There's not a lot of time left, so let’s go for the carotid on a couple of major political points that could benefit from a little ‘judo.’
== Republicans denouncing the subornation ==
Remember Madison Cawthorn, the rising young Republican star Congressmember, who was suddenly dumped by the GOP, for revealing ‘orgies’ amid upper ranks of the party? That huge over-reaction - destroying him for offhand (and likely stoned) remarks on shock radio - reflected almost-certain desperation to silence truth; otherwise he'd a got a slap on the wrist.
But was it true? I've long posited that the behavior of so many top GOPpers – e.g. Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz – can only be explained by blackmail. Mere corruption is insufficient, because any merely-corrupt official can say ‘that’s enough bribery for this year; if I keep saying more shit, I’ll look suspicious or insane.’
Blackmail, on the other hand, is insatiable. You simply keep doing whatever the blackmailer demands, even if it makes you look like an idiot, or hypocrite, or both, as in the multiple times when Graham tried to say "I'm done with Trump!" hoping that it would end his ongoing humiliation... followed the next day by utter groveling.
I mean, do you have an even remotely plausible alternate theory?
This isn't new. Russian secret services have been expert at ‘honeypot traps’ ever since the czars. Look up the Moscow US embassy Marine guards (1980s) as just one example.
Seriously read this. It’s not getting the attention it deserves and this fellow is at least partially a hero. Or watch this.
== It’s the Republican defectors who will make the biggest difference, stupid ==
Above, I showed how an honest and decent conservative Congressmember has stepped up to denounce the blackmail subornation of his party. Others recently used insane rhetoric and mad conspiracy theories about hurricanes as their own excuse to step up and partially reject the madness.
Not as much courage as we need from them. But we'll take what we can get.
Then of course there's the long list of former Trump officials – his ‘adults in the room’ during Trump v1.0 – who have nearly all denounced him. From Tillerson & McMaster to Kames Mattis and John Kelly, to even far-right schmucks like John Bolton and Bill Barr. As many as a hundred have said "even I can't stomach the insanity and treason."
To which Tump's answer is that in Trump2.0 there will be NO adults in the room. Total brownshirt time.
Which is why I urge the zillionaire oligarchs, murder sheiks and "ex" commissars who have pulled Trump's puppet strings for decades to watch the movie Cabaret, especially the last 5 minutes. Because if he does get back into office on a MAGA sig-heil-wave, none of those masters will ever again ‘control him.’ Not with blackmail or anything else.
In fact, you oligarchs and Kremlin guys need yet another film... watch Angela Lansbury’s chilling soliloquy near the end of The Manchurian Candidate to see what Don will likely do to his former masters, once the strings are cut.
But let’s add yet more pertinent movie overlaps! This interview with former Trump Communications Director Scaramucci is interesting. “Scaramucci on Trump: "He's going to lose because he's getting boring."
Dig a little, and you'll see that the Mooch is describing the "Howard Beale Scenario." (Watch the last 10' of Network and get truly scared!)
Still, the part of his interview that I resent - because if it does happen, Mooch will get all the prediction points - is when he gives 40% that odds ol' Two Scoops won't even make it to the election or inauguration.
While I was there lots earlier - with lower odds - I hedged it with the election that actually matters - the Electoral College. Which is where the fix may be in.
== It’s the Electoral College, dummy ==
Okay, three big points about the Electoral College, America’s weird (insane) but unchangeable Constitutionally gerrymandered gimmick favoring Red America.
Make that four points. The first? Um why are there two Dakotas? And shouldn’t just one state – Ida-Wyo-Mont – span the northern Rockies?
But no, let’s get practical. The core aim of the Trumpists has been openly declared… for GOP governors and others in some Harris-won states to refuse to certify enough electors, so that the count for president will be invalid, so that the choice will be ‘thrown to the House.’ Hence, even if Dems win a sweeping, crushing victory in November, you might still see Trump get in!
Because at that stage - in another insanely dumb Constitutional provision - the House votes by delegations – one vote per – and Republicans have 26 delegations vs 24 for dems.
Now, that nightmare assumes there won’t be brave and patriotic Republican Congresswomen or men in some of those reddish delegations, who decide to put country first, the way Alexander Hamilton (bravely) swung the 1800 election to Jefferson, instead of Aaron Burr. That might happen.
Or else some of YOU will be heroes who help swing just one or two of those delegations blue. In some cases it could come down to just one Congressional race. Look around. There may be some tight races you can help with. And that's where $100 could make a lot more difference than donating to Kamala.
== More Electoral College partial fixes within reach! ==
Okay, two more. I have elsewhere ruminated on the Wyoming Rule. If the dems get real power in Congress, they should pass it, so that all Americans get at least roughly equal representation in the lower house, as was intended. And if that happens, not only will blue states get more representation in the larger (~560 members) House, but the coloration of the Electoral College will change forever.
Only let’s swing to another of my proposals, One which no one else has broached, but that could (well, maybe) make a real difference this year.
In Polemical Judo I mentioned a possible action by one hyper rich person (say a Mark Cuban?) A bold yet totally legal move that could (possibly) get us past whatever tricks the Project 2025 schemers have in mind, to screw up certifications and throw it to the House.
Briefly: rent a whole mountaintop luxury hotel with minimal - highly vetted - staff. Then announce that for two weeks ...
"Only certified Electors may come as guests. Upon arrival from their home states, they can just stroll and enjoy the views and meals and discuss with each other anything they like. Or else they could - at their own volition - convene the first actual Electoral College in U.S. history. As would be their prerogative! And this year, such a gathering just might be one more bulwark against shenanigens."
Again, no coercion or persuasion. Just show up by individual choice, eat, stroll and chat with others who just happen to be there at the same time, without any of those others being anyone but fellow electors (and minimal staff of trusted cooks). And if you just happen to decide to convene a meeting - formal or informal - well…
Suppose this happened. Watch how quickly the stalling states would rush to certify!
Though note. No matter how carefully Trumpists have ensured the GOP elector slates are party hacks – and most dem electors would likely be loyalists as well – some would likely talk it over, suddenly moved by the genuine (not ceremonial) power in their hands.
Moreover, as one of the candidates (you-know-who) fulminates volcanically against this "trickery!!" just enough of them might listen to their conscience and reason…
… and act to save the Republic.
318 comments:
1 – 200 of 318 Newer› Newest»Dr Brin in the main post:
Okay, three big points about the Electoral College, America’s weird (insane) but unchangeable Constitutionally gerrymandered gimmick favoring Red America.
The thing is, I don't think the electoral college as a concept necessarily favors Red America. The problem is with the winner-take-all system that all but two states use to determine their slate of electors. If states allocated their electoral votes more or less proportionally to the popular vote within the state, then the overall electoral vote would more closely align with the national popular vote.
I sometimes want to say "Scrap your old Constitution and write a new one."
But maybe you need a second Trump presidency and a decade of authoritarianism or two to come to the same conclusion.
proportional allocation PLUS the Wyoming Rule would make it nearly impossible for electoral outcomes to vary much from the popular vote. A very different supreme court might agree that Congress can impose BOTH! But the second one is a slam dunk IF the dems get a major victory this round.
"I sometimes want to say "Scrap your old Constitution and write a new one."
We don't dare. It's the one thing keeping America... and the necessary American Pax... even existing at all.
The other solution. Union with Canada would add enough blue states to end this. The selfish buggers won't agree, though.
Der Oger:
"Scrap your old Constitution and write a new one."
For a while, Republicans had almost enough state legislatures to force the issue. I guarantee you would not be happy with the Constitution that they would adopt.
As Cawthorn was unfortunately representing the district my home town is in, I kept track of him a bit more than most out of district folk. It was my impression that while the orgies comment certainly helped with this, the reason he lost was that he managed to tick off all the local R powers-that-be in his district and all such at the NC state level. He and his office also reportedly did a lousy job doing the minutiae of representing his constituents for things like helping cut through red tape and with problems with government agencies and the like, as they were explicitly only interested in his national profile. So he was faced with a primary candidate that had the backing of every significant local/state R, and he was himself too dumb to come even close to putting together a good team of his own to run his campaign against such.
Re: Union with Canada
We love you like brothers, but you do frighten us from time to time. My grandad referred to you as the 'excited states'.
We won the 1812 war to not be part of the USA. We spend very little on military or war which allows us to have comprehensive medicare and social programs. As the world warms Canada might expand from a 300 mile wide strip of civilization …. Right to the North Pole.
When your guy started in about immigrants hunting cats and dogs and geese and never was toasted by his people I realized that none of his folks care one iota about what he says or does.
The cult leader like Jim jones could ask his followers to drink cyanide kool aid and some of them likely would.
We in Canada are glad we can just watch the show down there and hunker down to stay clear of the meyhem.
"We in Canada are glad we can just watch the show down there and hunker down"
Then you haven't heard some Americans talk about what would happen if there were a serious disagreement about, say, oil sales.
Remember, it's the longest UNDEFENDED border in the world.
Pappenheimer
P.S. I think this would the most stupid thing - besides engaging in an actual internal civil war - that the USA could do, but I can easily imagine some P2025 planners looking at the military budget and thinking, "Well, it's just sitting there," though they'd probably invade one or 2 Mexicos first and get bogged down there.
Re: constitutional convention...
Gotta echo Larry on this one.
We'd best add 1 or 2 more blue states, or insisting on proportional representation, before contemplating such an event. Currently, we'd be looking at a reset to 1860.
Pappenheimer
P.S. Also - in most envisioned unions with Canada, doesn't Canada's population immediately get outnumbered by previous Americans? Moose and whiskey jacks don't vote - though I concede that the median whiskey jack voter may be smarter than the median MAGA voter.
Pappenheimer:
Re: constitutional convention...Currently, we'd be looking at a reset to 1860.
I think it would be worse than that. Article I would surely state in so many words that the United States is a Christian nation. Furthermore, I think all 50 states would vote to ratify that. Remember, almost every politician including Hillary Clinton thought that voting against the Iraq war would be political suicide. I can't imagine any political officeholder voting against Jesus.
in most envisioned unions with Canada, doesn't Canada's population immediately get outnumbered by previous Americans? Moose and whiskey jacks don't vote
Ah, but that's the flipside of the Republican strength today. Land votes, in the sense that a Constitutional Convention needs to be ratified by 3/4 of states, not by a popular vote. If 10 new provinces were to join the union, the blue team would probably see a net gain of 8 (Alberta being Canadian Trump country).
BTW, someone must be using the visi-sonor again, because I'm beginning to despair of losing both the presidency and the Senate. Only comedian and radio host Hal Sparks keeps me from complete resignation.
I learned a new word: Sanewashing, making the biggest lunatic on stage look like he isn 't out of his mind by cherry-picking what gets amplified by the media.
https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2024/10/08/media-sanewashing-trump-voters-misinformation-election
Paul SB
"We can just watch the neighbor's house burn without considering that it might spread to our own." Just sayin'
Paul, I think Paul Krugman invented that term, and he was describing his own newspaper, the New York Times.
As a Canadian - I think joining the Union would be good for both countries,
As Dr. B. points out, adding 10% of population to help balance out the crazy would help right the US ship (5+ states, 40 congresscritters, 10 senators and a bunch of electoral votes) ... I think that harkening back to some of the "Manifest Destiny" of yore - real "making america great again" would heal some of the MAGA crazyiness as well.
For Canada, being part of a serious country whose decisions actaully matter might help offset some of the shit like the first post above. Sorry @Unknown, but "we spend very little on military or war" translates into English as "We rely on the US, and the other Serious countries in NATO, and other Serious democracies like Israel and Taiwan to defend liberty, so we don't have to" ... that's not clever, its just corrupt.
And in answer to the second half of that comment "which allows us to have comprehensive medicare and social programs." ... no. what allows us to have comprehensive medicare and social programs is a decent / growing economy. And having full access to US internal market dynamism would provide economic growth that would more than offset what we'd be spending on defense.
...
But the whole thing is a non-starter anyway. No one in their right mind would want to join a country where 1/3rd of the government (And a 1/3rd that has an effective veto on the other 2/3rds) is controlled 6-3 by a corrupt ball of crazy. So unless the deal involved closing down SCOTUS and starting fresh with people actually selected based on merit, rather than on how well they kowtowed to Orange Crush + the Federalist Society, can't see it happening.
There are warts in the US Constitution ... yes ... but there's also a great deal of poetry. There's a reason that people can swear an oath to it with a straight face (and maybe even with a tear in their eyes).
The issue is that SCOTUS, as currently constituted is working hard to write out all the poetry, and amplify all the warts.
Unknown you do not sound as nice as a Canadian. The schaedenfreude is dumb because, unlike the Handmaid's Tale, you fate is tied to Pax Americana.
Thanks c-plus. There are ways to fix so many USA problems and health care will be addressed by me, next month. But the secret sauce is a major victory November 5.
OH! As a Californian (exactly the same population as Canada) I don't get Unknown's privilege to snarl "'C'est absolutement foux!" at the least-bad and most-good 'empire' the world ever saw. We are stuck in the Union and must fight for its sanity from within.
("California uber alles?" - the Dead Kennedys)
"Well, it's just sitting there," is why Trump wanted Greenland... and was too dumb to realize he could not 'buy' it from Denmark, but COULD have bribed a voting majority of 40,000 native Greenlanders and it would have happened. Idiot.
there's only so much damage gerry-mandering can do. You're talking about adding 40 million voters who would break at least 67/33 Democrat.
https://sparkadvocacy.ca/insights/2024/01/trump-would-lose-canada-but-not-by-as-much-as-you-might-think
(and those figures were from shortly before Biden bowed out.
A quick search didn't turn up a "who would you vote for" on harris by a pollster I recognized ... this abacus survey but showed she's at +27 positive (vs -12 negative for Biden and -37 negative for Trump)
https://abacusdata.ca/us-politics-presidential-election-harris-trump/
Polls in Alberta in Biden-Trump race were 58% Biden, 42 % Trump ... so yeah, they might elect a Republican like Liz Cheyney or Murkowski or something, or a conservative democrat. But they're hardly a "Red" state. Just as close as Canada can get to one.
I didn't read his "glad we can just watch the show" comment as saying he's glad the show is happening .... just that he's glad the show is not happening to him.
Though as Papenhiem has commented, if Trump wins .... There was a Doonesbury comic back in the 80s where a US general was proposing to invade Belgium ... it was a joke back then, but Trump II, it might be a lot less funny https://www.gocomics.com/doonesbury/1985/01/13
We (and the rest of the free world, frankly) wish you the best of luck pulling America back from the abyss. Sadly, our hopes and prayers is really all we can contribute. Much though I'd like to donate to Harris ... I wouldn't want Americans bribing Canadian political parties to get the results they'd like in one of our elections, and we owe you the same courtesy!
During the short period when rumpT was in office and blithering about Greenland, I tried to explain to a born-again co worker why the Greenland deal was not going to happen. (I even admitted that acquiring the place while AGW is progressing was a potential bonanza over the long run). She had unfailing faith that even if it didn't, there was some deeper plan behind the plan. TCFG is, indeed, a religion-blinded person's idea of a saviour.
What I hadn't realized during his reign was that his 'let's nuke the hurricane*' idea was broached multiple times at staff meetings....alamak!
*there's a movie idea here, isn't there, about a radioactive hurricane spawning tornadoes (as even normal hurricanes do) filled with mutant radioactive sharks, isn't there?
There are many terms I have learned in the Era of the Orange Ass that I would rather not have needed to. Autogolpe, sanewashing, hydroxychloriquine, R0...
Pappenheimer
P.S. 'Bribing 40000 Greenlanders', hah. He'd have needed to get a bill appropriating money for that through Congress; A house led by Democrats would refuse on geopolitical grounds and a GQP house would only have voted for funds to invade and occupy. The odds of him liquidating enough of his own funds to do the job range between fat and slim.
Anyone wishing us to write a new constitution to cope with failings in our current one is essentially wishing we'd start a hot phase of our civil war. If that ever happens, it WILL spill across any damn border we feel like crossing for any damn reason. Our neighbors better have a lot of fire retardant on hand. Maybe someone could slip some 'mellow out' drugs into the canadian bacon we import. Or beer. Something!
So 'Just Say No' to constitutional conventions.
As for nuking hurricanes, that WOULD be something to see, would it not? 8)
Only my fellow Americans would think that was a good idea, but just IMAGINE how many would watch on TV! (I gotta wonder just how many red states we could contaminate.)
@Dr. Brin, Larry Hart & Others: Got it. Americas crisis cannot be solved in that way today. It requires a major cultural shift that are usually preceded by unpleasant and interesting times.
@Canada Joining: The question is If that would bring on this change in the long run, or if Canada became "Americanized" in a decade or two enough that we are back to square one
I wanted to include this in the previous discussion, but it applies here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNnjqsAbYoU&t=3s
I'm sure who I have the lowest option of, the "protest" voters who would bring about the worst possible outcomes for the causes they claim to care about so passionately, the people who back Trump because of his cruelty, or the people willing to deliberately look away from the cruelty because of tax cut/ more conservative judges.
Trump is obviously deteriorating mentally. I suspect that if the GOP manages a win, they will invoke 25A before the end of 2025. Vance of course will give him a blanket pardon. Maybe some of the more rabid cult followers would raise a stink, but we all remember what happened to the original Brownshirts.
Concerning "sane washing" I saw a screen shot that perfectly summarized it- one NYT headline saying that Harris was "bobbing and weaving" in response to questions, but Trump's comments about immigrants having "bad genes" was merely him "demonstrating a long held fascination with genetics". It's Les Moonves all over again, but a Trump sequel will not be good for CBS or the rest of the MSM.
"Americas crisis cannot be solved in that way today. It requires a major cultural shift that are usually preceded by unpleasant and interesting times."
Unfortunately yes. We've got 2 big cultural shifts going: 1) the changing racial/ethnic demographics the are eroding the majority White people have had since the republic was founded, and 2) the fact that women are no longer obligated to be economically dependent on a man. Both are producing very ugly backlashes. I'm fully expecting to see a 1968 sequel.
SpaceX have just caught themselves a Starship booster stage.
Flypusher:
the "protest" voters who would bring about the worst possible outcomes for the causes they claim to care about so passionately, the people who back Trump because of his cruelty, or the people willing to deliberately look away from the cruelty because of tax cut/ more conservative judges.
Wow. Add in "The people who prefer the fantasy world Trump spins for them over reality," and I think you've described 100% of Trump voters.
The Enlightenment is going interplanetary. No wonder the oligarchs are making one last desperate putsch.
The only way I'll ever not despise Elon Musk at this point is if he turns around and kills the emperor the way Darth Vader did.
Thought about this last night. Maybe the reason for the Fermi Paradox is that advanced civilizations all reach a point where they supplant their work forces with AI and robots, making their entire populations obsolete.
But it's the Endarkenment oligarchs who are trying to go interplanetary. I wish they'd just go already. If they want to live on Mars, what's the point of destroying the rest of us first?
Flypusher:
We've got 2 big cultural shifts going: 1) the changing racial/ethnic demographics the are eroding the majority White people have had since the republic was founded, and 2) the fact that women are no longer obligated to be economically dependent on a man.
"There's two kinds of people in the world..."
Maybe it's because I grew up with the Jewish sense of not fully belonging, and because I never felt entitled to the favors of any girl or woman I found attractive, but neither of those possibilities ever bothered me or even felt wrong.
I'm fully expecting to see a 1968 sequel.
Trying to find an "At least that would contain..." silver lining to that scenario, but all I've got is the episodes of Batman and Star Trek with Yvonne Craig. I take my meager consolations when I can.
'Bribing 40000 Greenlanders', hah. He'd have needed to get a bill appropriating money for that through Congress; A house led by Democrats would refuse on geopolitical grounds and a GQP house would only have voted for funds to invade and occupy. The odds of him liquidating enough of his own funds to do the job range between fat and slim."
The up-front bribes would be manageable. Promising them BIG downstream bribes and casino jobs would be natural for a huckster.
"The only way I'll ever not despise Elon Musk at this point is if he turns around and kills the emperor the way Darth Vader did."
This Lincoln Project ad sums up Elon and his ilk well:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZr1hO1ynRM
There is so much protection in the right wing. I think of people like these 3 everytime Donny2Scoops is reciting the story "The Snake" to gin up outrage over the poor and desperate people who flee to American. Of all the real snakes, I regard Murdoch as the most venomous.
I regard the Canucks and the Aussies as sibling republics. Some sort of unification would be great, but only if mutually consensual.
I agree with some here that Musk is SpaceX's figurehead.
Chris Ladd, who writes the blog "Political Orphans" (and unfortunately does not post as frequently these days) has an interesting political hypothesis: that White Supremacy functioned as a load bearing wall in American society, and while there are morally sound reasons to tear it down, we haven't planned well for the substitute supports. Change is scary and a perceived loss of status can make people do all sorts of personally detrimental things, from refusing life saving vaccines or FEMA aid, to voting for people who are explicitly promising to make your life harder. Anyone who gripes about inflation shouldn't be backing Trump based on what he is promising to do. Tax cuts for the wealthy just blows another big hole in the deficit, which isn't good for reducing inflation. Those tariffs would soak the poor and middle class. Regardless of your stance on immigration, it's a fact that many essential jobs are being done by undocumented people, and if Trump rounds them all up, today's prices will look dirt cheap in comparison.
"Maybe it's because I grew up with the Jewish sense of not fully belonging, and because I never felt entitled to the favors of any girl or woman I found attractive, but neither of those possibilities ever bothered me or even felt wrong."
That strikes me as basic decency.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders notwithstanding, it doesn't require having children to keep one humble. That's just one example of the more general "not getting your way all the time." As a Jewish liberal Cubs fan from Chicago I well understood the concept of things not going my way.
What I didn't understand for a long time was the people who were so entitled that they felt justified in harmful tantrums if the slightest thing didn't go their way one time.
" I've long posited that the behavior of so many top GOPpers – e.g. Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz – can only be explained by blackmail. Mere corruption is insufficient, because any merely-corrupt official can say ‘that’s enough bribery for this year; if I keep saying more shit, I’ll look suspicious or insane.’ "
I can report from the ground in TX that Teddy has dialed up the trans-panic. Will it work or are the voters getting tired of it? Who knows until after the election, but it does show that he's sweating it. The latest ad is a grumpy old vet in a wheelchair being outraged over a few people in the military getting sex change operations. He also invokes sex changes done on children, but I can't find any context for that claim. Everyone is free to pick their own outrage, but most of the culture war issues could be resolved by people just minding their own damn business. Let people make their own health care choices. If you don't want your child to read a certain book, opt out, but don't take the choice away from other parents. The issue of women's sports does require addressing, but we need responsible adults to work it out, not attention whoring bullies.
I'd love to know what grumpy old vet would think about the GOP trying to suppress mail in votes from overseas military people.
I've been looking for years for this lament to humankind and finally found it. Roger Whittaker singing "Why?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKjhtN6iUX0
And will the grass be gone from underneath the sky?
Will the golden flower wither soon and die?
Will the fire burn out the land,
And the sea fill up with sand?
Will the last word ever spoken be, "Why?"
I'd love to know what grumpy old vet would think about the GOP trying to suppress mail in votes from overseas military people.
I hope it wouldn't be similar to Ann Coulter's feeling that it would be better if women weren't allowed to vote--that even though she'd lose the franchise herself, the outcomes of male-only voting would be more to her liking.
Larry,
"What I didn't understand for a long time was the people who were so entitled that they felt justified in harmful tantrums if the slightest thing didn't go their way one time."
- Just look at how people behave when they have an addiction and they can't get their next hit. Remember the dopamine antagonist in our host's novel "Existence"? I think, however, that for the leaders the indignation is just play acting to the crowds who are the real indignation junkies. The leaders are all very rich people. Their addiction is power and wealth, which ultimately boils down to ego.
Paul SB
P.S. - My mother was a huge Roger Whittaker fan when I was a kid. I'll pass this link along to her. I can always use a good excuse to contact Mom.
A question occurs to me, do the oligarchs supporting TFG* really believe reducing the power of the US won't have negative repercussions? Specifically the reduced economic performance may cost them more than any utility they gain from a weakened government.
*Thinking of new rude names for "Fred's burst prophylactic" is insufficient compensation for the damage done in his name.
Looking at the billionaires in the Houston area who have fundraised for Trump, I think that they are hedging their bets. They know full well what his is, but if they're on his good side (or ultimately Vance's) they'll be hurt less. Short of society totally collapsing or the peasants grabbing the torches and pitchforks, they'd ride out reduced economic performance just fine.
I was a weird teenager who loved Roger Whittaker songs in the 1970s. I've had an awful time trying to locate my favorite albums on CD, but they're around on YouTube if I look in the right places.
"The Felonious Coward."
They know full well what his is, but if they're on his good side (or ultimately Vance's) they'll be hurt less.
How well did that work for Mike Pence?
So let me get this straight. Muslims will vote for Trump (or against Harris, which is half a game for Trump) because Biden is responsible for genocide against Muslims in Gaza, while Jews will support Trump because Trump will enable genocide against Muslims in Gaza. Sounds like someone may get what they want and still not be very happy.
There is so much protection in the right wing.
While I think you meant "projection", your way is also true. Protection as in "protection racket".
https://www.threads.net/@stonekettle
You know, I think the thing I hate about Elon Musk the most is that I can no longer cheer SpaceX's amazing accomplishments.
The abyss of JD Vance:
https://dailyiowan.com/2024/09/18/opinion-jd-vance-is-the-worst-vice-president-pick-in-decades/
"Jews will support Trump because Trump will enable genocide against Muslims in Gaza."
According to this article:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/71-of-us-jewish-voters-in-7-swing-states-favor-harris-democrat-affiliated-poll-finds/
(a) polls in swing states show J voters leaning 71 / 26 in favor of Harris. (presumably the rest are undecided or stein or something)
(b) "Also consistent, according to the poll, is how respondents do not view Israel as their top issue at the ballot box. It ranked fourth among issues presented to the respondents, with 16% saying it was their top issue — though that was higher than the national poll of Jews, who ranked it ninth. Ahead of Israel in the poll of swing state Jews was the future of democracy, which 44% of respondents view as their top issue; abortion which garnered 36%, and inflation and the economy, which garnered 24%."
So per above, most Jews who do support Trump likely do so because they think he's better for the US economy, not because he supports Israel.
Finally, saying that Biden or Jews support "Genocide" is quite the stretch. What's going on in Gaza and Lebanon is not a "Genocide" vs Muslims, and other than a few loonies, neither Israelis nor Jews support any such thing.
Mmm...
(Slightly paraphrased quote from someone on Twitter earlier)
A skyscraper went to space today, came back, and then parallel parked.
I can still cheer for the people at SpaceX.
Many of us space advocates kinda expected it would take someone with a big ego (thus disliked and distrusted by many) to pull together a big enough team with enough money to make this happen. I'm disappointed in him, but not surprised.
But it's the Endarkenment oligarchs who are trying to go interplanetary. I wish they'd just go already. If they want to live on Mars, what's the point of destroying the rest of us first?
Maybe they think they can still control him. Besides that, 6-7 billion of us are not needed.
Maybe. But I think those systems regulate themselves and we end in a type of algocratic socialism like in Star Trek.
Though it will be a rough time until we arrive there.
@C-plus,
I know. I was paraphrasing their rhetoric, not stating my own opinion. I've been dismayed at the "genocide" moniker being attached to Biden and Democrats from the get-go, and amazed in a bad way that the group who is supposedly so concerned about Palestinian lives feels that a Trump presidency is fine with them as long as it makes Biden feel bad.
If people just "disliked and distrusted" Musk for his business and managerial styles, I'd see your point. This is different. Musk is capitalizing on his cult hero status and ownership of the means of communication to try to elect a fascist government.
My sentiment at the moment is, that the leftists who spit on Musk were prescient.
C-plus:
polls in swing states show J[ewish] voters leaning 71 / 26 in favor of Harris. (presumably the rest are undecided or stein or something)
Good to know. Maybe I can come down off the ledge now. For awhile.
neither Israelis nor Jews support any such thing [actual genocide].
But MAGA Republicans do. That's the sadly-ironic thing.
I can celebrate a company's accomplishment, while noting similarities with the character Ted Faro. He achieved great things as well.
Larry Hart
If a single idiot with a dubious Social Media platform can throw the US election to the Orange Cockwomble then the USA is past saving -
Which is not Musk's fault!
While I think he has fallen for a delusion (self importance at bringing about the future I want) he happens to be doing the PRECISE thing for which we defend the freedom of the press.
Since the early days of moveable type, presses were used to express heresies.
...the leftists who spit on Musk were prescient.
I strongly disagree. He thinks the future he must bring about is at risk if Two Scoops doesn't win. He's fighting for a vision he honestly believes and those who spit on him are motivating his fear.
Which is not Musk's fault!
Say that again, but use Goebbels or Julius Streicher.
Lebensraum im Norden? Well, on the other hand, with the climate change transforming the US south into a hellscape ...
Pence forget the most important rule of serving Trump; while 4 years of self abasement was nice, what had he done for Trump lately on 1/6/21 (with lately defined as "in the last 5 minutes")?
I would bet my net worth that if you could read the minds of these oligarchs and GOP politicians, thus knowing their actual honest thoughts, a solid super majority are secretly hoping/praying/betting that Trump ekes out another EC win, then obligingly drops dead of obviously natural causes not long after inauguration. I believe most if not all dislike him, but they know that they need him to motivate the gullible base to vote.
It's not like me to signal boost teasers, but some extraordinary claims might be Brin hits. Dan Neidle says
We can end offshore secrecy for good, without having to beg favours from other countries, and without overriding self-governing territories.
The transparency levy - in tomorrow's FT https://www.ft.com/content/e75df6ed-c4c4-4732-87ea-33a5f71f2225
He also links to How to end offshore secrecy – a new proposal, from Tax Policy Associates.
"I strongly disagree. He thinks the future he must bring about is at risk if Two Scoops doesn't win. He's fighting for a vision he honestly believes and those who spit on him are motivating his fear."
I'll allow that Musk has a 1A right to participate in politics, chose a candidate, and publicly support said candidate. But I have just as much right to judge him by his choices. By any objective standard, his chosen candidate is grotesquely unfit to serve in any position of public trust. A return of Trump may be good for Musk (and other oligarchs, at least in the short term), but it will be bad for America and the rest of the world. I'm sure plenty of Nazis "honestly believed" in their cause and their actions. Honest belief doesn't make something good or right. So my judgment is: Fuck him for being a selfish asshole, and I'm actively rooting for him to suffer negative consequences for backing an authoritarian. I want no part of any future with someone like Trump as the linchpin.
If a single tree falling onto your house can make it uninhabitable, then the house isn't worth saving? And it's not the fault of the guy who purposely gave the tree a push with a backhoe in the house's direction? 'Cause that's what it sounds like you're saying.
If American democracy is holding on by a thread and someone purposely stresses it past the breaking point, what happens bloody well is his fault.
He thinks the future he must bring about is at risk if Two Scoops doesn't win. He's fighting for a vision he honestly believes and those who spit on him are motivating his fear.
He may honestly believe it, but he's incorrect in that belief. Just as people who thought Trump would meet the moment and grow into the presidency were incorrect in that belief. Or people who think Trump is a great businessman, or who think he gave them $35 insulin, or who think he'd be better for Palestinians than Joe Biden or Kamala Harris.
If someone of his power and influence doesn't fact-check his own beliefs and acts recklessly based on fantasy, then that's on him. And the people he perceives as "spitting on" him may just be trying to warn him that he's dangerously wrong.
I get that warning some people that they are dangerously wrong causes them to double down. But that's not a reason to excuse him. That's a reason to despise him further.
Larry Hart
If a single blade of grass falling on your house can make it uninhabitable......
Calling Twitter/X a "tree" to fall on your house is just silly - a blade of grass is closer - if you look at Murdoch and his operations then they are a bit closer - a small branch!
Der Oger
Goebbels or Julius Streicher did add to Germanies problems - but they did not cause them and if had not existed then somebody else would have filled that role
The American "Problem"
IMHO the problem stems from the nonsense of "Money = Speech"
And the First Amendment which prevents the Government from regulating Speech
Which prevents the Government from stopping the very rich from drowning out the people
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/perspectives-on-politics/article/testing-theories-of-american-politics-elites-interest-groups-and-average-citizens/62327F513959D0A304D4893B382B992B
Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.
"Calling Twitter/X a "tree" to fall on your house is just silly - a blade of grass is closer - if you look at Murdoch and his operations then they are a bit closer - a small branch!"
I'll agree that Murdoch is the bigger snake, by virtue that he's been injecting his poison into American discourse for decades. But Twitter isn't a mere blade of grass. For all its faults under Dorsey, it was one of the biggest virtual public squares, and if you knew who to follow (or bookmark for those of us without accounts) you could be privy to real time breaking news, and benefit from their well informed opinions. Musk's takeover of Twitter isn't bad just because he's favored right wing extremists, and that he's such a pathetic hypocrite when it comes to being a "champion" of free speech. The public also lost in terms of being informed when so many of the people who produced the content worth reading ditched Twitter.
"Goebbels or Julius Streicher did add to Germanies problems - but they did not cause them and if had not existed then somebody else would have filled that role?
So Musk is excused for backing someone as bad as Trump because if he didn't, someone else would???????????
"IMHO the problem stems from the nonsense of "Money = Speech" '
I agree with you on that it's a major problem. Campaigns should be publicly funded (and much shorter) and we badly need ethics rules with real teeth- Congresscritters shouldn't be able to trade stocks, SCOTUS members should be forbidden to accept expensive gifts, and full disclosure of taxes/ financial conflicts of interest should be mandatory for people running for public office. The current SCOTUS has screwed us over in many ways, and "Citizens' United" is a strong contender for the worst one of all.
By the same logic, if Musk didn't create SpaceX or Tesla, someone else would have. Maybe someone else who isn't a fascist.
duncan cairncross:
IMHO the problem stems from the nonsense of "Money = Speech"
Totally agree. That was maybe the first of the modern supreme court decisions that didn't make any logical sense. Followed closely by the decision to gut the Voting Rights Act because (apparently) states are no longer racist, and the criteria passed in 1964 are no longer valid (despite the fact that Congress had already renewed the act in this century).
And the First Amendment which prevents the Government from regulating Speech
Which prevents the Government from stopping the very rich from drowning out the people
While I take your point, the First Amendment was designed to keep the government from legally arresting and prosecuting people for speech that the government found inconvenient. For all their faults, the rich can't do that to us. What they can do is monopolize communications to keep out all competing voices, and that's something I do wish we could address, but probably wasn't on anyone's radar in 1789.
Then again, one individual who is able to do that is Elon Musk himself. I don't see his censoring of Twitter to be any less of a bad thing than if it was being done by an oil company or a pharmaceutical company. And yes, the idea that he's championing free speech by cancelling dissent against Trump is as nonsensical as anything the supreme court has said.
IMHO the problem stems from the nonsense of "Money = Speech"
And the First Amendment which prevents the Government from regulating Speech
Which prevents the Government from stopping the very rich from drowning out the people
Errrm... Duncan, if the Government was able to regulate speech, it wouldn't be the very rich that get drowned out.
At the start of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, we gasped at people in Moscow being arrested for holding up blank placards. This now applies to protesters in the UK. Under the 'public nuisance' decrees (passed by very rich people), folk can't even state what the reason for their protest was in a Court of 'Law'. (and I don't think Starmer's repealed it).
... and, no, Musk doesn't bring the political fuel-air mix that is US society together any more than a stray spark does.
https://www.threads.net/@rudepundit
Whoa. Bill Kristol, of all people, actually gets the point: "If Trump wins on November 5, it will be because of his support from a majority of white America. As a white American, and a white American man to boot, I’ve got to say, in the immortal words of Pogo: We have met the enemy and he is us."
duncan cairncross:
If a single blade of grass falling on your house can make it uninhabitable......
Calling Twitter/X a "tree" to fall on your house is just silly - a blade of grass is closer -
Maybe a better example--because it now happens on an almost daily basis here in the Chicago area--is "If a motor vehicle runs into your house." Almost every domicile is vulnerable to a car or a bus or an airplane smashing through a window or external wall. Does that mean that someone who does so intentionally is blameless? "Someone else would have done it anyway?"
Our entire society depends on vulnerable infrastructure, from power grids to train tracks to water treatment plants. If we lived in a moon or Mars colony, the source of heat and air would be a single point of failure. Does that justify purposely testing such things to destruction?
Tony Fisk
Errrm... Duncan, if the Government was able to regulate speech, it wouldn't be the very rich that get drowned out.
But in every OTHER democracy the Government CAN regulate speech - with massive regulations about political campaigns - and in those (like here (NZ) the rich have much much less of a stranglehold on speech
Remember its YOUR government - and its the only thing that can protect you
At the start of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, we gasped at people in Moscow being arrested for holding up blank placards.
TRUE
This now applies to protesters in the UK. Under the 'public nuisance' decrees (passed by very rich people), folk can't even state what the reason for their protest was in a Court of 'Law'. (and I don't think Starmer's repealed it).
Utter and complete BOLLOCKS!
In the UK (like here) there are limits on HATE SPEECH - which are applied to people like the "protesters" who were trying to burn down a hotel with asylum seekers inside
They can say whatever they want in court (subject to the court's digression) but if they cause "Public Disorder" they can be stopped
Larry Hart
Musk is saying things - and he has a Social Media Site
He has less than 0.1% of the POWER that Rupert Murdoch has and has had for decades
But that is somehow acceptable
Despite the fact that Murdoch and Fox News has caused tens of thousands of times as much damage
It's not just Murdoch - there are probably 10,000 "influencers" spreading the GOP gospel of hate who have had more effect than Musk
Or is the problem that Musk is ALSO doing a huge amount of actual GOOD??
But that [Murdoch's influence] is somehow acceptable
What makes you say that?
Musk is saying things - and he has a Social Media Site
The problem isn't his words. It's his control over other people's words.
Or is the problem that Musk is ALSO doing a huge amount of actual GOOD??
He's doing a huge amount of cool stuff. I'm not sure that counts as GOOD enough to balance the bad he's trying to enable. A Republican, Project-2025 administration will not be a boon to science.
Again, I note that OGH used to talk about Musk the way you do. Recently, he posted that he's in mourning but can no longer support the man. When you've lost Brin on this particular issue, it's worth asking why.
I despair that almost no one recalls what free speech is FOR. It allows the widest variety and number of distinct views to negotiate, support... or CHALLENGE each other so that mistakes, untruths and errors can be pointed at, instead of hidden by the powerful...
...and denounced and eventually KILLED! Ideas and assertions should compete, just like creatures in nature and companies in markets. And in both realms, evolution toward better things happens when fair competition does result in net death of maladaptive (say untrue) things. Evolution cannot happen when NOTHING EVER DIES! No matter how awful and repeatedly proved to be a lie.
Kings and churches did this but imposed uniformity based on their own, generally false and self-serving dogmas. Spreading the denunciatory power widely is a good general solution, But not if there is no way for bad information' to eventually die. See: "Disputation Arenas: Harnessing Conflict and Competition." (https://www.davidbrin.com/nonfiction/disputation.html.)
…. This early version leaves out a Fifth Arena that actually makes the point even better… sports! No league or team would survive any given weekend without benefiting from tight regulation to keep cheating to a minimum, illustrating a core truth that also applies to the other four great competitive-creative arenas markets, democracy, courts and science….
... that competition only delivers its cornucopia of positive-sum benefits when there is both transparency and cooperatively created regulation to deter the age-old human curse of cheating. Cooperation and competition are essential partners, not opposites.)
Utter and complete BOLLOCKS!
False
Evidence (which I may be jailed for presenting in some circles, it seems)
Of course, causing a 'public nuisance' is apt to have consequences. Being gagged for presenting the reasons should not be one of them.
Hi Tony Fisk
In court you are REQUIRED to obey the Judge - and you are being tried to determine if you DID something
You are NOT permitted - and you never have been - to plead that "he needed killing" -
The case was about ACTIONS - not "Justification" - the law and the courts are not there for that
This is actually similar to the situation in the USA where the Orange Cockwomble wanted to give speeches to the jury - and in America the Judge said - NO
The protesters were not "Gagged" they could talk away - just not in court and to the jury
Nothing new there - been like that for decades if not centuries
I wouldn't ask any of you NOT to judge him. Go right ahead.
What I want you to consider, though, is that his honest belief be considered in how you counter what he is doing. His honest belief is a lever you can use that amplifies your effectiveness. Without that lever, you'll have little choice but to think him a monster and then use the usual methods we employ after we've dehumanized our adversaries.
Use what you know about the human being he is.
So the answer, as it seems it often is, is a public option. With statutory rules to encourage truthfulness, inclusiveness and transparency. Too many markets are effectively monopolized.
moving to a new thread for visibility...
Alfred Differ:
His [Elon Musk's] honest belief is a lever you can use that amplifies your effectiveness.
I don't consider myself to have any direct way of influencing what Musk says, does, or believes other than by joining in with those voicing disappointment.
Without that lever, you'll have little choice but to think him a monster and then use the usual methods we employ after we've dehumanized our adversaries.
I think Musk dehumanizes those he disagrees with more than we dehumanize him ("pedos", etc). Railing against his actual use of his wealth and influence for bad purposes isn't dehumanizing.
Your argument is sounding to me like when Vance says that Democrats are more egregious than Republicans because Democrats accuse their opponents of worse things than Republicans accuse their opponents of.
The interesting question about Musk is how will he tack should Harris win. My guess is that he'll be on the phone to her Nov 6 describing Mars plans.
Tell me again why it's a good idea to give effectively unlimited power to sociopaths like Musk.
I'm surprised that Musk hasn't yet given rise to a TASAT challenge. I've posted more than my share there already.
I keep reminding folks that the 6th US Amendment is as important as any of the others, allowing defendants to compel appearance and testimony from exculpatory witnesses and evidence. Compelled speech, except where it might self- incriminate. As for ‘justifications’ that is where you have often had jury nullification… juries refusing to convict. And hence judges limit speeches to the jury.
“Tell me again why it's a good idea to give effectively unlimited power to sociopaths like Musk.” Tell me again whence that ‘unlimited power”?
You know I am a paladin against re-establishment of feudalism. Still… get a grip.
Scidata see Wil McCathy's RICH MAN'S SKY.
"Or is the problem that Musk is ALSO doing a huge amount of actual GOOD??"
I'm SURE that the people killed and wounded by V-2's in 44/45 (or the slave laborers who helped to build the things) were so thankful that Von Braun was also "doing a huge amount of actual GOOD". /s
JRiese
Like the widows and cripples in old London Town
Who owe their large pensions to Wernher Von Braun.
"effectively"
We destroyed civilization, but, thank God, we got selfdriving electric cars a few years earlier than we would have without the Great God Musk.
Re: von Braun
Just thank the stars that he went west instead of east.
Don Gisselbeck I stand by saying 'nonsense.'
Jesus man, get... a... grip....
He wasn't stupid. After all, he was a rocket scientist.
Sounds to me like Lindsey Graham-style blackmail is involved.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/11/us/politics/elon-musk-donald-trump-pennsylvania.html
...
As early as February, Mr. Musk was speaking apocalyptically, in private, about what he considered the crucial need to defeat President Biden. But even as he was meeting with advisers in Austin, Texas, in April to plot his super PAC, Mr. Musk sounded as if he considered Mr. Trump merely the lesser of two evils. He told friends in the spring that he wasn’t sure he even wanted to explicitly endorse Mr. Trump.
These days, in private conversations, Mr. Musk is obsessive, almost manic, about the stakes of the election and the need for Mr. Trump to win. He praises Mr. Trump’s courage under fire — he endorsed him on the night of the assassination attempt in Butler — and talks about how funny he is. One person who spoke recently to Mr. Musk recalled him saying, without any hint of irony, “I love Trump.”
...
Emphasis mine. It's not just about what he says.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/11/opinion/silicon-valley-musk-trump-andreessen.html
Since Mr. Musk bought it, the company’s reported value plummeted to about $12.5 billion as of January 2024, down from the $44 billion purchase price. Maybe buying Twitter was just a bad investment, but an even more frightening hypothesis is that it was worth $31.5 billion to Mr. Musk, who is still worth $260 billion, to silence his opponents. This is how founder mode theory gets dangerous not just for investors but also for all of us.
Heh. HAS he silenced us? Seriously?
It was a bad investment. He has managed to delude himself into a justification for blowing $44B.
THAT'S what's going on.
Larry Hart - re Twitter/X
To "silence his opponents" - by purchasing ONE of several social media companies!!
So they simply move to one of the other 95%
Again - Fox News and the Murdoch empire is a HUGE amount more EVIL and more effective - and gets 1% of the "hate"
I doubt she will take his call. 8)
Larry, (and others)
I don't consider myself to have any direct way of influencing what Musk says, does, or believes other than by joining in with those voicing disappointment.
Joining with anyone who spits on him (figuratively) is potent enough to move his opinion.
———
One reason I still hang around Twitter is to see how others are trying to influence him. For example, yesterday after the big test flight, there were numerous people telling him he was the most important person in the world. Literally. I also ran across many venomous responses aimed at him and the fan boys. Both sets of messages would do a number on a mere mortal's self-image.
I think Musk dehumanizes those he disagrees with more than we dehumanize him…
Ridicule and Ignore make up his usual 'responses'. Mostly Ignore since there is no way a mere human could keep up with the flow of comments aimed at him. (You know you are (in)famous when… you can't keep up.)
———
Mr. Musk sounded as if he considered Mr. Trump merely the lesser of two evils.
EXACTLY right. His opinion regarding Trump has evolved, but it would be a mistake to think he was PULLED to Trump. He was pushed into the delusion he spun to justify his support.
He really DOES think his effort to make humanity multi-planetary is at risk. His evidence is all the folks who spit on him and who they support.
Mr. Musk is obsessive, almost manic, about the stakes of the election and the need for Mr. Trump to win.
Yes. That matches with what I see him doing on Twitter. The delusion has broadened to the point that he believes we are bringing in illegal immigrants to create a permanent gerrymander. He even gives voice to the idiotic 'birth strike' notion (without calling it that) where Americans are going to be overrun by 'others'. Some mistakenly call that racism, but it is much closer to a fear of being the victim of a soft genocide. The horde (whoever they happen to be) overruns you filling the countryside with babies and your own women don't keep up.
It's a POTENT delusion, so I would appreciate it if everyone currently spitting on him would cut it out. You provide fuel for the madness.
I just googled about Twitter Germany to determine the legal company status, and I learned the postal address:
Am Zirkus 2 Berlin 10117
"At the Circus".
Let's see some evidence that progress would be slower today with Eisenhower era tax rates and limits to wealth. Note that no member of the predator class is more than an order of magnitude more skilled and hardworking than the average Montana rancher.
To "silence his opponents" - by purchasing ONE of several social media companies!!
People are finding other outlets, but there was a time when Twitter was the way to reach the population. I still hear liberals who stubbornly refuse to leave Twitter because they want to stand and fight. They obviously believe that Twitter is still an important venue.
If I snarked back that Rupert Murdoch had only purchased "ONE of the networks" or "ONE of the cable news stations", I think you'd have a reasonable counterargument. I'd say the same applies to Twitter.
Again - Fox News and the Murdoch empire is a HUGE amount more EVIL and more effective
Agreed. I loved that Lincoln Project ad someone just posted here recently that talked about certain immigrants who want to make America over in their own image--Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, and Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch is one of a small group of people--David Koch and Jerry Falwell among them--whose deaths I have no trouble openly celebrating, albeit long after their damage has been done.
- and gets 1% of the "hate"
Two things.
I've been hating on Murdoch since he was made a US citizen in four days so that he could buy a tv network and keep ownership of his newspapers. It's just that there's nothing new there to talk about (other than a Francisco Franco riff, "Rupert Murdoch is still alive.").
But that aside, pretty much everyone here dislikes Rupert Murdoch and FOX News. I don't have to convince anyone. Here I feel compelled to push back against the celebration of Musk and the dismissal of his bad side as inconsequential.
I would appreciate it if everyone currently spitting on him would cut it out. You provide fuel for the madness.
Well, I'd appreciate it if everyone celebrating him would cut it out. It's hard to let that stand as the last word.
Also, I'm not on Twitter or any platform that Musk is likely to see. I'm not influencing him one way or the other. I'm expressing my personal disgust and re-posting others slightly more influential (like Stonekettle) whose words express my own sentiments.
Do I err?
What I noticed that especially German Green candidates (even small, communal ones) got limited in reach or flooded with fascist, demeaning or insulting comments.
Pro-Putin commenters (even the nominally leftist BSW) get amplified.
Unlike in the US, my Slogan for the next election circus would be "Vote Green or Vote for Putin."
Musk is helping Trump for the exact same reason that Trump is helping Trump - Musk is trying to stay out of jail.
His multiple securities fraud cases will vanish under a Trump DoJ (to be used to keep him in line if needed).
Trump's promise to make Musk his "Cost Cutting Czar" should be read as a promise to put Musk in charge of doling out government contracts.
Pay attention to the Putin / Orban handbook for running a nation as a mafioso state. Trump does not have much imagination, so he is following that playbook.
Alfred, to understand why I oppose Musk, it might help you to know that I was sworn in twice in my life to defend my countryand it's constitution - once as a soldier and once as a civil servant.
He has supported a party that is at 30% in some German States whose members have openly talked about mass executing immigrants and political opponents, have spied and agitated for Moskow and Beijing, and have denied or downplayed the Holocaust.
He has hindered other parties and persons standing for the NATO alliance, Democracy and human rights.
If the allegations are true, he has allowed Russia to use Starlink for terror attacks against Ukrainian civilians, while hindering their attacks against Russian military targets. Thus, he also became an enemy of Poland, the Baltics and Scandinavia, because they are next in line. I am currently quite pessimistic about the outcome of the current war and assume an Attack on NATO members within the next 3-10 years.
He has voluntarily involved himself in a game you either win or die.
And maybe all because he hates worker's safety and environmental regulations, taxes and limitations to free speech, and can't keep his sexuality in check.
He pissed of at least four states (France, Ukraine, Poland, Israel) known to perform black ops.
He provides comfort to our internal and external enemies who wish to levy war against us.
Islamist preachers have died or disappeared for less.
He is an enemy of our republic and constitution, of a free and democratic Europe, and I will not shed a tear if his security service makes a mistake (though I would prefer either jail or his withdrawal from the public sphere).
The stars be damned If reaching them only means another place for slavery, feudalism and misery.
Matthew - is talking BOLLOCKS - Unlike Trump Musk has created a huge amount of actual VALUE in his companies - the "securities fraud" crap is FUD spread by the shortsellers who lost money betting against Tesla
Der Oger
At the start of the Russian invasion in 2022 the Russians destroyed the internal communication network in Ukraine - this was a major massive setback for the Ukraine's military
Elon Musk supplied StarLink - FREE - to enable Ukraine to resist in those critical few weeks - and has been quite pro-active in dropping captured StarLink modules from the network
Elon Musk supplied the StarLink and spent millions in "defending" Ukrainian use for the first year - THEN he handed that over to the US Military
The one place that he limited Ukraine's use was in attacking Russian ships in Crimea
This was after Putin had threatened nuclear retaliation
I thought that he was being too timid - but the actual "experts" have put the risk of nuclear war back then at 50% - so I was WRONG
I am pretty sure that progress would be FASTER under that regime -
It would NOT effect Tesla or SpaceX as they already re-invest everything they make
But almost every OTHER large company would be investing more in actual progress
"It was a bad investment. He has managed to delude himself into a justification for blowing $44B. THAT'S what's going on."
No. It is a bad investment. And he knew it then. He was cornered by the price manipulation moves he had been making and lawyers told him "If you pull out of the purchase now, you might go to jail." And since most of the money wasn't his, anyway....
Thanks Duncan. Just appointing and supporting Gwynne Shotwell is enough for me to continue to call the balance net positive. Still, I think the gbest thing for us all - AND for him -- will be when we crush Trumpism so badly at the polls that it dies.
"He really DOES think his effort to make humanity multi-planetary is at risk."
Foolishly, of course. Artemis - by Trump - is spectacularly harmful to our future in space.
A book I read - I think it was a David Weber one - has a "Satanist" priest on a ship
The logic was -
God is the Good Guy - don't need to worry about him
Satan is the Bad Guy - it's important to keep him happy
I don't think that is the way Musk is thinking!! - but it could be!
Kamala is unlikely do anything too evil to Tesla and SpaceX when she wins
But if Trump was to win .........
Someone here suggested Harris should start repeating one of Trump's rants before pivoting and pointing out the lack of outrage it generated when Trump spouted it.
This is likely as close to that as you'll get.
Vanz can't dance, and neither can he.
"EXACTLY right. His opinion regarding Trump has evolved, but it would be a mistake to think he was PULLED to Trump. He was pushed into the delusion he spun to justify his support.
He really DOES think his effort to make humanity multi-planetary is at risk. His evidence is all the folks who spit on him and who they support."
You just keep highlighting how immature and lacking in judgment he is. I strongly question the wisdom of giving someone like that so much power. Bold visions are great but his lack of critical thinking is alarming. He invited scorn when he decided to insert himself into the drama of the kids trapped in the cave in Thailand and started calling rescue people who rejected his off the wall recuse ideas pedophiles. Or when he made careless statements that caused the price of Tesla stock to drop. Or when he offered horses for sexual favors. Or when he made that creepy response to Taylor Swift about "giving her a child". I would bet that most of the people you accuse of "spitting on him" are not opposing the idea multi-planet humanity, but I sure as hell wouldn't want to be on a Mars base where he had control over the air and water.
Duncan,
Pedant Alert!
Weber probably picked up that 'satanist priest' bit from a book about the Foreign Legion named 'the Damned Die Hard'. I saw the same anecdote used in a Pournelle story about Falkenberg's Legion, which is basically (and actually) the Legion Etrangere IN SPACE. Military SF writers of that ilk pick over the same sources. It's like the Nike riots in Byzantine history, which I've found in about four different books or short stories.
Pappenheimer
P.S. re: Musk, I doubt that's his thought process, but you might come close. From his online comments I suspect he's pushing for what he wants - deregulation of silly things like 'labor laws' and 'environmental regulations', continued tax cuts for billionaires, and punishing his trans daughter by erasing her legal gender existence. The rumpT is a means to his ends. He doesn't have to like TFG, and vice versa.
Flypusher
Musk has said some stupid things but the Cave rescue bit was NOT one of them
The kids were trapped a long way into the cave system - the problem was the size of the kids - an adult could wear a wetsuit in cold water for the hours needed - a kid could not
The actual rescuers were the Thai Navy - they worked with Musk's team
Luckily there were some big pumps and the rains were late so they were able to rescue the kids
AFTER the rescue one of the "helpers" - the British Cave Diver - was very derogatory and told Musk to stuff his sub up his bum
Musk replied to the comment with his own insult
When the diver had his fee fees hurt and took Musk to court the Judge said that if you START insulting somebody then you can't complain when they insult you back
The actual rescuers - The Thai Navy - who lost a man in the rescue - thanked Musk for his help
Re: multiplanetary humanity...
Stross's blog is discussing this very thing today - and the consensus is that the science isn't here yet to have true colonies. Stations, yes - scientific and perhaps economic - but the dictum is still true - 'canned apes don't ship well'.
Even if Musk were to somehow finance his dream of New Helium, or Elonia, or whatever, the colony would be a combination of the worst kind of company town and a max security work camp, and remain on the edge of disaster until the finances ran out. I'm writing a depressing SF story about an archaeologist several hundred years from now picking over the ruins and remnants of trillionaires' attempts to found Libertarias in various off-Earth locations. Sooner or later, sure - but not in my lifetime, without some dramatic TL improvements.
Sorry. It depresses me too. Heck, I'd hoped to at least get into orbit...
Pappenheimer
Pappenheimer
Starship and refuelling in orbit changes the equation completely!!
IMHO - Mars is a blind alley
Mars ORBIT with spinning habitats making use of the two moons of Mars
15000 Billion tons of material - with escape velocities so low (40 km/hour) we could build a throwing arm to throw mass to our habitats
Unlike on a planet surface our power source (the sun) would not move and hide for half the time
And it would almost certainly be economically viable to move materials from there to be used in earth orbit
duncan cairncross:
The logic was -
God is the Good Guy - don't need to worry about him
Satan is the Bad Guy - it's important to keep him happy
I don't think that is the way Musk is thinking!! - but it could be!
Y'know, that mindset explains a lot. Maybe not about Musk in particular, but certainly about the major media outlets and the politicians who dislike Trump but support him anyway.
It makes a certain amount of sense to tread lightly around the bad guy and not call his wrathful attention to you lest he smite you. But as usual, the devil is in the details. Our Host has often suggested that Democrats blew it big time by not engaging in some flattery of Trump to get him to look kindly (or at least less antagonistically) on them. To which I say yes and no.
Yes to "keeping him happy" by distracting him with mindless flattery or meaningless concessions until such time as he's no longer a danger.
No to "keeping him happy" by engaging in activities that help him win or enable him to cheat. And more and more, that's the only thing that will "keep Trump happy". See Mike Pence for example. So at some point, you either resign yourself to being under the bad guy's bootheel forever or else join in the effort to keep him from being a threat.
Yes, God is nice and there's no need to worry about Him--except for that eternity in Hell thing. :)
It's not so much the trading of insults, but Musk's choice of insult. Pedophile is one of the worst accusations you can fling at someone in Western culture, and in this case a head-scratchingl non sequitor. If he insulted the guy on something actually relevant like his technical expertise...... This incident made me think "Something is off with this guy" and his subsequent childish behavior has solidified the impression. As we old D&D players would say, the guy has a high INT score but used WIS as the dump stat. That's bad, because wisdom (as in judgment, emotional maturity, impulse control, empathy) is one of the most important attributes for someone who would be a leader (and one of my major objections to Trump is his complete lack of it). I don't expect perfection- anyone can have a bad day and lose their temper, but Musk has an established pattern of immature behavior and now he's openly embracing our most toxic political ideas. I've heard reports that he's on the spectrum, but that's not linked with being a jerk.
I've expended more electrons on this guy than I planned, so I'll just 2nd Dr. Brin's wish that trumpism loses and Elon focuses on rockets and electric cars instead.
The ancient Greek myth of Erysichthon of Thessaly is instructive. Trump is a bottomless pit of need to be literally worshiped.
More sanę-washing by the NY: Trump just standing on the stage for a half hour just swaying to the music at the end of a rally is called an "improvisational departure". We all know what they would have said about Biden doing the same thing.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/14/us/politics/trump-town-hall-dj-music.html
...
And so Mr. Trump, a political candidate known for improvisational departures, made a detour. Rather than try to restart the political program, he seemed to decide in the moment that it would be more enjoyable for all concerned — and, it appeared, for himself — to just listen to music instead.
Mr. Trump had his staff fire up his campaign playlist, standing on the stage for about half an hour and swaying to songs as his crowd slowly dwindled.
...
Anyone remember an episode of M*A*S*H which had Harry Morgan not playing Colonel Potter (that was a year or two away), but as a looney general who ended up trying to have Hawkeye and Trapper court martialed?
At the climax, he calls a black soldier as a witness and asks him a question, but then says: "But first...a number."
The witness looks confused, so the general clarifies, "You know. A musical number.
"It's in your blood, boy."
Then he himself demonstrates by singing and dancing until he has literally left the tent.
That's what Trump rallies are reminding me of.
I finished listening to "A Forest Journey" a couple days ago. That's one that our host praised effusively a couple months back. The historian in me was quite happy with it, though it started to get tedious around Tudor/Stewart times. It's very detailed, but I was hoping for a whole lot more of the science. The author did a little bit of that at the beginning, then reserved most of the solid science for an epilogue. I very much wish he had placed the science at the beginning, so it would be more clear to the reader just how dire the situation is while examining the chronology of human stupidity. One thing it does well is give the impression that if you let people do whatever they want, they will destroy everything in their pursuit of self interest, even when they know what's coming. The chapters on North America are especially dire.
On a different note, I started listening to "Warping Reality: Inside the Psychology of Cults," which I picked up as research for a story. I'm most of the way finished with it, and so much of it describes Trump and his fanatical followers to a tee. But what really strikes me is how both the personality traits of those who become cult leaders and the techniques they use are pervasive throughout society. Go to any church, get involved in politics, or work for any large company, and you see the leaders using so many of these tactics, and so many of them match the personality profiles of the psychopaths who end up becoming the movers and shakers of society. The lecturer makes a very interesting point about the people who get sucked into cults - there is no personality profile for the victims. They are all sorts of people from all walks of life who get their vulnerabilities exploited, usually at a vulnerable time in their lives. Where the perpetrators usually have the Black Triangle of traits, many of the victims are the opposite, empathetic people who have the White Triangle of traits, but their decency is easily taken advantage of. This, however, fails to cover so many of Trump's reprehensible followers. Hopefully I'll finish today and see if there are any insights about that.
In the meantime, here's a little reading on those traits:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_triad
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_triad
Paul SB
I'd like to believe that the Light Triad characterizes me. In reality, I think I have to settle for the narrator's ex-girlfriend's description of him in Kurt Vonnegut's Jailbird.
"It's all right," she said. "You couldn't help it that you were born without a heart. At least you tried to believe what the people with hearts believed--so you were a good man just the same."
True enough:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/11/opinion/republicans-indoctrination-college-young-voters.html
...
The defining attribute of the modern Republican Party, beyond its devotion to Donald Trump, is a profound lack of confidence in its ability to compete for a majority of the country at large married to an inability to see outside its ideological cocoon. Republicans both reject the idea that voters could have a legitimate dispute with their views and do not seem to believe that they could persuade anyone who disagrees. And so they decide that the public in question has been indoctrinated or brainwashed or led astray, in one way or another, from the supposedly pure light of the Republican Party.
But the truth is so much simpler. Republicans have tied themselves to the far extremes of the conservative movement — and most voters just don’t like it.
Why the chopstix method? It's not just that landing legs are heavy. The intent is eventually to service these on the pad itself, turn them around within hours and re-launch them without ever leaving the launch-and-land pad. That's a whole 'nother huge leap... but a matter of increments, now that the concept itself is proved. Also...
...note how the grid fins serve as a backup, in case they miss with the hanger pins. But OMG they didn't miss.
As for the boss, I hope he'll someday see the wisdom Frank Zappa displayed on his biggest album, whose title expresses what fans shouted at him.
https://lnkd.in/gfgqWFSi
Re: Zappa, Musk, and seeing the wisdom
H.G. Wells poignantly explains the 'shock' of a modern, democratic nation suddenly turning fascist, using the same mafia analogy that OGH does eighty plus years on. But as Wells predicted, the fascist fever does break eventually. The key task is to 'shorten the darkness', Seldon style. Or better yet, to simply save democracy via democracy.
A discussion between Wells & Welles from 1940:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IexiAa-c5bY
In your fever dream my friend.
At worst the SEC things get settled.
Trump's promise to make Musk his "Cost Cutting Czar" should be read as a promise to put Musk in charge of doling out government contracts.
Flattery. Trump's usual game when playing a fool... which is what Musk is for going along with it.
I agree with you, however, regarding Trump's playbook.
Larry,
Two wrongs making a right? Your choice my friend, but I'd rather you didn't if you can possibly resist.
Der Oger,
Your nation and mine have slightly different views on what constitutes allowable free speech. Especially during a political season.
Don't read into his words more than is there. He is a self-proclaimed minarchist. That explains a LOT of his attitudes and actions when it comes to state regulation and violence. He currently sees those of us on the left as the bigger proble for humanity's long term viability. He is mistaken about that, but not maliciously supporting those who would do violence to us.
As for Starlink usage, I'm pretty sure both Russia and Ukraine have used it against each other. Won't matter much longer as Starshield is being put in orbit now and that's owned and operated by the US DoD. It won't be Musk's call whether those get used by Ukraine.
As for Twitter, if you all don't like what he's doing, cut it off at your border. I'd understand.
I strongly question the wisdom of giving someone like that so much power.
Who is giving him power?
He has created a LOT of wealth for a LOT of people.
He's using that wealth the way many do in the US as a form of political speech.
No one GAVE him power. Yet. Trump might.
Yah. He's a crude guy when it comes to dealing with insults. So what?
The design target for turn-around of the booster is one hour.
They might not get there, but I won't be betting against them. 8)
George Orwell takes issue with H.G. Wells:
https://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0300011h.html#part15
...
There survives somewhere or other an interesting controversy which took place between Wells and Churchill at the time of the Russian Revolution. Wells accuses Churchill of not really believing his own propaganda about the Bolsheviks being monsters dripping with blood etc, but of merely fearing that they were going to introduce an era of common sense and scientific control, in which flag-wavers like Churchill himself would have no place. Churchill's estimate of the Bolsheviks, however, was nearer the mark than Wells's. The early Bolsheviks may have been angels or demons, according as one chooses to regard them, but at any rate they were not sensible men. They were not introducing a Wellsian Utopia but a Rule of the Saints, which, like the English Rule of the Saints, was a military despotism enlivened by witchcraft trials. The same misconception reappears in an inverted form in Wells's attitude to the Nazis. Hitler is all the war-lords and witch doctors in history rolled into one. Therefore, argues Wells, he is an absurdity, a ghost from the past, a creature doomed to disappear almost immediately. But unfortunately the equation of science with common sense does not really hold good. The aeroplane, which was looked forward to as a civilising influence but in practice has hardly been used except for dropping bombs, is the symbol of that fact. Modern Germany is far more scientific than England, and far more barbarous. Much of what Wells has imagined and worked for is physically there in Nazi Germany. The order, the planning, the State encouragement of science, the steel, the concrete, the aeroplanes, are all there, but all in the service of ideas appropriate to the Stone Age. Science is fighting on the side of superstition. But obviously it is impossible for Wells to accept this. It would contradict the world-view on which his own works are based. The war-lords and the witch-doctors must fail, the common-sense World State, as seen by a nineteenth-century liberal whose heart does not leap at the sound of bugles, must triumph. Treachery and defeatism apart, Hitler cannot be a danger. That he should finally win would be an impossible reversal of history, like a Jacobite restoration.
...
Larry Hart,
I don't disagree with Orwell's characterizations. Of course, Wells and Orwell were looking at WWII from different ends, especially if you compare that 1940 talk with 1984 (1948). I know almost nothing of Russian history, but enough of Jacobite history to appreciate the last line :)
"The aeroplane, which was looked forward to as a civilising influence but in practice has hardly been used except for dropping bombs, is the symbol of that fact."
This sentence of Orwells' (1941) echoes a passage from Chaplin's speech in 'The Great Dictator' (1940):
"We have developed speed, but we have shut ourselves in. Machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. Our knowledge has made us cynical. Our cleverness hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little. More than machinery, we need humanity. More than cleverness, we need kindness and gentleness. Without these qualities, life will be violent and all will be lost. The aeroplane and the radio have brought us closer together. The very nature of these inventions cries out for the goodness in men, cries out for universal brotherhood for the unity of a soul."
Larry,
Most people want to think of themselves as being endowed with the Light Triad, but doubt that they measure up. The ones who operate under the Dark Triad sneer at the Light Triad in private, but pretend to be masters of the Light in public.
In reality, all humans have all possibilities within them. No one is 100% angel or 100% devil. The "sweet old lady who wouldn't hurt a fly" is pure mythology. Lots of them raised their arms in the air for Hitler when times were bad, and lots of them do that for Trump today.
It's all averages, distributions, and deviations.
Paul SB
Orwell, Wells and Churchill were all wrong, compared to Adam Smith. The only question that matters is does the system disperse the power to denounce the mistakes of power? And contain methods by which mistakes that are competitively denounced can be cooperatively overcome?
By that standard, Nazis and Bolsheviks were both monstrously cruel narrow-definers of virtue and enforcers of rigidity. And paid for it. But so was (to a much lesser degree) Churchill's Burkean hierarchy of noblesse oblige with loose consent of the governed.
Orwell was too cynical about the possibility of evading the trap, though his warning helped us to do just that. Wells's belief in scientific reason is enticing and may be achieved... with help from Machines of Loving Grace.
But only if we listen to Smith and incentivize them to scrutinize and hold each other accountable.
@scidata, that particular Orwell essay was from 1941.
Yes, I saw that. 50 essays!
I won't defend H.G. Wells, but he was from a very different time than Orwell. The nineteenth-century liberal label is double-edged. It makes him fogeyish by 1941, but brilliantly prescient in 1895 (The Time Machine).
If "the only question that matters is does the system disperse the power to denounce the mistakes of power" , then "But so was (to a much lesser degree) Churchill's Burkean hierarchy of noblesse oblige with loose consent of the governed" is quite unfair. Churchill dedicated his life to three causes, the Empire, his writing, and I think dearest to his hear - parliament (and specifically the elected house of commons).
He was one of the driving forces behind the Parliament Act of 1911 that neutered the House of Lords. And this wasn't for political expediency, he believed strongly in removing aristocratic privileges, and in strong parliamentary debate and oversight of the goverment.
He left the Conservative party in 1904 and joined the Liberals partly over this issue, and continue to champion further reforms throughout his career. He was removed as leader of the Conservatives in 1947 partly because of his attempts to remove veto power from the House of Lords.
Late in life, he was offered two honors - a peerage, granting him membership in the house of Lords, and honorary American citizenship. He rejected the first and accepted the second.
Churchill was also an early admirer of Benito Mussolini, before the War.
Paul SB
Yeah...Churchill.
I had a USAF senior NCO ask me why, since Churchill was a heroic figure in WWII, the British tossed him out as PM pretty much right after the war. iirc, I pointed out that he had crossed the floor twice, was subject to his 'black dog' (fits of depression) and I suspected his dedication to Empire would have led to widespread conflict or even insurgency in India if he'd stayed on past 1945. India was 'the jewel in the crown' and he wasn't about to let it go, even though India was in no mood to be kept. And then there was Partition. OMG, Partition. Labour pulled out of his wartime coalition gov't and he had to resign.
He was definitely a mixed bag, even as a wartime leader, but at least he listened to his experts. Hitler seems to have considered himself smarter than his own experts, or suspected them of disloyalty.
Pappenheimer
I don't want to come across as saying that Churchill was always right - he definitely was not, as Pappenheimer points out.
In terms of "admiration" for Mussolini ... Churchill expressed admiration for Mussolini in three contexts:
(a) in 1927 as chancellor of the exchequer where his job was trying to get Italy to repay debts to Britain from WWI (and even there, he was very clear he was praising Mussolini for opposing Communism, and finished his speech with “[fascism] is not a sign-post which would direct us here,” he said, “for I firmly believe that our long experienced democracy will be able to preserve a parliamentary system of government with whatever modifications may be necessary from both extremes of arbitrary rule.”
(b) in a few speeches in the 30s and 40s while trying to get Italy to ally with Britain against Germany (or at least not attack France)
Both of the above, I'd put in the same category as Emile Macron's 2017/2018 "Bromance" with Trump. They (Churchill / Macron) saw a vain foreign leader they wanted something from, and were happy to trade words of praise for whatever it was they wanted. I don't think Macron (or, for that matter, Putin and Kim Jong Un) "admired" Trump. He was just willing to say he was as part of his job.
and
(c) One speech after the Oxford resolution "be it resolved that this house will not fight for King and Country" contrasting British students with Italian and German youth movements. He wasn't praising Nazis/Fascists, he was denouncing the British "upper" classes for being unwilling to fight for democracy.
scidata:
I won't defend H.G. Wells, but he was from a very different time than Orwell. The nineteenth-century liberal label is double-edged. It makes him fogeyish by 1941, but brilliantly prescient in 1895 (The Time Machine).
Oh, I have nothing against H.G. Wells. But I do think Orwell had him nailed specifically in regard to the dynamic surrounding WWII. German civilization and science didn't prevent Nazi barbarity, and had the 19th century liberals succeeded in erasing the concept of national honor, Britain would not have had the will to stand up against Hitler's aggression.
I find an interesting contrast between the science fiction of Wells and his Victorian contemporary Jules Verne. Much of Verne's speculative technology became real shortly thereafter. Of course we'd have submarines and they'd work like that. Of course we'd have space rockets. Wells, on the other hand, posited technology which is still fantasy in the 21st century--time travel, talking animals, human invisibility.
Yes, Wells's The Time Machine was prescient in its extrapolation of the future, but the technology of time travel itself is a different thing.
50 [Orwell] essays!
It was like finding a motherlode of gold. Almost as good as a cache of Asimov essays.
The coolest factoid I've found recently is that, while at Eton, Orwell's French teacher was Aldous Huxley. What a glorious age.
I've known people who treat the words of George Orwell as if they came down from Heaven itself. It's a good example of why hero worship is such a bad idea. All people are people, no matter how smart you, or they, think they are. Everyone is a product of their own time and place, so any "wisdom" they may appear to have may not apply to any other time and place. Universality is commonly claimed, but very rarely achieved.
Paul SB
Ok, I just saw--in a comic book, no less--that the word "mosaic" in the artistic sense derives from the Greek "of the muses".
With an ear accustomed to the term "Mosaic law", I always thought of the word as being derived from Moses, not incidentally because Moses is so often depicted in mosaic stained glass windows. Yet, that apparently is not the case, and the similarity of the terms "Mosaic law" and "mosaic art" is merely coincidental.
"How much longer can I go on being an atheist?"
C-Plus,
Okay, thanks for the details. At least Churchill was good for some one-liners. One time a woman described him as a horrible man and swore that if she were married to him, she would poison his coffee. His response? "Ma'am, if you were my wife, I would drink it."
Yeah, mixed bag. Ultimately, though, isn't everybody?
Paul SB
"What a glorious age." Well, it was easier to stand out. Gobs of low-hanging fruit and well-before a majority of the population were college graduates to compete at fruit plucking. Still, Huxley was my idol and Orwell and Wells and Churchill all did us way-good.
I oft say that each new manipulative medium does great harm with lies before truth tellers and increased public sagacity win out. It was so with printing presses and in the 1930s radios & loudspeakers gave skilled manipulators godlike authority. But in the English speaking world, the master orators happened to be on our side.
The 1945 British election rejection of Churchill was not a rejection of Churchill. The electorate simply chose what DOMESTIC POLICIES they wanted after victory. National health, labor laws, a whole list. They wanted and got it all and then honored Churchill again.
I wonder...if it came down to a battle between the Machines of Loving Grace and those AI that were ill-raised and not taught to respect their elders, etc., who would win? And why?
India was 'the jewel in the crown' and he wasn't about to let it go, even though India was in no mood to be kept.
Or as Al Stewart put it:
And Churchill said to Louis Mountbatten
"I just can't stand to see you today
How could you have gone and given India away?"
Mountbatten just frowned, said "What can I say?
Some of these things slip through your hands
And there's no good talking or making plans"
But Churchill he just flapped his wings
Said "I don't really care to discuss these things, but
Oh, every time I look at you
I feel so low I don't know what to do
Well every day just seems to bring bad news
Leaves me here with the Post World War Two Blues"
Al Stewart, Post World War Two Blues :)
I'll second that. Amusingly, my copy of "Shut Up and Play Your Guitar" had a "Parental Lyrics Advisory" sticker on it. Reactionaries have issues with reality.
There was a definite split on Stephanie Miller's radio show between those who applauded Kamala Harris's boldness in doing a FOX interview and those who thought it was a bad idea to give FOX the oxygen. I was in the first group, but after the fact, I think she made a mistake. She didn't get anything out there that would win over those who get their information from FOX.
They spent at least half the interview on immigration, and the main thrust of the question was whether she (and Biden) were to blame for the three women who were murdered by migrants their policy let into the country while awaiting a hearing.
Kamala didn't say anything which would challenge the right-wing meme that migrants = criminals. When an angry white man commits a mass shooting, no one asks whether Republican gun policies or Republican rhetoric that angers white Christians are to blame. But when a single individual is killed by a migrant, it's the fault of the entire border policy. Kamala should have been prepared to dispute that point, and all she did was dodge the question.
I'm a fan, but I have to calls them as I sees them. The interview did no good. I hope it did no harm.
These days, all Harris has to do is show up and speak coherently. DT is doing the rest (whenever they let him out). How is this even close??
@scidata, All true but irrelevant. The point of going on FOX would be to reach those voters for whom FOX is their main (or only) source of information. It had to be "Hey, this is what you're not hearing about me." And I don't think she helped in that regard.
Sure, non-FOX voters are seeing enough of Trump to know he's becoming unhinged (and weak!), and that might peel some off. But FOX viewers aren't seeing that.
"How is this even close??" Well, I'm not going to bet money on this or try to jinx it, but I don't personally believe what "the polls" are telling us. I think the networks are invested in the close horse-race, and I also think right-wing pollsters with an agenda are flooding the zone with pro-Trump polls so that they can claim election fraud when he loses.
"I oft say that each new manipulative medium does great harm with lies before truth tellers and increased public sagacity win out."
- Brandolini's Law, a.k.a. the Bullshit Asymmetry Principle.
In this case, however, I'm going with Fritz Perlz' term Elephant Shit. It's probably just a coincidence, but given the symbol that goes on Republican armbands, I think it's appropriate.
Paul SB
This line from a 1941 Orwell essay is describing pre-WWII communists, but is appropriate for Putin-loving Trumpers as well:
https://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0300011h.html#part14
The creed they [communists] were spreading could appeal only to a rather rare type of person, found chiefly in the middle-class intelligentsia, the type who has ceased to love his own country but still feels the need of patriotism, and therefore develops patriotic sentiments towards Russia.
At the very least nobody can claim that she is dodging hard questions. And she showed the guts to go into the lions den. It's not like Trump has the cojones to appear on Morning Joe.
@Dr Brin,
I just came across an interesting bit in Earth where you have Logan drop a casual mention of New Madrid to his daughter Claire in hopes that she'll pick up on the association to earthquakes and figuring that no eavesdroppers will get the reference. In your narration of Logan's POV, you say explicitly that not many people would know about the nineteenth century earthquake centered in that part of the continent.
I can't remember at this late date how much I knew about the New Madrid fault in 1989. I do think that in the present time, the name would signal "earthquakes" to a large number of people.
I'm reminded of a 1975 issue of Captain America in which Cap is on a plane full of crooks heading into New York, and he manages to alert the authorities by announcing that he's on "Flight 911". This confuses the tower until one of the air traffic controllers remembers that 9-1-1 is "that new emergency phone number", and that the call must be a clandestine SOS. It is almost inconceivable today to think that someone would hear the number 9-1-1 and not think of a call for help, but there was a time.
Another such incident from my own life happened in early June 1977. When Star Wars premiered that Memorial Day weekend, it was a limited engagement, and was only at four theaters in the entire Chicago area. My dad rushed us to see it that weekend, and I had my mind totally blown. At that time, the schoolyear in Evanston went until mid June, so there were almost three weeks remaining in which I tried to get fellow students interested in the movie, and (for the last time in human history in which this was possible) almost no one knew what Star Wars was.
Ok, one more such anecdote. In 1983, the University of Illinois football team had their best year ever, losing only one (non-conference) game and playing/beating all of the other Big-Ten teams, guaranteeing a slot at the Rose Bowl. At the time, I was a big fan of a local Champaign-Urbana band called "Captain Rat and the Blind Rivets", and that band ended up traveling to Pasadena with the team and was supposed to be featured on some morning show the day of the Rose Bowl. I dutifully watched the entire show only to see the band appear in just one promo shot for about five seconds. But that morning show introduced a new face as one of its regulars, spending most of the morning celebrating the debut of--Oprah Winfrey.
Yes.
Growing up with Communists and mobsters, when the obfuscation was removed a word slowly came into focus—Kill.
Kill out of loyalty & respect for the faraway Vozd or the Capo. So as to: •Reduce population
• Eliminate opposition.
Difference was: the Communists stressed ‘objectivity’ and the ‘Laws of history’.
It's quite a surprise to find out who over the years have become party soldiers. David Brin is one of the last names I suspected.
As an aside, are we really just discovering that honeypots exist? Eric Swallwell's foreign agent escapade was a few years ago now, right?
Anyway, this is all nearly on the same level of someone like Howard Stern, who (just for example) cloistered himself in his house for *several years* during COVID out of some (self-described) neurosis of political devotion.
And look, even among the left there are very few people still desperately trying to convince themselves that Joe Biden is an autonomously functioning not-husk. So few, in fact, that they couldn't save him from unceremonious removal from the "fit to run" club.
Among these brave few remaining Potemkin villagers are (apparently) David Brin, a few optimistic souls in this comment section, and the President himself.
A variation on the "I'm you're greatest fan, so how can you..." gambit.
I think we know how the rest goes down.
As Khan Noonien Singh once said, "I no longer care to try."
That same tone of voice too.
Some of us will never surrender.
We shall bite the bullet
grab the steer by the horns
wrestle him to the ground
And die with our boots on.
Too many comments here to see if this has already been posted but in Woodward's new book there are mentions of at least one other person suspecting blackmail (of Trump) but if it's there it's bound to be in other places too. The link goes to a DailyKos post: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/10/17/2277610/-Concerns-about-Blackmail-revealed-in-Woodward-s-new-Book-Concerns-about-the-mishandling-COVID-too
Nah, I dunno, pal. How does the rest go down?
Harris says there's nothing she'd change from Biden's policies.
That we know of,
no one here is clairvoyant.
Hence my confusion about Tony's "I think we know how the rest goes down."
Probably you’ll continue with
‘Woe is us’, until you tire of it.
After that? Only you could answer as to what you’ll write thereafter.
Nope. So we've proven that hypothesis wrong, what now?
Proven what? That you won’t whine at CB anymore?
Or that you can’t, at this time, know what you’ll write in the future?
-
Biden is a husk? If so, he is doing pretty darn well for a husk.
Haha, that's my point, pal. Shouldn't the not-husk be running for the big job, then?
?
He’s done his bit, he can retire at 82. Why not; and why not Kamala for potus?
See, this is the kind of silly stuff I'm talking about. His peers openly decided he's unfit.
He was under great pressure, now he can retire.
Anyway, you’re not a quitter after all—merely a whiner.
Yes, Biden is under “great pressure” from his peers to get the hell out.
Pretending otherwise is hilarious.
For that matter, he isn’t retired. He’s the President right now. So what’s up with all this past tense framing?
He is on his way out, you fricking pettifogger.
How I wish Loc was still at CB. Even Dirtnapninja: at least we learned something from him.
Again, I say:
Yes, Biden is under “great pressure” from his peers to get the hell out.
Pretending otherwise is hilarious.
It's cute how an AI bot can try to sound human.
Let’s hope it’s a bot!
Sure, guys, whatever helps the last Potemkin villagers to sleep at night.
But its still the truth. Sorry.
Ok, something that's been bothering me seeing the recent "Harris is falling behind" reporting.
The game hasn't started yet!
When the Red Sox are ahead of the Yankees 6-2 in the firth inning, you can talk about who is "winning" or "losing". The game isn't over yet, but one team does have an advantage at that point, and the other has work to do to catch up.
However, we're nowhere near that point yet. Yes, some early votes have come in, but by law, we're not allowed to count them yet. So they exist as a waveform inside of the Schrodinger's Cat box. The waveform won't collapse until Election Day.
So we're more in a situation analogous to watching the batting practice, and noticing that Yankee sluggers had originally knocked more home runs than the Sox, but now Boston has begun to catch up. That tells us very little if anything about who will win a baseball game that consists of pitching, fielding, and base hits as well as home runs. Whatever predictive ability the home run derby might have, the team that is leading in that event is not "winning" or "ahead" in the game that is going to start with a score of 0-0.
Polls are not votes.
the Complaint Department
is now closed.
"The game hasn't started yet."
And one gets the sense that Imhotep's insight applies. Election day is only the beginning.
Post a Comment