Get ready for President Palin....

26 posts / 0 new

Remember when I told you that the tens to hundreds of millions of dollars that billionaires and transnational outsourcing corporations are spending in this election was really just practice for 2012? I even suggested that these big funders let some whackos in to play, people with room-temperature IQs who will parrot a line regardless of how ridiculous it is, like Sharon Angle, Joe Miller, Rand Paul, and Christine O'Donnon, just to see how much money it would take to get voters to put into office somebody who's obviously and patently unqualified for a powerful office like the senate, so they'd know how far they can go in 2012 in putting into office wholly owned candidates. Apparently I was right. Today's news reports that a secretive network of Republican donors is heading to the Palm Springs area for a long weekend in January, but it will not be to relax after a hard-fought election — it will be to plan for the next one. Koch Industries, the longtime underwriter of libertarian causes from the Cato Institute in Washington to the ballot initiative that would suspend California’s landmark law capping greenhouse gases, is planning a confidential meeting at the Rancho Las Palmas Resort and Spa to, as an invitation says, “develop strategies to counter the most severe threats facing our free society and outline a vision of how we can foster a renewal of American free enterprise and prosperity.” In other words, how the rich guys can completely take over our government, including the White House, in 2012. Get ready for President Palin.

Thom's picture
Thom
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Comments

Politics is rapidly reaching the point of irrelevancy. We are approaching an interconnected crisis that will have no political solution.

Watch the documentary Collapse with Michael Ruppert, who was talking about the collapse of our financial system and derivitives back in 2004 in his book, Crossing the Rubicon. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuBgzwSBcuw&feature=related This is part 1/8. The documentary film is broken up into eight 10-minute parts.

What the Koch brothers and the Cato Institute and their ilk don't understand is that, as Ruppert eloquently points out in Collapse, our population surge, economic expansion and standard of living were mostly due to having a relatively cheap and ready supply of oil. Our economics have more to do with cheap energy than any one economic system. Oil is running out rapidly and virtually everything we use is derived from oil. Even Saudi Arabia is earnestly engaged in offshore drilling. What's that tell us about their so called, inexhaustable reserves under their sands?

Republican politics, especially the ridiculous 2010/2012 election seasons with demonstrably unqualified tea party candidates, is relevant only in that republican control will speed up the collapse as they sift and search for every last dollar in this dying financial paradigm. The collapse of the fraudulant financial system and the depletion of oil reserves and the attendent skyrocketing price of the cost of living is something that we must all bear. The freemarket politicians will not have any answers because all of their freemarket ambitions hinge on the fallacy of always having unlimited amounts of oil to energize our growth.

The freemarketeers, taking their lead from the oil industry tycoons, have fought green energy development, pulled up electric cars in LA, tore down the solar panel on the White House, all in order to keep oil consumption high. As Ruppert points out, even an electric car runs on tires and each tire represents seven gallons of oil. Our food industrialists use oil derivitives for every step of the planting through harvesting processes.

The American public is damned by their own ignorance. They don't know the machinations of money, the limits of growth based on the limits of oil and other natural resources. People in general do not understand the basic physics of the laws of thermodynamics. When the oil stops, the money stops, and we stop eating. No politician has any answers for that, least of all Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnel.

Choco's picture
Choco
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

How long before she resigns to take a big money TV show? I think the Palin is more of an entertainer for the Right than serious candidate material if there is any chance she would have to take on the tasks of the office. On the other hand, the Bush/Rice team scares me because they do have ideas about how to use the White House and the imperial system.

What major American institution has faced any critical issue in the last decade? The schools continue to miss the learning environment factor and cooperation for the anxiety of the race to get the good job, now basically over and more desperate for that fact. The culture war churches have made issues of conscience more important than the abuses of political and economic power. The Old Mainline has had very little to say and that very cautiously.

Commerce has been completely swamped with Neocon Supply Side crap as the empire rewards crony capitalism and neglects the homeland.

The responses of the duopoly are to how difficult it is in DC with the system being "slow" to move. Some dare call it broken, and when you admit that you have to admit that getting anything positive done is a minor miracle. We can applaud Obama for doing more with a broken system than others could, but we still have to recognize that even minor miracles are still small change compared to what is needed.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

I have posted before that I believe Palin will never be president of the US.

Coalage's picture
Coalage
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Back in 2008 I said that the Republicans were running McCain because they didn't want the White House or the blame would fall again on their watch as the economy falls apart. So they let ol' John have a last whack at it for fun and then made sure he wouldn't win by making the joke Palin this VP choice. They figured that economy would fall down so bad that they could buy us out for pennies on the dollar. Seems to be coming true. 2012 will be too late.

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

While I can agree with the part about pinning the blame on the Democrats by "losing," I don't think Bush/Cheney left them any option about "winning" the election. Even a black looking guy won.

We get the two Santa theory and how the 'fiscal cons' waste our treasury then tell us we cannot afford the basics of a decent society. They are trying to push the amnesia factor into less than five years. Most of us have better memories than that, even at our age and with all the things we have done to warp them.

Nothing they promised came true. Nothing. Every promise they made was broken. But, they did great at messaging and PR, and if you ignored reality and believed in fairies you could feel good about being an American. It was an addiction we finally broke electing Obama and saying we wanted change.

Rehab is rarely all that much fun, and addicts often criticize and stop going to therapy until they repeat the failure. We remember feeling good and not getting sick. We think we can handle that crack this time. Rehab sucks.

Maybe the addicted public will reject the therapy Obama offers. They could be in denial or they could see that their problems are much bigger than what this therapy seems to address. But where do they turn? Back to the pushers and users on the Right? Or to other offers of "therapy" from quacks and frauds.?

I think Obama's message failure has been to act as if the system were only in need of fixing instead of redesign. The desire to bring the country together and reduce partisanship is not irrational absurd. People complain about partisanship all the time. Being seen as confrontational and willing to "win" by any means would be a disaster for Obama. We are only at the end of the First Quarter. If Republicans gain a lot of seats, Obama can frustrate their legislative agenda even if it means getting nothing much that matters.

Instead of trying to use criticism of the radicals in his base to attract moderates and independents, Obama needs to use the base as an excuse to advocate for more radical policies. Even if he gets tagged for playing to his base, he can still claim the high ground of realism. What goes through Congress comes out compromised by corporate. Talk of half loaves and cups half full does not describe the crumbs from the table or the dregs; and it gets hard to be enthusiastic about lesser evils and continued predator entitlements.

Every election gets described as "the most important." If we think about the continuity of any struggle, persistence is more important than momentary emotional panics or highs. But persistence has to have something to work for and works best when done with others.

My paranoia has not been up to the task with the American Empire. I keep falling behind in wonder at the insanity embraced with pious sincerity. This is why I have recommended keeping the outrage matched by humor. It comes free with the sorrows of empire. What I do know is that the choice of not dealing with the Empire is to be ground down by it. Necessity may be the mother of invention, but it is the ass-kicker of persistence. Finding ways to find meaning and purpose in the struggle for liberty and justice for all is easier than when you are working for the Empire.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Its not Sarah Palin they are getting ready for 2012, its Jeb! The crazies are just to soften us up, and then Jeb will seem like a breath of...sanity?

Bob_H's picture
Bob_H
Joined:
Oct. 1, 2010 12:14 pm

Do you really think the public would except another Bush in the WH? If so they are crazier than I thought.

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

We can talk about Palin but she is really not the first. The republican party has a long history of running candidates with inferior intellects. Remember Dan Quail? So, Sarah Palin is the first notable anti-intellectual republican female...so what? If she fails there will be a string of screechy half-wits behind her to b'gosh their folksy way into the hearts of the American inbred.

The fact that the Republican party would select such mental minimalists to represent them speaks to the weakness of thier philosophical structure. I have said for a long time that their ideology-at least from the perspective of middle class adherents-is totally ficticious and could never be realized. Thus, because it is not a philosophy that has ever worked in reality, it needn't make sense. They rely more on the emotional argument than the reasoned one and it is working for them.

How else can someone be a right-to-lifer AND be a military hawk? How else can someone believe that you can pay down the debt by cutting taxes? These are people for whom a loving god might order the murder of innocent children, after all, and it all makes "sense" to them. The right wing is connected to raw emotionalism where facts needn't mingle and conflict with their agenda.

I cannot blame entirely the ones at the top, though. They satisfy a pre-existing condition in much of humanity that is both intolerant and incurious about why. We will never convince them that two plus two is not seven if that is their will to believe it. All we can do is form support groups like this one and wait for them to knock down our doors.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 8:47 pm

If the dream team Palin & Beck run in 2012, I might even give them a donation. As progressives we should promote those two half wits and put them on a pedestal so the uninformed masses see the leaders of the tea party and the republican party vetted under a much deserved public prime-time microscope and we can all hear the anti-American, and hateful demagoguery they barf up from la-la land as factoids.

makuck's picture
makuck
Joined:
Mar. 31, 2010 10:13 pm

So... If having the current highly intellectual President and staff in office has been a disaster, and putting in less than intellectual people in office will be a disaster, what is the answer? Is there, perhaps, some measure other than IQ that would help predict a successful politician?

Paleo-con
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Maybe politics is not the answer. After all who runs for public office anyway? Mainly just narcissists and opportunists. It was simpler back in 1776. Now running the country is an overly complicated process and rife with fraud.

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote captbebops:

Maybe politics is not the answer. After all who runs for public office anyway? Mainly just narcissists and opportunists.

Pretty much agree with this. Politics works the reptilian (lower evolved) brain. Constantly seeking money and power, which politicians do, and making Faustian bargains with corporate masters goes to the heart of our corrupt system. The problem with the republican and libertarian ideologies that claim we need less govt is that undemocratic corporations swoop in to fill the vacuum.

The solution is to acknowledge the timeless wisdom of God and let God's master plan permeate each one of us. God's master plan is to evolve each and every one of us to ever higher plains of conciousness and awareness. I'm not being naive, I understand that this scenario is either not practical at this date or is not practical for all or both. That's not my problem. My problem is to understand God's master plan and live by it with or without formal institutionalized human governance.

Choco's picture
Choco
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

I don't look for Palin to be Pres. I do look for Republicans to possibly capture control of Congress in the mid-terms. Dems reversed nothing. They addressed nothing in the structures that are collapsing the economy including outsourcing and rising costs of for profit health care that are extractions from the production/distribution economy..

Service sectors are supported out of the productive sectors. Their costs should be minimalized .

Mid-terms will be a vote on the economy and Obama's incapacity to deal with it. If Dems show up at the polls, it will be out of fear of the Repugnants rather than an endorsement of the Dems.

The decline of the U.S. will continue after the mid-term elections regardless of the outcome..It will accelerate with a Republican victory.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote Paleo-con:

So... If having the current highly intellectual President and staff in office has been a disaster, and putting in less than intellectual people in office will be a disaster, what is the answer? Is there, perhaps, some measure other than IQ that would help predict a successful politician?

It's only been a disaster from YOUR perspective. Actually, "disaster" is a pretty strong word from someone who presumably supported George W. Really, though, the only bad thing about Obama is not his IQ but his apparent fear of conflict. Even when his outstretched hand was returned to him covered in Republican tooth prints, he failed to get angry. Instead of reading the writing on the wall of the Senate, he continued to try to build consensus with the people whose goal was his total failure so he ended up failing partially to satisfy both sides.

So, no, the answer is not to counter an intellectual liberal with a Republican knee-biter like Sarah Palin, though I'm not sure that won't be the ultimate result of the American political calculation. The answer, of course, is to seek out some real hard-nosed liberal sonofabitches who will fight when fought and not fold up like a cheap tent. Maybe when we liberals overcome our partially deserved reputation for wimpy-ness, we will get back some of the vote from those Americans who agree with us but just can't respect us.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 8:47 pm

Sorry, you won't find me defining Bush's term as anything less than a disaster either. True, Obama's administration is a disaster from my own perpective, but it is also a disaster from any objective perspective. If it could be called a success, I am sure the Democrats would have a good November, and the current candidates would be embracing the last two years instead of hiding from them.

Paleo-con
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote Paleo-con:

Sorry, you won't find me defining Bush's term as anything less than a disaster either. True, Obama's administration is a disaster from my own perpective, but it is also a disaster from any objective perspective. If it could be called a success, I am sure the Democrats would have a good November, and the current candidates would be embracing the last two years instead of hiding from them.

Now we're back to the weak-kneed liberal thing. Instead of trumpeting every accomplishment from the tops of mountains, as George W. did even with his failures, we mekely agree to disagree with the giant billboards that conservatives buy all over the country. That is not a responce, that is folding up. Democratic success, as a result, is not measured by the democrats but by their opponents who control the dialogue. The way the conservatives control the conversation IS brought up by liberals but it comes off as boo-hooing about the big bully republicans who they outnumber but can't seem to stand against.

If they really wanted to win, they would fight fire with fire. The republicans make up some crap about one of them and then they do the same until the republicans are calling for an honest debate. Then we can start over on an even playing field.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 8:47 pm

All the Democrats have to do is the weekend before the election run dark ads reminding the public what life was like under the Bush dictatorship.

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Even if we agreed that the Obama administration has not been a "success", I am curious how any act that followed the Bush clown car could have been universally considered successful. It is obvious that the right has done nothing but attempt to be a barrier to any success that might have been possible in the first place. I mean how do you walk in to the white house, deal with two wars, a trillion dollar defecit, double digit unemployment with over half a million jobs a month being lost and then convince the cause of the problems to see things your way? Hell, two weeks into the Obama administration they were already calling it the "Obama recession". Talk about fantasy land!

The last thing the republican party was willing to do is allow Obama to be successful. Their game plan was 100 years of republican rule, not making the democrats look good by comparison. I believe that if the money that was spent trying to bring down Obama were invested in trying to fix the problems, we wouldn't be so deep in sh*t and both sides would be taking less heat.

D_NATURED's picture
D_NATURED
Joined:
Oct. 20, 2010 8:47 pm

Obama is hardly a weak-kneed "liberal". He isn't a liberal at all. He governs way the right of moderate Republican Pres. Dwight Eisenhower.

Ike couldn't get nominated by either party today. He'd be considered too radical..Obsma wouldn't be nominated in Ike's day. He'd be considered a right wing nut.

Today, liberal Pres. FDR would be consigned to the looney bin as a left wing wacko.

The nation has swung so far to the right, it wouldn't recognize a traditional liberal if he wore a neon sign flashing Kucinich..

I don't expect a change of direction regardless of which wing of the Corporate Party gets elected. One may slow an economic/environmental collapse, the other may speed it up. Same end results. Whoopie! Time to celebrate nothing. on election night.

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm
Quote captbebops:

All the Democrats have to do is the weekend before the election run dark ads reminding the public what life was like under the Bush dictatorship.

I am just wondering what points they would bring up. That unemployment was half of what it is now? That the deficit was trillions less than it is now? That the war effort has grown larger? That Social Security recipients have never received a COLA under Obama? I could go on and on, so, would it really be in the Democrats best interest to compare their results over the last four years to life under the Republicans so close to an election?

I am not trying to be antagonistic; I am seriously curious what the Democrats might point to as being better than the bad old days under Bush. From what I read on the news, most Democrats are running away from the track record of the Obama administration years. What, specifically, did Bush do that Obama has not continued?

Paleo-con
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Well, Obama did give health ins. firms a $500 billion subsidy, tens of millions of new mandated customers and the ability to maintain collusion with one another in price setting, etc. As far as premiums go, the sky is still the limit. Bush didn't do that..

Other than that, not a whole lot has changed. Outsourcing remains national policy, the Patriot Act is intact, the wars are on-going, the military budget has been increased, banks are still receiving bonanzas from the Fed, Main St. is still seeing incomes decline, Bush's Head of the Fed has become Obama's Head of the Fed.

However, Bush didn't have flowery rhetoric and Obama does. That's the vast difference between the two.

The Dem wing of the Corporate Party really isn't much different than the Rep wing of the Corporate Party..They do seem to disagree on who can marry who, and that disagreement probably doesn't run very deep. It's good as a distracting sideshow to provide an illusion of difference..

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

The active words in my post were "Bush dictatorship". But the country is so dumbed down they apparently actually believe that somehow the Republicans can make things better. No, Republican rule will just mean the final act where they steal everything leaving the public in show wondering what just happened.

Anyone else catch the "60 Minutes" report on the "99ers" last night? That one hits close to home because it was filmed a mere 60 minutes from where I live. Steve Pelly at one point even called this period "The Great Recession." All these well educated professional people out of work or working at jobs that pay 1/3 or less than what they had.

The job of our representatives is to keep this country functional. I would say both parties have failed at that because they were only in power for their own self-interests not the publics.'

So what is it really going to take to change things?

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Capt. wrote:

So what is it really going to take to change things?

poly replies: Probably the same thing it took in Chile and Argentina when they faced the same problem. Mass destitution. Video - the rise and fall of neo-liberalism in Argentina in 12 parts..:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rH6_i8zuffs

Retired Monk - "Ideology is a disease"

polycarp2
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

I think Poly is a bit paranoid, but not wrong in his sense of what needs to be done. I think Obama is a better intended and better strategic player than he allows. He told us he wanted a united America, and he tried. Is it his failure that the GOP chose the road of blind negativity?

I am also not convinced that bold moves against either Wall St. or the Pentagon would have been more than a suicide act for our entertainment. The same goes for taking on the big entitlement parasites because they have a ton of cash.

The Supremes sabotage democracy while the Senate snuffs legislation. The media is stacked with negativity and actively supports and spreads GOP lies. When one tries to explain reality, its complexity and ambiguity gets swamped with emotions and demonizing. The Empire of Illusion gets prime time while the Dems get C-Span3.

Our historical comparisons are not equal. FDR did not have an Empire or much of a Pentagon. He had Wall St., but not a lot of direct sucking of the government treasury compared to today's Piratefest.

While far from perfect, I am willing to give Obama's first quarter a pass on learning and process. I want the coaches to get busy on the gameplan revisions with lots of film study. Establishing the bad behavior of the GOP instead of rhetoric about what we fear they might do with power ought to be close to the same. They tell us they have nothing new and want us to believe that their crack will get us high instead of making us sick again.

Yes, we need more healing than a bipartisan prayer service for faith healing. Rehab involves getting at what caused the problem, not just swearing never to hit the pipe again. The C St. way is never going to work.

DRC's picture
DRC
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Poly, that is a good video and I believe still available as one file on Google Video. There was a really good report years ago on Free Speech TV but I haven't been able to find it since. That was the report that woke me up to Argentina and it may well have been a rerun of a Frontline report (which I can't find even on that site).

In Argentina they confiscated the 401Ks and IRAs. There has been rumblings of that happening here. Ya think that might actually get people into the streets? The local police, government and military have been training for that all along. Alan Watt, a Canadian conspiracy guy as a PDF from the UK military that outlines such a plan and when they expect the public to riot. Bet there is a US document too and most likely classified.

The "60 Minutes" report:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/10/21/60minutes/main6978943.shtml

A lot of these people seem depressed. They should be VERY angry instead.

captbebops's picture
captbebops
Joined:
Jul. 31, 2007 4:01 pm

Currently Chatting

Powered by Pressflow, an open source content management system