Frost and King

Yeah, I know I get obsessed. Anyway I was at LGM reading about the blathering of Brooks. Capital B, the small b kind babbles. Well, I suppose that's true of both. And there was a link to a criticism of Drew Brees who plays some kind of game with an oddly shaped ball. The criticism focused on one of Martin Luther King's letters from a Birmingham Jail.

I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

Since the Frost article has been on my mind the past few days I kinda fixated on that quote underlined. The trouble is, I'm not even sure that he shares the goal of ensuring Trump doesn't reach the White House. Does he agree with criticizing white supremacists, racists and punchers in the face of 69 year old women? I would hope he does. It's just that Hillary doesn't do it in a genteel enough manner for him? Who knows?

That whole piece is great. It's worth putting up in any case. And there's this.

Way To Man Up, Donnie

Yesterday, Donald Trump bravely stood up and said, "It Wasn't Me. It Was Hillary." I want to give a shout out to real journalists like Jill Colvin and Jonathan Lemire.

Even as Donald Trump sought to close the door on the false conspiracy theory that President Barack Obama wasn't born in the United States, he peddled another lie by claiming that his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, was behind it. There is no evidence that is true.

Would it be so hard for other pseudo journalist/opinion/analysis people with a soapbox to show that same level of journalistic ethics. 

Here's a few that I believe might be appropriate for Mr. Frost to look at:

Take responsibility for the accuracy of their work. Verify information before releasing it. Use original sources whenever possible.

Provide context. Take special care not to misrepresent or oversimplify in promoting, previewing or summarizing a story.

        Oh yes, that one especially. Please don't Hannitize.

Recognize a special obligation to serve as watchdogs over public affairs and government. Seek to ensure that the public’s business is conducted in the open, and that public records are open to all.

Provide access to source material when it is relevant and appropriate.

Never deliberately distort facts or context, including visual information. Clearly label illustrations and re-enactments.

And I saw this comic in the paper today and just can't resist putting it up for lil Donnie:

Doremus Jessup He Ain't

He probably would fit right in as Buzz Windrip's press secretary, though. Hey, at least I'm not comparing Trump to Hitler. Anyway, I've gotta put up some comments on Mark Hannity's Frost's latest screed against Hillary Clinton. Unfortunately I have no way of linking to it. The piece I'm referring to is titled "Hillary the Hateful." Do you see where it's going? And, of course, she's hateful for calling deplorable people deplorable. Trump can say anything nasty thing he wants, but she has to walk on eggshells.

So, here's the portion of the speech MHannityF prints in his paper.

(Y)ou could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?

If you go to the link, you'll note that's a mighty small sample. so, let's start the process I like to call de-Hannitization. It's so new spell check doesn't recognize it. OK, here's what precedes that quote.

You know, to just be grossly generalistic,

OK, I'm going to admit that generalistic is not a word. I believe it's not too much of a stretch to intimate she was going for the idea that she was generalizing, which is a word. If that was included though, it would have been harder for Frost to say,

"If Trump is polling at, say, 40%, Hillary thus trashed about one in every five American voters." 

So let's put up some more of HRC's speech that didn't fit into the Chronicle. 

The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic -- you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people -- now 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks -- they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America."

It's not really that long. It does seem to indicate why she might be referring to some of Trump's supporters as deplorable. Let's meet some of them. WhiteGenocideTM, come on down. 

The account, @WhiteGenocideTM, tweets obsessively about white women allegedly raped by various minority groups. “Africans and Muslims rape more than anyone else,” reads one of the user’s retweets. “Don’t let them in.” Many of the tweets are accompanied by the hashtag “#rapefugees,” apparently a combination of the words “rape” and “refugees.”

The account also dabbles in support for Nazi Germany. “Hitler SAVED Europe,” reads another tweet. 

Could just be one bad apple, though. Nope.

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on Tuesday retweeted an apparent white supremacist, something he’s done multiple times this election.

"@keksec__org: @realDonaldTrump Your policies will make this state and country great again! #MakeAmericaGreatAgain pic.twitter.com/SWxV3YCbqb"

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 19, 2016

The user, who goes by the name Jason Bergkamp, writes for an online publication called Vanguard 14. According to its website, the publication covers issues like “white nationalism and genocide.” Bergkamp’s bio on the site says he is a “Dutch based journalist writing about European, American and South African events.”

Then there's the made up data suggesting a massive crime wave by blacks against whites. He got that from a Twitter user named "CheesedBrit" whose avatar is a swastika and who says we should have listened to "the Austrian chap with the little moustache."

Far from the last I could put up is the Star of David obtained from a white supremacist message board. 

"The image was previously featured on 8chan's /pol/ — an Internet message board for the alt-right, a digital movement of neo-Nazis, anti-Semites and white supremacists newly emboldened by the success of Trump's rhetoric — as early as June 22, over a week before Trump's team tweeted it.

Having beat the stuffing out of that horse, let's move on with the rest of the quote which Frost commented on, but did not actually provide for his readers.

"But the other basket -- and I know this because I see friends from all over America here -- I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas -- as well as, you know, New York and California -- but that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they're just desperate for change. It doesn't really even matter where it comes from. They don't buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won't wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroin, feel like they're in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well."

And what does he have to say about that? 

"As for the other half of Trump's adherents, she said they deserve 'empathy and understanding.'

OK, so when did empathy become a bad thing. I suppose it helps when you gloss over her actual comments. 

Not respect, but pity.

Oh, I see. You take the word empathy which is difficult to spin in a negative way and translate it into pity which in some lights can be seen as a negative. Very clever. 

In one fell swoop, Hillary revealed both the intolerance and the condescension that so puts off so much of the electorate. 

So, he's criticizing Clinton for not being tolerant towards out and out racists. Shame on her. And I would really love to know where the condescension is found in there. For old times sake (2 years back) Mark Frost is the guy that endorsed a man who said, "We need guns to defend ourselves against tyranny. If you don't understand that, you're not paying attention." I have no problem seeing condescension there. Also over the top wingnuttery. 

Where is the mission to represent everyone, to respect us all. 

It's in the part of the speech you didn't present to your audience so they could make up their own minds. 

But, you say, what does he have to say about Trump?

But Trump is so much worse, they'll counter. 

This is me countering, yes he is!

Frost on the Gibson Abandonment

Mark Frost in his most recent issue of The Chronicle has an encomium to Chris Gibson. I have no problem with that. There are probably issues where I would find agreement with Gibson and he's in no way as loony as many Republicans. And Frost can sing praises for whomever he likes and besides, he's willing to run my letters. So, Mark is running him for president, if he could. So, 90+% of the column I have no issue with.

But, smack dab in the middle of it for no reason:

I'm sickened when I read some of the obsequious divulged e-mails by which some of Mrs. Clinton's aides seek her favors, like she's the Queen. 

And that's pretty much it. It's just a nasty dig for no reason I can see other than to say Gibson is the salt of the Earth and doesn't want to be treated like royalty, I guess. It just seems nasty, though. In all fairness, I will point out that Frost did endorse Clinton against Lazio when they both ran for the Senate.

Frost and Funiciello both, IMHO, need someone to look at the things they write and say. A no-man who would advise caution. No, I'm not available. I just picked up a bunch of perennials and a spice bush that have to go in the ground. The taters need plantin', too.

Letter to the Chronicle on Minimum Wage

Hi Mark, 

     

     I realize you're likely to get a flurry of letters in response to the minimum wage pieces you had in your last issue. Thank you for running those, btw. I also enjoyed the photos and story on your trip to the Holy Land. Very nice. I am enclosing a letter with my admittedly prosaic thoughts on the wage discussion. If you would like to run it, I'd be delighted. Awhile back, you noted what a fine magazine The Atlantic is. Taking your advice, or possibly due to the lovely portrait of Barack Obama on the cover of the most recent issue, I took the plunge and subscribed. Thank you for the recommendation. 

To the editor:

     Assemblywoman Woerner's proposal, for a regionally adjusted minimum wage, has changed the debate. I hope that her fellow Democrats, including the governor, recognize the utility in a plan that takes into account the cost of living differences between upstate and downstate. I appreciate that when she says her approach is data driven, she has put forth the effort to look at statistics applicable to each region. She admits the idea will need tweaking, but it sounds like an innovative first step and worth exploring. 

     Matt Funiciello mentions Seattle having raised their minimum to $15 per hour. Using an online calculator, I found the cost of living in Albany (GF area is not available) is 80% of what it is in Seattle. Fittingly, the wage Ms. Woerner is suggesting for the Albany/GF region is $12 an hour, or 80% of $15. The added benefit of her legislation is the greater possibility of it coming to fruition. I'm optimistic that our state Republican office holders are more open to compromise than their federal brethren. 

     Robin Barkenhagen's idea of a tax deduction for employers, at least recognizes they would face a hardship if they were required to go up to $15 per hour. It seems to this admitted non-economist that the lost revenue would leave a big hole in the state budget which would have to be filled. And maybe I'm looking at it wrong, but it appears the business owners who are paying the lowest wages would get the largest deduction because they would be raising pay the most. That seems unfair to those already paying decent wages. 

Thank you and be well,

Kevin Robbins    

Mark Frost Comes Concern Trolling

Unfortunately The Chronicle is not published on-line so I can't link to Mark's forays into concern trollery. Right. I almost forgot. First, say something nice. I love 99+% of The Chronicle. It's a weekly with great articles on local happenings and what to do and lots of ads for area businesses and is everything a weekly paper should be. There. That's out of the way.

I like Mark Frost and am a bit concerned about his mental state, though. He seems to be getting as loony as Matt Funiciello. Maybe he's eating that Rock Hill Bread and there's something in the ingredients that leads to delusions.

"To get back to the warning that I received. You may take it with however many grains of salt that you wish. That the brown acid seeded rye that is circulating around us isn't too good. It is suggested that you stay away from that. Of course it's your own trip. So be my guest, but please be advised that there is a warning on that one, ok?"

The March 3rd edition in his Inside Scoop contains the suggestion that Hillary Clinton should pick John Kasich as a running mate. This is due to the fact that "she denounces Donald Trump Drumpf (editorial correction) as a divider and depicts herself as the Uniter in Chief." I have to ask myself has Clinton ever depicted herself as the "Uniter in Chief." The reason is that Mark Frost has a tendency to engage in mostly strawman arguments.  

I'm mostly just posting this for the record. I expect to see this sort of thinking in 9 year olds. Kids believe all kinds of stupid shit. They might not realize that the vice presidency normally is not worth a bucket of warm piss. OTOH, if the president is incapacitated, the VEEP gets a big promotion. One that would not set well with many of us who voted to elect a Democrat as president. Then, there's that oddball tradition where Kasich would have the opportunity to break ties in the Senate. As a Democrat, I gotta say I would not be real comfortable with that notion. 

I should point out here as well that Mark did not call on The Drumpf to pick a Democrat as his running mate despite his depicting himself as a Uniter. 

"Believe it or not, I'm a unifier," Trump offered during a raucous rally Friday in suburban Detroit. "We are going to unify our country."

Moron the Liberal Media

So, I'm beginning to think Mark Frost is just as loony as my bête noire, Matt Funiciello. In the December 3, 2015 Chronicle, he's on once again about how ultra-liberal the NYTimes is, but the Wash Post is really liberal, too, except not so much. He admits that the WashPo has lots of conservative opinion people.

"The Times' liberal slant shows through too often in the news coverage." What does that even mean? It's lucky for him he has the ability to pierce the veil and discern Truth from Propaganda. Later on he says, "Don't get me wrong; I read a lot of Times articles and still believe great work goes on there, but lately I feel that more so about The Post." Yeah, great work except for the liberal propaganda.

And he mentions a piece the Times did on Amazon pointing out sweatshop conditions. Then praises Jeff Bezos. Mark, do you think the WashPo would have run that piece. Jesus, don't get me ranting about evil corporations like Funiciello.

Mark Frost on Political Correctness

Unfortunately I still can't link to anything in the Chronicle, but I still want to comment on some things Frost says in his "Inside Scoop" of November 12, 2015. I haven't followed the story of Tim Tai. He apparently is a reporter who was kept from doing his job at the University of Virginia. MF's comments led me to at least take a look at the story. He did make it harder by calling the professor Melissa Clark when her last name is actually Click. Onto the quote:

Ms. Clark (sic), advocate of strong-arming innocent people, foe of tolerance and a free press, shouldn't be a member of any college's faculty, especially one funded by taxpayers, but she'll be defended by many, probably lionized. 

This is the new Left's McCarthyist unveiling, yet again. So many liberals who know better nevertheless kow-tow to it. 

I did search the internet and was not able to find anyone lionizing Ms. Click. It's not the pound of flesh that Mr. Frost seems to desire, but I see that she is resigning her job. If it's any consolation for MF, the Trump campaign seems to be rolling along well. Sadly, there are signs of PC there, too. In the recent debate, when Donald was waxing nostalgic for the deportations of from back in Uncle Ike's day, he neglected to mention that it was called Operation Wetback. Oversight or Political Correctness? Sadly, I lean toward the latter.

Thanks to Mark, I'm adding Leftist McCarthyite to my resume. Let's see: faux liberal (compliments of Funiciello), fascist liberal (Jonah Goldberg), nihilist (Donald Douglas), and from many sources there was libtard, dummycrat, dhimmicrat, moonbat and so many I've forgotten.

Hat Tip to Mark Frost for this GunWingNuttery

Thanks Mark. Even though I can't link to the Chronicle, I can link to Congressman Gibson's Facebook page. I hope.

Mary Jo and I grieve for the families in Oregon. We are very saddened by this senseless and horrific violence. As laid out in the Declaration of Independence, the first function of government is to secure the rights of its citizens, natural rights of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" that come from God. A direct quote from the Declaration of Independence, "...and to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

WTF? How did the Declaration of Independence get involved?

When shootings like these have happened, politicians like Governor Cuomo call for stricter "gun control," most recently even threatening to shut down the government until that happens.

Cuomo is wrong, at least on the shutting down the government part. I'll give him that one. 

However, their "gun control" approach to reducing violence is utterly flawed and has not made us safer. Indeed, the areas with the strictest gun control policies are rife with the highest incidences of gun violence.

Absolutely wrong! Apparently I can't say that enough, though. 

Law abiding citizens, the target of gun control legislation, already follow the law.

Nice tautology.

Fundamentally there are two types of threats to safe and secure - irrational actors (those with psychosis and severe mental illness) and rational actors (those with criminal intent).

Having a criminal intent is rational. 

And to be clear, my wife and I care deeply about the safety of our children, our communities, and our fellow citizens.

Why would you feel a need to tell us that? We don't suspect you of being irrational. Yet.

(C)onsequent to the exposes of the late 1970s that revealed serious abuse in our mental institutions, our country closed most of our hospitals for those with psychosis and other very severe mental health diseases. That response was understandable, but our government did not replace that with any significant new approach to assist and deal with those desperately need mental health treatment. 

Who was in the presidency during the 80's again? 

I have helped author and support H.R. 2646, the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act, that significantly overhauls federal policy to support those who need mental health treatment for severe mental health diseases, including psychosis.

Because the NRA won't allow him to actually address the problem of guns. 

(please note, here we are not talking about veterans or others with depression or anxiety, that's a whole different category that absolutely requires mental health treatment and support, just different kinds of support. Generally speaking, these individuals are NOT a threat to community "safe and secure" that the severely mentally ill may pose without treatment).

Going back to WTF? on that one. 

The second way we strengthen deterrence is to support the 2nd Amendment and recognize the reality we are in. Even Pope Francis, whose central message of love, service to others, and leadership by example, had security in the US armed with guns to protect him.

No, really. He actually wrote this. It's Wingnuttery Supreme. But lest you think he's calling the Pope Frank a hypocrite:

That didn't mean for a moment that Pope Francis was hypocritical or inconsistent - his dedication to the transformation of society through the power of love is unquestioned, but we live in the real world where there are irrational and rational actors who pose a risk to safe and secure and society needs to act accordingly. The Pope's security operation was successful and Pope Francis' message of love and service to others was communicated, effectively in my view.

I may have been unfair. The ultimate in wingnuttery would have been if he had pointed out the pope's position on climate change and his use of cars and airplanes to get around. 

Tragically, in Oregon, a state with "strict" gun control laws (including universal background checks and "gun-free" zones) we witnessed this latest devastating attack. We simply must recognize that policies such as "gun-free zones" have failed us. 

They don't look that strict to me.

Link to Doolittle piece.

Link to Oregon gun law rating.

Keeping Godwin Alive

First, I want to implore Mark Frost to put the Chronicle online so I can just copy and paste from it. Mark, it will be so good for you to receive all of the zero readers from my blog hitting your site. At least consider it.

OK, so here's Susan Balfour whom I'd like to give a big thanks to. Every now and then when I write a letter to the editor, I feel like a crank. That's actually every time that I do. There's a fine line between crank and gadfly you know. So here's Susan today:

I graduated form Glens Falls High in 1970 with 245 students. Having lived here may entire life. I have witnessed tremendous growth in Glens Falls. So many more houses have been built and many families have moved here.

One would think the number of graduates would be close to the same or more. It is shocking that in 2014 only 130 students graduated. 

So, a web search of US birth rates gives me 25 per 1000 people in 1952 when Susan Balfour was presumably born and 15 per 1000 in 1995 when 2013 graduates were born.

Yes, families are having fewer children, but I wonder how many of those that would have graduated were aborted babies?

So, you're writing this letter based on pure speculation. Could it be that, among many other things, this had something to do with it? Then, I'm pretty certain she considers that to be some form of murder against sperm.

I wonder what talents and gifts were killed with those aborted.

You know, one of them might have been the next Hitler, too.

If we don't think abortion has an impact on every hometown, think again, the evidence is right before your eyes!

Uh, no it really isn't

Credit Where It's Due Dept.

I've taken Mark Frost to task for a few things he's written, so it's only right that I give him credit for a comment in the July 16, 2015 Chronicle. This is regarding the agreement with Iran.

Keeping my mind open, but my caution intact. This is likely the best or worst thing the Obama administration will have done.

For Frost, in talking about the prez, this is a full-throated endorsement. Thanks Mark!

I'd Really Love To Get Mark Frost's Reaction

Fuck it, I'm just going to link to Charles Pierce.

The United States assists Israel in bombing the living isotopes out of two uranium-enrichment plants and a reactor. Leaving aside the pre-emptive nature of the attack, it unleashes a public health catastrophe with untold ongoing consequences on a country where the public-health system is rudimentary at best. Which results in a population that is so excited about being bombed and sickened that it rises up and overthrows the government and installs one more likely to be friendly to the powers that have bombed and sickened them.

That quote is from Pierce, though you would be excused for any confusion.They must be competing with the WashPo for Mark's love. Liberal media? It must suck to be on the same side of an issue as the pathologically insane.  

Salon sees the Times as doing a reverse end around of some sort. I'll go with that, the devious bastards. 

The New York Times editorial page pulled a fast one on Iran hawks today by publishing an op-ed from the most indiscreet member of their rank, former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton. While some Times readers may have been aghast to see the venerable paper publish Bolton’s ravings — under the headline “To Stop Iran’s Bomb, Bomb Iran” — the editorial decision should be cheered. Here we have a leading conservative hawk plainly admitting that the alternative to the deal currently under negotiation is not a “better deal,” but is a bombing campaign followed by some hazily defined efforts at “regime change.” Meaning, ultimately, war with Iran.

Well, it is the paper of record. And Bolton as a member in good standing of the neocon crowd is now on record calling for mass murder. 

Hat Tip to Mark Frost

He's right about The Atlantic having some fine articles. I looked at the last few issues and was mightily impressed. I had read it on occasion in the past, but am going to have to at least browse it from now on. The Christian Science Monitor, daily and weekly, is my main news source and I love it dearly. Four articles really caught my eye in the past few issues. I'll refrain from linking to the interview with Erick Erickson. I will point out that Mr. Erickson does not have the physique that I'd expect to see on a viking.

Yeah, I used their photo figured I better link to the story. Don't want The Atlantic going medieval on me. Onto stories I hope Mark Frost read. First up, "Be Not Afraid." Dear God, try to buck up and survive the Hell that is the Obama years. 

It often befalls presidents to be most criticized in office for what later turn out to have been their particular strengths. Disparaged at the time as simplemindedness, timidity, and slickness, Ronald Reagan’s firmness, George H. W. Bush’s caution, and Bill Clinton’s adaptability look in hindsight like features, not bugs. (Unfortunately, George W. Bush’s bugs still look like bugs.) President Obama catches flak for his supposed underreaction to crises in the Middle East, Ukraine, and elsewhere. Instead of leading, the professorial president lectures the American public not to be so darned worried. “If you watch the nightly news, it feels like the world is falling apart,” he said last August. “I promise you things are much less dangerous now than they were 20 years ago, 25 years ago, or 30 years ago. This is not something that is comparable to the challenges we faced during the Cold War.” Blame social media, he tells us, for shoving so much upsetting stuff in our faces. 

Amen, sing it brother! Fucking idiots that are afraid of a handful of religious zealots in Northern Iraq and Syria. And if that isn't bad enough they want to make war on the country that is over there providing ground troops to fight the religious zealots. And yeah, I realize the Right thinks that the Iranians are suicidal religious zealots, too. But they're wrong. Oh, that brings me to the big surprise I received in seeing Robert Kaplan "Warming to Iran."

Foreign policy is about necessity, not desire. And multiple necessities have been driving the United States and Iran toward a détente of sorts. Indeed, the American-Iranian estrangement, which has gone on a decade longer than America’s estrangement from “Red China” did, is anomalous in international relations, given how many amoral geopolitical interests the two nations share. The idea that the interests of Israel, even with Saudi Arabia alongside it, can indefinitely or even permanently override some degree of reconciliation between the United States and Iran—the ancient world’s first superpower—is problematic. Yes, Israel’s domestic lobbying machine is formidable, and yes, Israel’s prime minister is by some accounts a determined schemer, but they may not ultimately be able to prevent the American executive branch from seizing the kind of diplomatic opportunity that comes along only a few times a century. Whatever the eventual outcome of the long-running negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, Israeli interests cannot impede a warming of relations between Iran and the United States in the coming years, under either this president or the next.

I'm even going to re-read that and maybe do a longer post on it. He said many things I had been thinking and even mentioned Yemen, where the Shiites (if not the Iranians) are doing us some good in fighting AQAP. Last, and certainly not least, is James Fallows with a very nice article explaining that we are now a chickenhawk nation. I had never thought of the country as a whole as being chickenhawk, but he is absolutely right. 

(Obama) noted that they were often the face of American influence in the world, being dispatched to Liberia in 2014 to cope with the then-dawning Ebola epidemic as they had been sent to Indonesia 10 years earlier to rescue victims of the catastrophic tsunami there. He said that the “9/11 generation of heroes” represented the very best in its country, and that its members constituted a military that was not only superior to all current adversaries but no less than “the finest fighting force in the history of the world.”

If any of my fellow travelers at O’Hare were still listening to the speech, none of them showed any reaction to it. And why would they? This has become the way we assume the American military will be discussed by politicians and in the press: Overblown, limitless praise, absent the caveats or public skepticism we would apply to other American institutions, especially ones that run on taxpayer money. A somber moment to reflect on sacrifice. Then everyone except the few people in uniform getting on with their workaday concerns..

This From The Liberal Washington Post

So, I know that Mark Frost is reading the WashPo now because it's not as lieberal as the lieberal NYTimes. He did say that the WashPo was coming around to those good Conservative values (such as genocide). I'm sure this psychopathic opinion piece, by someone whom I'm sure moonlights as a serial killer, made his day.

What if force is the only way to block Iran from gaining nuclear weapons? That, in fact, is probably the reality. Ideology is the raison d’etre of Iran’s regime, legitimating its rule and inspiring its leaders and their supporters. In this sense, it is akin to communist, fascist and Nazi regimes that set out to transform the world. Iran aims to carry its Islamic revolution across the Middle East and beyond. A nuclear arsenal, even if it is only brandished, would vastly enhance Iran’s power to achieve that goal.

And sadly yes, it gets more insane from there.

Otherwise, only military actions — by Israel against Iraq and Syria, and through the specter of U.S. force against Libya — have halted nuclear programs. Sanctions have never stopped a nuclear drive anywhere.

Does this mean that our only option is war? Yes, although an air campaign targeting Iran’s nuclear infrastructure would entail less need for boots on the ground than the war Obama is waging against the Islamic State, which poses far smaller a threat than Iran does.

Some might make the case that sanctions stopped a nuclear drive in Iraq. Of course, it didn't do any good because psychopaths like Joshua Muravchik helped to impel us into war there, too. And since we obviously don't have an army capable of taking on a country 3 or 4 times the size of Iraq and aren't going to have any allies, we'll just drop bombs on them. That won't cause any unintended consequences. 

Fuckin' asshole!

And since I'm here, do Democrats equal Republicans in this instance, Matt?

Since Frost recently said he was a fan of The Atlantic as well as the WashPo, I hope he caught this post by James Fallows (bless his heart).

Right, repeated bombing raids "as necessary." What could possibly go wrong with that approach? Yes, "surely the United States could best Iran." Surely we could polish off those backward Viet Cong. Surely invading Iraq would work out great. (I haven't taken the time to see if the author was a fan of invading Iraq, but I have a guess.) Surely the operational details of these engagements are a concern only for the small-minded among us.

How would we think about a "scholar" in some other major-power capital who cavalierly recommended war? How would we think about some other capital-city newspaper that decided to publish it? The Post's owners (like those of the NYTand other majors papers) have traditionally had a free hand in choosing the paper's editorial-page policy and leaders, while maintaining some distance from too-direct involvement in news coverage. Jeff Bezos, behold your newspaper.

Hat tip to Scott Lemieux at LGM for the Fallows link and for "The Answer is always War."

But When You're Right, You're Right

I realize that I don't agree with any of Lew Rockwell's economic views, but I enjoyed the dunning letter he sent me. He's not getting any money, but I'm more than willing to help share his views on neocons. Have at it, Lew:

The ideological movement that calls itself neoconservative is small, potent, and extremely dangerous. Oh, and its members don’t like lewrockwell.com, either.

Founded by followers of Leon Trotsky, they liked Lenin but not Stalin, who killed Trotsky. These left-wing intellectuals now run the conservative movement and the Republican party. How the heck did that happen?

They applied the tactics they learned from Bolshevism to become first, left-liberals, and then, new conservatives. In every mask, they have been very successful, but while there are important neo-liberals (Democratic neocons), they have had the most effect in the GOP.

From the days of Reagan, especially, and their almost total victory under Bush II, the neocons have exerted immense influence not only in politics, but in academia and the media.

Their policies are no longer openly socialist; indeed, they promote a government-controlled capitalism, instead. But their belief in global empire, perpetual war, the police state, central banking, total surveillance, and an omnipotent executive has never changed. Now, however, thanks to them, that’s called Republican conservatism.

Perhaps the first neocon was Leo Strauss, an admirer of the totalitarian Plato, and who advocated rule by intellectuals who, from behind the scenes, would put neocon ideas into practice not only through machinations and the “Noble Lie” (needed to fool the peons into obedience), and through connections to the state’s intelligence organs. The neocons have always been very, very close to the CIA.

Who are the neocons? The late Irving Kristol is properly called their godfather. Bill Buckley was important, too. Today they include such figures as Bill Kristol, John McCain, Charles Krauthammer, and Sean Hannity. Their institutions include everything from the NY Times to National Review, and departments in many universities, too. Oh, and let’s not forget the billionaire donors.

Despite having vast power, the neocons seem to be in perpetual anxiety. They’re like fleas on a beautiful dog—constantly worried about being scratched off.

And what might be the intellectual equivalent of the much-needed flea powder? The ideas of liberty, especially as shown forth by our two greatest anti-neocons: Murray Rothbard and Ron Paul.

I started LRC more than 15 years to support these ideas, and to tell the truth about the neocons, whom Murray had first warned me about. In the Congress and in private life, Ron has been the great anti-neocon champion.

If a grouplet is salaamed from the White House to the Congress, from the Pentagon to the CIA, why worry about opposition? Because neoconism is built on very ignoble lies, and we have the beautiful truth on our side.

So LRC has been smeared from pillar to post from the very beginning. 2014 may be the worst ever. The NY Times had a number of attacks, and have their many allies. A major search engine company joined in, and so did many paper and digital pubs.

There is no attempt to refute the ideas of freedom, peace, laissez-faire capitalism, honest money, private property, of the idea that we do not need a predatory and vicious state ruling over us, that civilization if built on commerce and trade with everyone, on the art of peace, not the weapons and mores of death.

LRC continues to reach young people, all over America and the world. I know we are doing good, because of all the attacks. They’re like anti-congressional medals of honor. But they’have had an effect, especially that giant search engine’s actions. This year, more than ever, LRC needs your help very much.

Whatever donation you can make would be a huge help, to keep LRC going.  Please, bug the neocons and boost liberty, by becoming a Supporter. I can’t tell you how important this is. Please help as much as you can, as soon as you can.

PS: It seems as if the state and its pals are advancing on all fronts, but one of their weak points is youth dissent and youth skepticism towards their lies and schemes. Help me keep this going, in 2015 and going forward. 

Well said sir, they combine the worst of Democratic activism with the worst of Conservative slathering adoration of the military and have infected the politics of both parties. They are an unfortunate aspect where Funiciello is right. But, on the Netanyahu/Iran Diplomatic issue the parties are obviously on a different wavelength. And the two MFers are not on the same wavelength either. 

It May Be That the Media is Centrist and You're a Right Wing Loon

This is in response to a Mark Frost editorial of a few weeks back that I didn't want to let slip totally into the ether without a bit of comment.

Are you as concerned about the nuclear deal with Iran that the Obama administration is pursuing?

Yes, but likely for different reasons since I'm not a neo-conservative. Mostly I'm concerned that most of our Congress doesn't realize that Bibi Netanyahu is a lying warmonger.

And then he does a copy and paste that would make Donald proud to a mystery editorial that has concerns about the negotiations with Iran. And zounds! It's from the so-called liberal media. The WashPo to be precise. Apparently, they have grown in Frost's estimation, while the NYT is, of course, still a liberal slime bucket.

Another line I wanted to point out was:

I know everybody is fixated on Lyin' Brian and Kim and Kanye, but count me as having no confidence in the Obama administration to make far-reaching foreign policy decisions by itself imposing its pre-set mindset.

You know who else has a pre-set mindset? Bibi Netanyahu. One more link to people saying he's lying. Why not? Also wanted to mention the first part of that quote. I barely know who the K's are. But, I do know that Bibi Netanyahu is a lyin' warmonger and that's more important to me than anything a lyin' anchorman has to say.

UPDATE: Had to come back and tuck this in here. It's the history of Bibi's Chicken Littleism over Iran's nuclear ambitions.

 In 1992, then-parliamentarian Netanyahu advised the Israeli Knesset that Iran was “three to five years” away from reaching nuclear weapons capability, and that this threat had to be “uprooted by an international front headed by the U.S.”

There's more at the link. I'll thank the prime minister to not volunteer our military for such forays.

Frost ends by saying the Wall Street Journal is still his favorite paper. Why? Has Murdoch brought the page 3 girls to it? That link is NSFW, BTW. This brings up a question I frequently ask myself, though (and never get an answer). A series of questions, actually.

If the so-called liberal media is lying to you, why the fuck do you read it?

Is your bullshit detector so good that it automatically pierces the left-wing lies to get at the creamy, truthy center?

Why don't you just read the goddam NY Post and quit whining?

If the media is so liberal, what happened last November?

Has it ever occurred to you that maybe 90 some odd percent of the media in this country is centrist and you are just a right-wing lunatic?

This leads to my request for a theory of how this liberal media conspiracy works. I'd like to see a "Loose Change: The Liberal Media Edition." If you're going to go around ballyhooing about the liberal media, you should at least be able to present a theory (not a postulate) for how it's possible that all the media outlets (sans Murdoch owned and talk radio) are in the pockets of the forces of evil (i.e. Democrats).

Just want to tack this on. You know where else liberals are hated? Russia.

Analysts believe that the majority mood of hyper-patriotism and the official media's labeling of liberal opponents as "traitors" may be encouraging violence by ultra-right fringe groups. And one of several theories currently being studied by the Kremlin's powerful Investigative Committee is that Nemtsov's murder may have been connected with "Ukrainian events."  

"The poisonous atmosphere we're living it is the basic problem," says Alexei Kondaurov, a former KGB general turned politician. "There are new people out there, armed groups, who are not controlled by the authorities. It's a new generation," he says. This includes Russian volunteer fighters in eastern Ukraine who now equate Russian liberals with Ukraine's Maidan revolutionaries. "I'm afraid this tragedy is just the beginning," he says.        

Vladimir Putin has condemned Nemtsov's killing, and created a high-level investigative team that will answer to him directly. Some protesters at Sunday's march said they blame Mr. Putin personally for the Nemtsov murder, but most were more circumspect.”

In recent years, the Kremlin successfully marginalized Russia's liberals by denying them access to mainstream media and tarring them as agents of Western influence. Putin currently enjoys 86 percent public approval while Nemtsov has barely showed up in opinion polls in recent years.

Kind of like the Bush years on steroids.

Hey, at least I didn't mention Hitler or Coulter.

Unwritten Letters to the Post Star

At the risk of looking like too much of a crank, do believe I'll send some editorial letters to my blog and not the Post Star. Anyway. This one goes out to you, John Siebrecht.

As the left continues to flounder and gasp for air like a fish dying on a beach, we on the right chuckle over our morning coffee.

Throwing pebbles against the one news outlet that is not in the left’s back pocket, these pitiful souls sweating from panic will do or say anything to divert our attention away from the fact that their liberal experiment, their apology for something that took place 200-plus years ago, has failed miserably. The anti-American liar occupying the White House now has set race relations back years and has made us a laughing stock around the world.

In Moreau, we have a guy living in his basement with one eye glued to Fox News 24/7 while the other eye watches the letters to the editor for anything that displeases him. His latest rant was accusing Mr. Hepp of creating the Islamic State; anyone but the empty suit hiding beneath his desk in Washington. A couple of weeks before this, a liberal guardian of our letters submitted an attempt at humor by way of a poem that was so embarrassing I almost felt sorry for the guy.

Over in Lake George, we have a woman seated on the left of the lake wants only her and her ilk allowed to voice their opinions. So typical of the left. Call people names embarrass them when they voice their opinions, and shout them down if they don’t fall in line. Sorry liberals, you’ve had six years and look at the mess the world is in. Who is at fault? This is now Obama’s war.

JOHN SIEBRECHT

First off, chuckling into your coffee while we die gasping for air doesn't seem very Christian. But, I'll leave that for another time. And I'll let my buddy Al and the lady from LG fend for themselves. What I really want to address is "The anti-American liar occupying the White House now has set race relations back years and has made us a laughing stock around the world."

I've seen this attack on President Obama here and in other venues. See, I don't think you can lay it all at the feet of Obama. The reason I like putting it up here is that I can add pictures like this to illustrate the point:

 

 

 

And if you don't think that's racist there are plenty more at the link. I do realize that he's not as white as all the presidents we've had that have come before him. In his defense, as Rudy points out, his mother was white.

 

 

 

 

No word on whether she was Dutch. Oh yeah, and I don't think we're a laughing stock around the world either, John.


Can you see why this well thought out rebuttal didn't become a letter to the local press? Some stupidity doesn't deserve a lot. Just a little blogging!

Just want to tack on an RIP for Leonard Nimoy, a beautiful man.

Significantly, Nimoy did not disregard his Jewishness after becoming a star. Even after his depiction of Dr. Spock became famous throughout the world, Nimoy continued to actively participate in Jewish causes, from fighting to preserve the Yiddish language and narrating a documentary about Hasidic Jews to publishing a Kabbalah-inspired book of photography, The Shekhina Project, which explored “the feminine essence of God.” He even called for peace in Israel by drawing on the mythology from “Star Trek,” recalling an episode in which “two men, half black, half white, are the last survivors of their peoples who have been at war with each other for thousands of years, yet the Enterprise crew could find no differences separating these two raging men.” 

Yes It Does, Just Ask Rick Santorum

Easy post. Now that I've written the letter. Here's a letter to the editor and area wingnuts who read the Post Star and to a certain someone. Enjoy!


     I haven't seen the movie about Chris Kyle, so I can't discuss that. I'd like to mention some other brave heroes who served in Iraq, and likely won't have movies made about them. Since March 2003, over 150 journalists and over 50 media support personnel have died there, in an effort to bring us the truth.

     Despite their sacrifice, and the efforts of others like them, some in this country see fit to disparage the press. I appreciate the fourth estate. If they tell me we've turned Iraq into a Hobbesian hell-hole, it's because we have. I'm sorry for those who cannot accept that or other truths. When you use the term liberal media, I can't give your opinions any more respect than if you had mentioned 9/11 Truth, Obama's birth certificate or the Illuminati.

     If someone can truly make the case for this grand conspiracy, then tell Congress to begin investigating immediately. They will, happily. In the meantime, could you drop me a few hints? Is it the wealthy owners or the reporters in the field or some nefarious group of jackals in between, who are pushing opinions ever leftward? Does anyone have in his hands, a list of names? Out of curiosity, does the internet have a liberal bias, as well?

And to my spell checker, Hobbesian is a fucking word.

Thoughts on Chronicle Reprentative Endorsement

I want to jot down a few thoughts on Mark Frost's endorsement of Matt Funiciello. At first, yes I was shocked at the endorsement since Funiciello is quite a bit to the left of Obama. Like all Dems, seemingly, our president is a corporate puppet. Then Frost admits he would not be dismayed if Elise Stefanik was to win and my world is spinning the right way again.

I like the idea of Kate Hogan, Larry Bulman and Funiciello in a 3-way race. And I appreciate that he lobbied them to run. Oh well, one out of three ain't bad. Of course, they're all from Warren County. There are 11 other counties. But, that just goes to his point, that in a district as large as the 21st there are few natives stepping up to run. Mind you, I'd still like to see the most capable person elected over some yokel like me who has lived here for 57 years.

We run into some disagreement at, "I see Aaron Woolf as a privileged dilettante from NYC."

At the point in the election where this statement was made, Aaron Woolf was down by 18 points. I realize politics ain't beanbag and all. But, this seems a little unnecessarily petty. We've had many politicians from the founding fathers forward who would qualify as privileged. Pretty sure Frost would not have referred to Willard Romney as a privileged dilettante. The definition of ad hominem:

   

    1 :  appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect

   

   2 :  marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made 

Better yet, from the urban dictionary:

An attack upon an opponent in order to discredit their argument or opinion. Ad hominems are used by immature and/or unintelligent people because they are unable to counter their opponent using logic and intelligence.

He also points out that Woolf only registered to vote in the district 5 days before declaring his candidacy. He declares Woolf to utter Democratic talking points and to have a generic candidacy. You know who else utters their party's talking points and has a generic candidacy? Elise Stefanik! Pretty sure she hasn't been registered to vote in the district all that long either. 

But, when he gets to Stefanik, Frost expresses great affection. He really, really likes her. He states, "She's smart and able-and I like how hard she's working to get to know the district and its people. She's paying some dues." Not like that big city phony, Aaron Woolf.

I'm not going into the actual endorsement except to say thanks for the news that Matt is a Truther Questioner. That bit hadn't hit my RADAR. Also appreciate the Chronicle interview from back in February. There was enough in there to keep me from considering to vote for him.

That reminds me: there was this constant drumbeat from the Chronicle for Woolf to do an interview with them back then. He did two. Stefanik never did one at all, that I saw. And what else I didn't see was the idea that she was ducking them, as was put forth for Woolf. It's different for Republicans.