Instinct-driven people are hooked on personal coonection, evenwhen they do not know how to connect. The politics of personal destruction and personal adulation are examples of both.
The connection to personalities is quite irrational, but usually boils down to some emotional trigger, for good or ill. The Bernie Sanders fans are as unhinged as the Trumpists. Are Sanders’ policy proposals more caring and supportive? Without a doubt. Coukd he get them enacted as President? Not likely.
He’s also got a deus ex machina mentality.
Trump’s a home wrecker. That is all he’s good at. Wrecking is probably an addiction by now.
Current events are resurrecting memories of Richard Nixon and prompt me to reiterate that, after he was re-elected, he had to be removed, so the plumbers set him up with a botched burglary. At whose behest? That I do not know, but Nixon had already been an agent of disaster — the abandonment of the gold standard, the cessation of the military draft, and the admission of teens to the electorate — that the powers that be just coukd nit take anymore. Nixon’s support for the guaranteed family income was likely the last straw. While McGovern had also supported the concept, if McGovern had been elected, it was unlikely he coukd get the legislation passed. Nixon’s track record spelled disaster. So they engineered his replacement by Gerald Ford.
Who? I don’t know, but perhaps Goldwater had something to do with it.
Putin (replying to previous question): That could be a first step, and we can also extend it. Options abound, and they all can be found in an appropriate legal framework.
Mason: President Putin, did you want President Trump to win the election and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?
Putin: Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.-Russian relationship back to normal.
However, the White House transcript, um, abbreviated the exchange as follows:
Putin: That could be a first step, and we can also extend it. Options abound, and they all can be found in an appropriate legal framework.
Mason: And did you direct any of your officials to help him do that?
Putin: Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.–Russia relationship back to normal.
It is a bit long-winded but informative. The only quibble I have is with the word “threat.” It is a weak word and insubstantial. I suspect the authors of these remarks used it out of habit and in the interest of familiarity. However, as Rosenstein specifies later on, the DOJ does not act on vague accusations, but on credible evidence. In that regard, I would have liked to see reference to the complaint as the instrument that gets the agency investigating.
In a sense, cyberwarfare is to military aggression as abuse is to murder. When we recognize that the goal is control, rather than elimination or eradication, it becomes obvious that military aggression is outdated and abusive actions require a more forceful response.
Instead of doling out acreage for homesteaders, miners, ranchers and drillers, Capitol Hill disburses dollars to “secure the nation.” National security is big business. Dollars make it easier to follow the trail. Paragon Systems Inc. is one of the leadeds.
Paragon Systems Inc.
Are dollars for guards better spent than dollars for bullets?
Human husbandry comes in many flavors. The husbanded are all restrained, though not necessarily caged.
Capitalism is, like authoritarianism, perverse. In the beginning, capital designated the surplus that woukd be saved for future use, rather than going to waste. Waste avoidance. That’s the ticket! However, capital mental concept, an idea, a figment of the imagination and, like many ideas, it has assumed an importance that has nothing to do with the reality to which it originally applied. The triumph of ideology. Humans assigning more importance to what they think than the reality they perceive. That is how they arrive at the notion of destroying a village in order to save it.