Tea Party Terrorists & Code Pinkos

Just a quick update on American Politics:

If you are anti-war you are a "pinko" and if you are anti-taxes you are a "terrorist."

Just so we are all perfectly clear...

Why Does Thou Bloggist So?

I’m The Mad Hatter, as I explained in a previous post, and this is free-flowing cognitive-internet instant-publishing a.k.a. “blogging for nothing.”

For those of you who are highly against internet / blogger-net advertising let me tell you a little story:

I once wrote more than one very thought-out essays that were duplicated from my own websites and posted elsewhere on the web with no authorship included, and of course ads all over it.

I gave up on this notion of “internet purity” on that day.

Anything and everything you post on the internet you completely lose the rights to, end of story.

As long as I don’t have the rights to it I guess it really doesn’t matter if I fully “monetize” all my three-platform blogging. So far it’s been two out of three and I don’t really want to put ads on WordPress. I like the site just like that, but in all reality: “If you are not making at least some amount of money on this post you are being screwed.” That is, if you put a piece with any amount of work to it that is only backed by your personal credibility.

I had mixed feelings about being “word-jacked” at the time, and I still do.

I have spoken of a sense of “duality” about myself before. This whole issue expresses it well.

Part of me was angry, nobody will ever read something else of mine if they wanted to and only saw the duplicate, and the other part of me was pleased.

I am the “most imitated.”

Imitation is the highest of flattery.

Thank you, random internet spam-bot / scammer, you promoted my analytical essay on society and politics to a website that most likely obtains far greater hits than I do.

Yay!

As to another topic, the topic in question here:

Why does Eric blog, anyway?

Surprisingly, I’m sure, it’s a dual-effort.

One part of me is on here to “just have fun” as my About describes on Wordpress.

The other part of is sitting around going: “Hey! I have rarely spoken point of view and the inside-line on certain elements of hearsay and what have you. I gotta get out the word!”

An example?

The Afghanistan War should have been handled like a police action from the beginning and should have been out within a years time, of course not invading Iraq in the first place. What we have now is this term “quagmire” I am sure we are familiar with by now.

The Politics of War has to stop. The Politics of War-for-Profit might have taken a heavy blow with the absence of Republican John McCain in The White House and the re-naming of Blackwater to “Xe” but the peril remains in continuing to feed to war machine.

Something like that probably.

Another example?

Maybe my anecdotal tale of Lockheed-Martin military bunkers and firefighters and explosives and wildfires.

I’m not saying: “I rule.”

I’m saying: “Somehow I don‘t totally suck.”

I have been going through here and “enhancing” my blog-posts. Not taking things out, that’s not it. I have deleted one post, because I was so vague it was upsetting to me to actually read it. It was one of the first posts I did. I like to add links, correct typos / bad grammar o’ mine, rambling sentences, and images / video.

I would like to point out to fellow blogger that we have a problem here: Nobody, and I mean nobody, goes backwards on the blogs. (I mean even I forget to go backwards and I love blogs!) It’s all running through the cyber-forest at top speed. It’s impossible to write nothing but trying-to-be-impressive-learning-stuff when something random you posted is just so damn interesting to people and nobody reads the items more to the nature of my thoughts on overseas conflicts. That’s my point, the credibility has to come first here in my case. Unfortunately so, since I am trying to expose false-credibility and bad business practices.

There are a rare pack led by Ezra Klein that have obtained a high level of credibility by value of their work alone, but I present to you that these people may be some of the great minds of our times. The bar is far too high.

I have the outmost respect for Ezra Klein and his work. I have only neglected to “blogroll him” because of sheer laziness. His work in researching the health care bills should not be overlooked.

--

I am the soothsayer of the internet!

I spoke of “astroturfing” prior to Nancy Pelosi and prior to Keith Olberman attaching it in front of every word he says.

I didn’t say “astroturfing” but I couldn’t remember that term or the book in which I had read it before, so whatever.

But hey!

I’m running Congress from my laptop over here! Does anybody know this!?!

Now you do!

I’m totally convinced that (not really) that major figures across the nation in media and politics are reading this blog on a regular basis!

You should too!

I hold the Liberal Movement is in palm, where I go they go.

They back me about Fox.

They back about astroturfing.

Before they go there, I have to go there first.

You know what I mean?

The “trend-setters” be known by their own arrogant volition.

--

It’s writing practice. I have a few novels on the back-burner. When I just completely stop blogging for awhile it’s probably because I am writing a lot.

Those pieces of writing I posted on Open Salon are what I call: “dead ends.”

That’s the “real-life” response when I am asked this question.

I am just practicing my writing and at first everything went online and now if I do something really good I probably shouldn’t post it and just hang on to it.

Some pf the stuff I am working on behind the scenes is that which is designed to be very “internet-draft” but still well composed and substantial.

I saw an ad in Harper’s Magazine that caught my eye and I apply the concept to blogging rather than news magazines:

“100% Content Free”

How much of blogging is just “content over substance” and do we give proper regard to those who have substance?
I merely pose the question without pointing any fingers or giving any examples of low-credibility internet publishing.

I’ve always invited people to “fact check me” as Monique C. did when I made the declarative statement that “tea party people did not vote in 2008.”

I believe I still have neglected to reply due to internet-swamping but she was right to point out that I have no statistics.

I don’t. I also say in the body of the blog where I am basing it off of though: people who are either blogging under their own credibility on the right wing or those who espouse on open forums like talk radio / internet domains.

So it is just an assertion of mine and she was right to point out that I probably should have just said upfront that I have no figures or numbers of any kind to back it up, it’s complete web-punditry.

--

I dunno. I proposed a health care bill over here … I mean, I feel like writing one out just so people can see it’s not magic fairies from pixie-land. It’s called “legislation,” and for some strange reason I can read it.

Strange places this blogging journey is taking me.

Editorializing … everything!

Come Home, America

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. knew well of what he spoke when he addressed a meeting of Clergy and Laity Concerned at Riverside Church in New York City on April 4, 1967, in regards to the Vietnam Conflict:

“Come home, America.”

In Harper’s Magazine, Andrew J. Bacevich made the connection between Dr. King’s words and the current war in Afghanistan. I wholeheartedly agree, and would press further this point by taking a look at the heading-titles from the speech itself:

1. “The Importance of Vietnam [Afghanistan]”

I believe it well past the point in terms of the expenditure of American Treasure to the nation of Afghanistan to set a clear withdrawal strategy, and hold to it.

2. “Strange Liberators”

We are not the nation to spread liberty and justice for all across the Mid-East. Whatever preconceptions one may have, the fact remains that stabilization efforts that operate outside U.S. Military influence remained intact while U.S. facilities are destroyed and rebuilt in a constant cycle in Afghanistan.

3. “This Madness Must Cease”

We cannot afford to throw lives and money into a nation with no clear estimation on how long it will take to achieve this lofty goal of terrorist safe-bed being prevented from being formed. The bottom line is we are pointlessly infrastructure-building and policing Afghanistan, and this madness must cease. Sooner rather than later.

4. “Protesting The War”

At this stage, in November of 2009, I do not believe there is a valid anti-war protest platform to take. President Obama is weighing the decisions carefully. However, should his decision-to-come be something to nature of huge troop increases with no time line for withdrawal I believe the voice of the people should be known.

5. “The People Are Important”

The people of Afghanistan are who are important in this issue. The constant fighting takes more and more innocent lives every day. Without a time line and an attainable mission-statement the occupation of Afghanistan is nothing but a quagmire. A quagmire that not only costs American lives but the lives of those caught in the cross-fire.

--

If truly we seek to build up nations that have systemic problems that may effect our national security agenda then, as Bacevich reminded us, then the nation of Mexico would be of primary interest to those in Washington D.C.

The U.S. could take part in other “humanitarian invasions” under these same circumstances.

The entire concept that we can “fix” another nation with increased troops and increased involvement is absurd.

Andrew J. Bacevich -

“Fixing Afghanistan is both unnecessary and impossible. Rather, we should be erecting and maintaining a robust defense.”

I find it rare to find people willing to make the pro-defensive military argument. I applaud Bacevich for this recent article in Harper’s. Worthy of your attention, to be sure.

George Carlin Was Pure Genius

I was feeling in the the foulest of foul moods, so I decided to watch some comedy clips on everyone's favorite time-suck: YouTube.

 

 

I just recently watched Bill Maher's "Religulous" for the first time. I found the movie very entertaining and very informative.

But I also found it somewhat like watching the internet-sensation "Zeitgeist" more than anything else in terms of the research and review of all perspectives toward biblical history and human history.

But you really got to talk to, or read the books of, people who have studied this to death because (1) I'm not an expert and (2) I don't want to go there.

 

 

In the interest of full disclosure: I am one of those people who doesn't know when or how to shut up.

 

 

 

"Hey! Hey! Hey! Time for a few fart jokes!"

 

 

 

 

 

R.I.P. Harold Pinter

“The invasion of Iraq was a bandit act, an act of blatant state terrorism, demonstrating absolute contempt for the concept of international law,” Pinter said in his Nobel lecture, which he recorded rather than traveling to Stockholm.
“How many people do you have to kill before you qualify to be described as a mass murderer and a war criminal? One hundred thousand?” Harold asked, in a hoarse voice.

http://www.alan.com/2008/12/27/rip-harold-pinter-did-he-hate-who-we-are-or-what-we-did/

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081225/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_obit_pinter

One more great man has passed on. We hardly knew ye Harold. Let your words and your writings live on by the generations behind you.

Politics in Pictures

Too Much For One President?

Under my understanding of American civics current President Obama is by no means taking on more than is possibly sustainable, in terms of policy changes and economic recovery efforts.

In fact in my estimation he has, in regards to national security and financial stability, done exactly what was and is needed to ensure success in our efforts to revive this bankrupt economy.

The issue of undertaking 'too much' comes primarily from the right wing. Though others may question the wisdom of taking on so many issues at once as wise it is exclusively the right wing that declares this unsound policy.

The concept of 'political capital' is primary in understanding the recent actions of President Obama in his first two months in office. Political capital does not remain in any politician’s favor for long.

The willingness to address major issues like Embryonic Stem Cell Research, Enhanced Interrogation and vigorous fiscal stimulus only prove to those who grasp civics that the President intends in make good on the many campaign promises made to voters like myself.

While many more issues abound, and ultimately I am one who says that Obama is not doing enough, the raw fact remains that the current administration is showing a genuine interest in fulfilling the will of the people beyond simply nationalist fever or populist outrage but to rather try and reach attainable goals in our time.

Eric Lightborn

http://americapress.wordpress.com/

March 29th 2009

The R-Word

Recession; In the span of no more a few months the word is now ‘fair game’ in America.

An American Recession, no less. After only a handful months these two words can be freely connected in advertisements and in public media formats.

This after a time in which any Democrat or liberal spoke of a coming recession they were dismissed as ‘kooks’ and ‘doomsayers.’

I was one of those ’doomsayers.’ And I was right. 

While the prevailing wisdom is to downplay a sick economy and a weak dollar I do not believe this to be the correct course of action.

If the economy is sick, we should know about it.

If the dollar is about to drop, we should know about it.

If a stock is about to devalue, we should know about it.

And on, and on.

I believe that one of the reasons we have suffered this recession is due to this very mentality combining with the ‘greed is good’ mentality.

A broadcaster, a stock quote broker, a banker or an economic journalist has no benefit to being truthful to their audience and every benefit to simply remaining mute. Or worse yet, talking up a business, stock or concept that they know to be unsound.

The idea that saying into a camera or many media outlet the raw truth of the economy as being a detriment to that economy is false.

The investors and consumers need to be able to make informed decisions. If those trusted to give honest and credible advise are proven to simply communicate in a ’one answer only’ situation then the reality of market hazards remain the sole property of those already succeeding in market endeavors.

Leaving us, the common people, out in the rain.

Caps-Lock Engaged America

“populist outcry”

“socialist agenda”

“economic outrage”

We are hear these words connected in the Big Buzz of the Media, lately.

We live in a state of economic chaos. Right now, today.

As an internet-blogger I call this state we exist in “Caps-Lock Engaged America.”

My need to translate everything into internet terminology is no doubt why I prefer this way of describing the current state of affairs in America.

These pundits and talk show hosts of the right wing seek to drum up fear in the public, nothing more.

In the absence of logical arguments they simply wish their audiences to suspend all logic and proceed to believe in conspiracies.

The left wing is busying itself with AIG-Hate while shunning these new Populists as madmen and radicals. We are neither.

These are the very same kind of ‘madmen’ and ‘radicals’ who helped to form the Democratic Party of our day, but I digress.

There is no shame in being upset. But direct your anger.

President George W. Bush spent this country broke as if it was his personal play-thing to abuse and mistreat as he would.

One of the primary functions of a President of the United States of America is to be a Steward of the American Economy.

The previous President not only failed in this, he failed so miserably that his actions in this area specifically are in fact criminal.

President Bush had an obligation to use his position to inform America of the coming recession. Yet he joined in the chorus of conservatives who claimed all was well in the economic seas.

The ’proper’ blame doesn’t stop there.

The major leaders of financial institutions, those chairing relevant boards and countless figures in the media all failed in this exact same respect.

These individuals had a duty to the American public to inform them of an impending crisis that would directly effect their home life and personal budget.

These individuals knowingly withheld information from investors and consumers in a clear effort to destroy any chances we had at mitigating the coming storm.

Some moved funds into bonds instead of stocks. Some transferred funds into foreign currencies. Some bought precious metal portfolios.

But many more simply did not know or would not listen to those like myself who warned of this coming American Recession.

Safe Since 9/11?

President Bush wishes to express to the people of America that he has kept our nation safe since September 11th 2001 by means of his administration’s Middle-Eastern foreign policy.

It is true that this nation has not suffered any such tragedies in the past seven years and unfair to not recognize that President Bush has held our national security in high regard after the 2001 attack.

The question of his of readiness to assume the responsibility from the out-going Clinton administration in terms of national security and properly assimilating the depth of the known threats to American soil in 2000, is another issue. It is entirely possible and within reason that the Clinton administration failed in their presentation of relevant security matters and did not properly convey the gravity of said intelligence.

The responsibility to prevent an attack on America, if at all possible, still falls under the purview of the Executive Branch even in cases of possible faulty intelligence or possible inadequate representation of facts by previous administrations.

Prior to the 2001 tragedy in New York City often termed ‘9/11’ in mass media we had not suffered an attack to our mainland from a foreign source in more than one-hundred years.

Ultimately, the President is the President in-full from day one and is responsible for that day and every to come until out of office to the safety and prosperity of the American people.

Yet another issue to weigh is the effect of the Bush foreign policy agenda as a whole against the issues of the security of our national allies such as Israel, India and the European nations. The common interest of the American people always extends to their national allies in so far as the interests of commerce and mutual security.

While it is possible the Bush Doctrine may indeed provide the critical and necessary elements of effective national security that our nation must maintain, it is a possible outcome that continued use of this style of foreign policy in future administrations could cause permanent damage to our allies and thus effect the strength of the nation as a whole.

The issue of the responsibility of any current President in national security affairs extends beyond simply guarding against possible foreign attacks but also to guarding against national market failures and against stagnation in our legislature.

Economic strength provides higher quality intelligence services and personnel staying within American interests. Inaction in the branches of our government during crisis or outcry sends a message of instability to foreign adversaries who seek to claim us a nation without legitimacy and without honor.

The Bush White House has not upheld the role of economic steward nor has President Bush personally been a vigorous advocate of significant legislation, with the exception of the credit market bail out totaling $700 billion and the No Child Left Behind Act.

President Bush has taken more total vacation time and made less total vetoes than any President of recent decades. In a televised interview aired tonight he explained that he was concerned about the auto industry crisis but took no significant stance on the proposed bail out negotiations.

Even a lame-duck President holds the power of office and working American families that were promised pensions and benefits under the major American automakers could face an employer contract-breach should the chief legislator continue to straddle the issue.

The House of Representatives and The Senate, to date, have also not upheld their role as intelligent regulators and legislators of our vital markets and industries. Congress is also not without blame in allowing a single branch to become unjustly-powerful in our system of checks and balances between the Three Branches of American government.

Eric Lightborn
http://americapress.wordpress.com
December 18th, 2008