridicule Republicans for their top two presidential frontrunners, the blowhard Donald Trump and the somnolent ignoramus and proto-fascist Ben Carson. But when you stop to think about it, how is the outwardly cool calm and collected Barack "Kill List" Obama less nutty than Trump or Carson?

Democrats ridicule Republicans for their top two presidential frontrunners, the blowhard Donald Trump and the somnolent ignoramus and proto-fascist Ben Carson. But when you stop to think about it, how is the outwardly cool calm and collected Barack “Kill List” Obama less nutty than Trump or Carson?

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on RedditDigg thisShare on StumbleUponEmail this to someone

50 thoughts on “Sometimes You Feel Like Electing a Nut

  1. “Does your script contain anything a little more substantial?”

    CrazyH, I think the only thing we can agree on is the fact that no matter what I say you’re going to criticize it.

    • Never mind. Just keep saying it. I read your posts and sometimes even the links you provide.

      I might not always agree, but (as an academic and an expat in Mexico) I can separate the wheat from the chaff.

      • Thanks, that’s why I do this. I have no illusions that I can have any impact on CrazyH or anyone else who has their mind already made up, but hopefully others will read these comments and decide for themselves to question the propaganda they have been force fed from birth.

    • You say that like it’s a bad thing, yet if Bernie Sanders says anything you’re going to criticize that. How is that any different?

      Here’s the deal, Prole – either you’ve done the massive amount of research you claim, or you haven’t. If you have done your research, then you know that you’re cherry picking. If you haven’t, then you’re simply drinking someone else’s kool-aid. One way you’re a liar, the other way – you’re fool.

      In the final analysis, it doesn’t matter which – either way your posts are worthless.

      As to the question you’ve been evading (as usual) Let’s talk about life expectancy, North Korea: 69 years; China: 75 years; USSR: 64 years; US: 79 years. How about that air pollution in China? Freedom of the press? Gay marriage? You may not like Bernie, but we at least have some say in our president whereas the North Koreans get zero.

      You want to have an honest discussion about the pros & cons of different socio-economic theories, no problem. But if you just want to dispense koolaid, then yeah, I’m going to criticize.

      • CrazyH, you picked a good name, because I am beginning to suspect that you are literally insane.

        What am I evading? When did you ask me about life expectancy in these countries? Your data may be true, I don’t know, but talk about cherry picking!

        How about that air pollution and environmental devastation in the US and allied countries like, say, Japan? China, at least, is beginning to make significant progress in cleaning up their air pollution problem.

        And do you really want to talk about freedom of the press in the US? Do you really want to go there?! Two words: Operation Mockingbird (look it up – it’s still going on).

        Gay marriage? This is one of the most “progressive” ideas your ruling elites can come up with?

        I’ve got a progressive idea for you: Stop trying to destabilize and overthrow other countries’ governments simply because they refuse to be your slaves!!

        The US is not in any way progressive, it is an imperial dictatorship:

        https://gowans.wordpress.com/2015/10/25/the-international-dictatorship-of-the-united-states-its-friends-amnesty-international-isis-and-the-nusra-front-and-enemies-hassan-nasrallah-cuba-and-ana-montes/

      • No, I asked you to name something substantial, and you named trivialities. That’s an evasion, and it’s pretty typical of your responses. I did have a specific goal in mind: and that was to highlight your cherry picking. Thank you for your help.

        What was that you said about putting words in other people’s mouths? I happen to be against invading other countries – have I ever said otherwise? Do you deny that the USSR *invaded* Romania, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, et al? Tanks in the streets aren’t exactly signs of a populist uprising.

        Sure there were some people who welcomed the “communists” – likewise there were some people in Iraq who welcomed “democracy” – you can find traitors who welcome the invaders anywhere.

        Treating gay people the same as other people is called “human rights” and yes, I do happen to think that human rights are important. Shall I assume that you do not?

        Freedom of the press? Seriously? How many bloggers living inside China talk openly about how China is the most evil country in the world? You can state that openly and under your own name in the US. Why do they need a great firewall if they don’t fear free speech? The USSR had Pravda. Oh, sure – our corporate media has been subverted by capitalists today, but you can still find free and open voices. We’re chatting on one such site today.

        Remember Joe Wilson during the run up to Iraq? Do you think Pravda would have published a piece pointing out how the president was lying to justify an illegal war?

        Unlike your unrestrained cheerleading, I can see the problems with my country. I don’t try to whitewash them.

        > The US is not in any way progressive,
        Fail. It is progressive in many ways, I just named a few. Remember?

        > it is an imperial dictatorship
        Partially true, and unfortunately going the wrong way. But again – I don’t try to whitewash it.

      • @ prolecenter –

        You’ve hit the nail on the head!

        (Except for your assumption that one has a mind to make up! 😀 )

        Since when does a person’s declination of another’s terms of engagement automatically mean guilt, huh?

        “You won’t answer my question, so that means I’m right!” LOL 😀

        I wonder why the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution hasn’t been repealed?

      • Refreshing to side with you. Glad you’re handling prolecenter particularly since I have no interest in engaging him. Although the idea there are Russians everywhere is pretty tired paranoia in my view. 🙂

  2. Wow – some of the comments here are a good example of why we can’t get anything done in this country – people get completely lost and side-tracked by their pet peeves, trollishness and desire to “show the other guy how am dumb he are about kerrekt definitions and spelling”. My take on the cartoon is that Yes – the Amurikan people can easily elect an ignorant poser – they’ve done it may times, whether for president, governor, etc. One of the he-yooooje problems is the lack of voter turnout, especially among the Dumbokrats, allowing the more angry nutzoids to get what they want. So yeah, Ted, it possible that we will elect some wacko, because we have already done this many times before – Why do you think the Repugnikans clown car has so many erected ofishals right now, along with the nutjob wannabes like Trump and Carson? America is a big country, and it is absolutely chock full of ignorant, stupid, apathetic croutons that think and vote against their own best interests.

  3. The Federalists were actually opposed to federalism, preferring a strong central government. The Anti-Federalists stood for federalism. The Federalists took that name because the people favored federalism.

    The Founding Fathers hated democracy because for them it was only another name for anarchy, which they also hated. So now we have an oligarchy named “democracy”, in which the study by Gilens and Page demonstrate the near zero effect of elections on policy.

    The Russian people wanted socialism so Stalin named his state-capitalism “socialism”.
    American capitalist politicians hated both socialism and Russia, so they went along with Stalin’s naming convention in order to aid suppression of socialism in the U.S.

    That’s how the people bought into the present anti-social social policies provided by our oligarchy.

    • A nice summation – one nit, though, our government is actually a constitutional republic.

      … although the “republicans” do hate the idea of a republic, let alone the constitution, and democracy is right off the table.

      • The Unitary State of America has not been a constitutional republic ever since the regulating institutions have become subordinate victims of regulatory capture.

        The too-big-to-fail Big Finance institutions now regulate the government.

      • I did not mean to imply that it was a successful republic, at not least in the manner the founders envisioned. 😉

        It *is* after all, a government by representation. The representatives just don’t represent a very large percentage of the electorate.

    • The Representatives represent their corporate backers.

      They should be made to wear corporate patches on their clothes and cars just like race car drivers.

      • I haven’t read the article but I agree with its title.

        Read ” Human Smoke” by Nicolas Baker if you have any illusions about Churchill.

        I don’t think Truman needs further examination given his atomic bombing and his CIA.

      • A cursory review of the book reveals much criticism of its veracity and objectivity. In any case, the only one who can challenge Stalin for most evil person of all time is Mao.

  4. There hasn’t been more comedic entertainment in an election since Pat Paulsen’s campaigns in 1968, 1972, 1980, 1988, 1992, and 1996.

    The total idiocy of the CCCP is being revealed.

      • I think we should be able to sell our votes.

        What’s the deal with us giving away votes for nothing?

        That not how the Congress critters allocate their votes.

      • lesseee here, The Donald said he’s worth approx 8.7 billion, there are about 146,311,000 registered voters … uh … carry the one … that comes out to around $59 each.

        That seems a little low. How much am I offered? Special today: two votes for the price of one!

    • Well maybe an entrepreneur could buy more votes from voters to exercise monopoly powers, and then mark them up when they sell them to the candidates. Or become a candidate himself.

      That’s it, a vote market is sure to please the free market ideologues.

      The upside of this scheme is that even the losers will get something for their sold votes, even if it only pays for gas money to go to the polls.

  5. “Yet, when the discussion is about a country, you readily believe whatever they say they are. Why do you not uphold the same philosophy when it’s a person?”

    That’s not true at all. I judge people AND countries by their policies, laws and actions. The claims that I make about socialist countries come from a great deal of research and study. I don’t take anything at face value.

    • And yet, with all that research you’ve never uncovered one, single negative aspect of any socialist country, nor one, single positive aspect of the USA.

      Perhaps you should try sources other than your script?

      • Baseball is trivial. Fewer consumer goods is a good thing.

        If you trivialize the differences, then you are implying that the differences are trivial. I was under the impression you believe that there are very large differences.

        Does your script contain anything a little more substantial?

  6. Socialist … ? Did you know that Hitler was a “socialist” leader? Yeah, he was in charge of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, or Nazi Party. The question remains, exactly what kind of socialism are we talking about now for WDC? The personality-socialism of government bureaucracy, that of a limited constitutional republic, or the corporate socialism of a fascist dictatorship?

    It seems that Trump would select the later, while Bernie would much prefer a more Stalin-esque brand of the primary former. Neither has too much respect for the U.S. Constitution. The SOP of Hillary distastefully relates a continuing, Bill-of-Rights depleting paradigm of Zionland ass-sucking. America really is tired of being Israel’s bitch, so like ZOG-infested Weimer Germany, Americans are now looking for a fresh(er) face to horribly misdirect us.

    The overwhelming meme here is, that once selected, Bernie would summarily turn the reigns back over to whatever Netanyahoo-bot master would currently be committing genocide in occupied Palestine. Hillary? Well, she’s BC without any of the “good-times.” Trump is much more a wild card … kinda’ like Hitler was. Hoo-boy, interesting times.

    DanD

      • … and you do ad-hominem like ghetto-white trash. Why don’t you go back to your trailer and create another baby again with your daughter.

        D

      • Not addressing anything you’ve posted: Is there a distinction between “reigns” and “reins,” do you think? How many smarts does it take to master the English language?
        LOL
        😀
        (Now I’ve relegated myself to trolling, since nobody seems to want honest discussion of issues.)

      • You call that a “brief analysis”? My head is spinning from trying to comprehend all that was said!

        I think the gist is this: “But anything that could make a Clinton voice even vaguely progressive sentiments in a not too fatuous way is not to be despised.”

        (Did I miss it much?) 😀

      • To my mind, mein verehrter Lehrer, the essence in Mr Levine’s analysis (which is made credible by the details into which he goes) is to be found in this paragraph, which deals directly with the question he poses in the article title :

        «What, then, does he want? The most likely answer is the one that gives him the most credit: he wants to move the center of political gravity leftward and to make “progressive” thinking respectable again.»

        In a country like the United States, that’s no easy task ; indeed, the way things are going here in Sweden, we’re going to need a Bernard Sanders here as well !…

        Henri

      • So Sweden, the most left-wing country in the Western world, needs to move further left? You’re a lunatic–as if I needed more evidence. What, in your opinion your country needs more Muslims to rape your women? Do you need more mainstream politicians saying there is no Swedish culture? Perhaps you support the proposal to outlaw men peeing while standing? Or maybe the income tax should be 100 percent?

      • Why «Jack Heart», I hadn’t realised you were so knowledgeable about conditions in this, «the most left-wing country in the Western world» ! You seem to know almost as much about Sweden as you do about the other matters on which you presume to comment on these threads…. 😉

        Henri

      • No really, in all seriousness, I’d like to know how Sweden is specifically not sufficiently leftist for you.

      • «[I]n all seriousness», «Jack Heart» ? Judging from your posts on this thread, «seriousness» is hardly one of your most prominent characteristics, but I can easily think of other attributes….

        I doubt sincerely that you possess the background to render a discussion of Swedish politics meaningful ; nor would this thread be an appropriate forum for such. But to indulge you, let me name one area in which I should like to see a significant change and which you may, despite your limitations be able to grasp : Sweden’s vassal status vis-à-vis the United States, which has persisted since 1943 and which has intensified these last two decades, irrespective of which party or coalition of parties has been in government….

        Henri

      • It’s true that I cannot keep up on the current politics of every country. You got me. But think of it as a perfect opportunity to give me a topic to investigate myself.

        One would think that a commenter accusing another of a lack of seriousness would be able to post a serious comment himself, i.e. snark-free.

        I’d say “fair enough” to your desire for your country to be free of the yoke of a superpower but this is hardly an issue of left-right, and you would still be under the heel of the EU. Any nationalist would have the same position as you, and so, we can at least have agreement here that your nation should choose it’s own destiny. And if this were to happen, perhaps your government would stop harassing Assange. I would say not to worry as the US can only last so much longer at its current level of power.

      • I’d say the only way you’ll get your wish to be free of the US is if your people reclaim their sense of nationhood. After all, if a people don’t think of themselves as a nation, why would they care if another nation makes their decisions? Alas, this will not be to your taste. You’re hardly one to appreciate national pride. Sweden could start by exiting the EU, closing its borders, raising the native fertility rate, and supporting marriage again. If the Swedes could find enough self-respect and national identity to do these things, providing for their own defense free of US influence would follow. It is a shame how far your country has fallen from once having one of the most impressive militaries in Europe.

      • «It is a shame how far your country has fallen from once having one of the most impressive militaries in Europe.» Indeed, «Jack Heart» – but on the other hand, it’s been nearly 400 years since Gustav II Adolf left us for a better world on that November day at Lützen…. 😉

        Henri

  7. How would Bernie be any different if he became president? He chose to run as a Democrat, and so a vote for him is a vote for the Democratic Party. The financial backers / capitalist masters will pull his strings just like every other president before him.

    The last time a U.S. president tried to go his own way, he was assassinated.

    • Dude, he calls himself a Socialist. Isn’t that enough? You believe that any country that calls itself socialist is, in fact, a true workers’ paradise – doesn’t the same hold true for people?

      • Ever heard the expression, “Don’t tell me who you are. Show me what you do and I will tell you who you are”?

        Bernie’s behavior is NOT that of a real socialist; that is to say, a Marxist. However, words do have meaning and if you pay close attention politicians will sometimes unwittingly tell the truth. There are some lines that can’t be crossed because the politicos are not just talking to the stupefied masses, but they are also, of course, auditioning before their capitalist masters. Hence, you will NEVER hear Bernie call himself a Marxist or a Communist. On the campaign trail he doesn’t even proclaim himself a socialist. He just doesn’t deny it when pressed, but he is very anxious to put the word “democratic” in front of the socialist label so as not to be confused with a real socialist.

        And don’t put words in my mouth! I have never, and will never, use the stupid expression, “workers’ paradise.” In fact, the only time I see or hear that expression is when it’s coming from anti-communists employing it as a form of mocking propaganda.

      • Yet, when the discussion is about a country, you readily believe whatever they say they are. Why do you not uphold the same philosophy when it’s a person?

Leave a Reply