And thanks again to Susan for turning me on to alibris.com. Even if I can't combine orders, it beats Amazon on price and supports small businesses across the country. For ordering music I can listen to tracks on Amazon, then buy from alibis--turning the tables on Amazon doesn't make me feel guilty at all.
--Alan
P.S.: I had a dream last night that I double-ordered a small bone box inlaid with semiprecious stones from Amazon! The dream was vivid enough I had to check my orders this morning. I think the dream must have come from one or more stories about medieval artworks--reliquaries--that I had perused.
Building a Progressive International [Click] by Yanis Varoufakis I found more than one column today about the “Liberal” establishment’s concerted counter-attack on upstart populists, and the opening it presents for Fascism etc. Also the US misreading of the collapse of the Soviet Union and things since. This is the most hopeful article.
These things can never be said too often. Susan, are you involved with Code Pink? Sounds like the perfect fit for you. They're on FB. Just search codepink, like that with no spaces. I've given them a little money and plan to give more. It's true what you said the other day about there being too many causes to donate to them all. IMO Code Pink belongs on the shortlist of ultra deserving causes.
Have folks seen the letter from The Harvard Republican Club? It's well worth a read. Included below, divided into two posts:
Dear Members and Alumni,
In every presidential election since 1888, the members and Executive Board of the Harvard Republican Club have gathered to discuss, debate, and eventually endorse the standard-bearer of our party. But for the first time in 128 years, we, the oldest College Republicans chapter in the nation, will not be endorsing the Republican nominee.
Donald Trump holds views that are antithetical to our values not only as Republicans, but as Americans. The rhetoric he espouses –from racist slander to misogynistic taunts– is not consistent with our conservative principles, and his repeated mocking of the disabled and belittling of the sacrifices made by prisoners of war, Gold Star families, and Purple Heart recipients is not only bad politics, but absurdly cruel.
If enacted, Donald Trump’s platform would endanger our security both at home and abroad. Domestically, his protectionist trade policies and draconian immigration restrictions would enlarge our federal deficit, raise prices for consumers, and throw our economy back into recession. Trump’s global outlook, steeped in isolationism, is considerably out-of-step with the traditional Republican stance as well. The flippancy with which he is willing to abdicate the United States’ responsibility to lead is alarming. Calling for the US’ withdrawal from NATO and actively endorsing nuclear proliferation, Donald Trump’s foreign policy would wreak havoc on the established world order which has held aggressive foreign powers in check since World War II.
Perhaps most importantly, however, Donald Trump simply does not possess the temperament and character necessary to lead the United States through an increasingly perilous world. The last week should have made obvious to all what has been obvious to most for more than a year. In response to any slight –perceived or real– Donald Trump lashes out viciously and irresponsibly. In Trump’s eyes, disagreement with his actions or his policies warrants incessant name calling and derision: stupid, lying, fat, ugly, weak, failing, idiot –and that’s just his “fellow” Republicans.
He isn’t eschewing political correctness. He is eschewing basic human decency.
Donald Trump, despite spending more than a year on the campaign trail, has either refused or been unable to educate himself on issues that matter most to Americans like us. He speaks only in platitudes, about greatness, success, and winning. Time and time again, Trump has demonstrated his complete lack of knowledge on critical matters, meandering from position to position over the course of the election. When confronted about these frequent reversals, Trump lies in a manner more brazen and shameless than anything politics has ever seen.
Millions of people across the country are feeling despondent. Their hours have been cut, wages slashed, jobs even shipped overseas. But Donald Trump doesn’t have a plan to fix that. He has a plan to exploit that.
Donald Trump is a threat to the survival of the Republic. His authoritarian tendencies and flirtations with fascism are unparalleled in the history of our democracy. He hopes to divide us by race, by class, and by religion, instilling enough fear and anxiety to propel himself to the White House. He is looking to to pit neighbor against neighbor, friend against friend, American against American. We will not stand for this vitriolic rhetoric that is poisoning our country and our children.
President Reagan called on us to maintain this, our shining city on a hill. He called on us to maintain freedom abroad by keeping a strong presence in the world. He called on us to maintain liberty at home by upholding the democratic process and respecting our opponents. He called on us to maintain decency in our hearts by loving our neighbor.
He would be ashamed of Donald Trump. We are too.
This fall, we will instead focus our efforts on reclaiming the Republican Party from those who have done it considerable harm, campaigning for candidates who will uphold the conservative principles that have defined the Republican Party for generations. We will work to ensure both chambers of Congress remain in Republican hands, continuing to protect against executive overreach regardless of who wins the election this November.
We call on our party’s elected leaders to renounce their support of Donald Trump, and urge our fellow College Republicans to join us in condemning and withholding their endorsement from this dangerous man. The conservative movement in America should not and will not go quietly into the night.
A longtime student of American democracy, Alexis de Tocqueville once said, “America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”
De Tocqueville believed in the United States. Americans are a decent people. We work hard, protect our own, and look out for one another in times of need, regardless of the color of our skin, the God we worship, or our party registration. Donald Trump may not believe in that America, but we do. And that America will never cease to be great.
It is will written, and paints a nice picture of a Republican Party that has not existed in a very long time. I see no allusion to Nixon's Southern Strategy, for instance. But if the Harvardians want to make the GOP into something resembling the party of Eisenhower, I certainly approve. Civility, rationality, respect and responsibility are fine things. First comes thinking of something, then saying it, and then the action. Or put another way, "Great oaks from tiny acorns grow."
Well, if backing someone other than one of the two major party candidates is good enough for a congressman I reckon it's okay for us ordinary folk. :P Who knows? It may become all the rage.
Made it there and back again. :-) We had a barrel of laughs and some really great talks with our three Maine grands!
And now that I'm home… I was asked by a friend to comment on this Noam Chomsky article. So here's the link to the article, then my response. I'd be interested in your views as well. (Yes, you too, Susan!)
I have read the Noam Chomsky article. I found myself impatient with his wordy, almost snobbish phrasing. I think he could have said the same thing in less than half the space. That said, I will speak to the only real point he was making:
"4) The suffering which these and other similarly extremist policies and attitudes will impose on marginalized and already oppressed populations has a high probability of being significantly greater than that which will result from a Clinton presidency."
We are reminded that Trump's policies would create far worse consequences that Clinton's. This may be true, especially with regard to international relations, given how swiftly DT antagonises people. On the other hand, Trump may simply blunder so much as to render himself ineffective, possibly impeached, or worse. While, it's possible that Clinton would be more likely to get us into a war that drags us into an recession and costs many lives. So I'm not sure he's right, but given how much I detest the thought of DT as President, I could give him the benefit of the doubt. That still doesn't erase the reality that Bernie Sanders would have kept us out of war and helped the poor, while leading us in such a positive way, lifting spirits, including improving world relations. And it doesn't erase the fact that both of the main candidates for President are under investigation. And it doesn't erase the fact that our election was tampered with, and voters were suppressed. So there remains a reasonable doubt about whether Clinton is the rightful Dem candidate.
Be that as it may:
"5) 4) should constitute sufficient basis to voting for Clinton where a vote is potentially consequential-namely, in a contested, “swing” state."
I also take issue with the notion that voters in Swing States have a different responsibility than voters in other states. This was never the intention of our Founders, and needs to be rectified! I maintain that we need to invite anyone qualified to run for President, give each the exact same amount of money (no donations at all) and the same amount of time to make their case to the American people (such as six months!), then let all the voters vote ONCE. No donations, no parties, no superdelegates, no shenanigans. One vote, one voice. PS: Also "Qualifications" should include a psychiatric exam! Think of the time, money and frustration this would save the American people! My goodness.
Starting to read the article. First off, not voting is *NEVER* an option. Write in Snoopy if that's what your conscience dictates, but the deliberate choice not to vote (obviously as opposed to some exigency or accident preventing your doing so) makes a mockery of the blood that has been spilt and the bodies that have been maimed winning and protecting *your* right to vote. Such a choice also removes you from the debate. If you don't exercise the right to vote, you lose the right to bitch.
Finally, it should be understood that the reigning doctrinal system recognizes the role presidential elections perform in diverting the left from actions which have the potential to be effective in advancing its agenda. These include developing organizations committed to extra-political means, most notably street protest, but also competing for office in potentially winnable races. The left should devote the minimum of time necessary to exercise the LEV choice then immediately return to pursuing goals which are not timed to the national electoral cycle.
I agree, Cat. Voting is our civic duty. I can't see voting for the nominees of the Democratic, Republican, Libertarian or Green Parties this time, but I WILL find someone to vote FOR. The Peace and Freedom Party nominating convention is Aug. 12-13 (Fri.-Sat.). The official list of certified write-in candidates in California is due to be posted Oct. 28th, as memory serves me. Gloria La Riva is growing on me. Granted that California not being a part of Clinton's Three-State Strategy could alter the dynamic for some folks.
As for the points themselves, they make sense. Certainly, he is correct that those of us on the Left will be savaged by the Clintonistas if Trump wins. He would seem to indicate that some of such blame would be warranted since we would have facilitated the election of an administration that preys on the marginalized and vulnerable. But I don't think that's true. As Alan points out, a vote for Trump is a vote for Trump. A vote for somebody else is a vote for somebody else. Of course, that logic is beyond a great many people, especially supporters of HRC.
I really don't know. As a marginalized and vulnerable person myself, do I have an obligation by Chomsky's lights to vote for Clinton? Or is he too using the bludgeon "It will be your fault if Trump wins?"
After reading the piece I'm confused and beginning to feel trapped again. I'll go see what Listener has written.
Alan, I'll have to look at the Peace and Freedom Party again, but my fuzzy recollection is that something about it alarmed me. What that something was has, of course, slipped my sieve, er, steel trap of a mind. But I think I'll probably be going with Stein.
I don't think you need bother, Cat; so far as I know they are only on the ballot in California. They ARE a pretty far-out bunch. Gloria La Riva is a frank Stalinist, but she doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of getting elected dogcatcher, much less President. I am sure she would appreciate the vote (unlike others who will not be named), and she can't do any harm. Perfect protest candidate, no? The American Independent Party still has a ballot line in California, but that's again something you don't have to worry about in the Bay State.
About 8 years ago I was on a panel at a science fiction convention where we were asked whether we typically voted *for* a candidate or *against* the candidate's opponent. It took only a moment's thought to realize I typically voted against someone. Then, on second thought, I realized that election was an exception: I was voting *for* Obama. But this election is not an exception. I will be voting against Trump.
Whether Illinois will be a swing state is difficult to predict at the moment. Probably not, if nothing changes. But it's close enough that a Trump surge could make Illinois a swing state.
Nope, Chomsky has joined the ranks of the scolders. The ones who try to shame or bully you into doing what they want. I will not vote for Hillary because she is NOT the legitimate nominee. She won the nomination through fraud and vote rigging and voter suppression. Why would I reward corruption with my vote? Because Trump is scary? Believe me, Hillary is even more scary. I oppose almost everything she supports and I don't trust anything about her. Also I've heard rumors about her healthy for a few years now and today I saw a video of her that looked frighteningly like she was having a seizure.
Trump is a total bombastic idiot and he flails around like a beached whale. Should he win the election he will face opposition on all sides. Hillary, on the other hand, will be cheered as she quietly makes her back-room deals, starts the next war and gives Netanyahu even *more* of our tax money. She just had a big fund-raising do with the fracking industry and I believe she will allow and expand fracking - poisoning what water Nestle hasn't stolen or Gov. Snyder hasn't poisoned with lead.
I want the Democratic Party to get the clear message that we are NOT okay with their cheating and their secret deals and their preference for corporations while ignoring the people.
How did our country come to this? Two truly terrible and dangerous candidates, either of whom will be very bad for us - though business will love them, not to mention the military/industrial complex. It's going to be a rough ride.
Oh, and the video of Hillary's seeming seizure is on YouTube. Date was July 21. Snopes rates it "unproven", but it sure as heck looked like a seizure to me!
That ain't no epileptic seizure, at least not a gran mal--i've seen them. Petit mal seizures I have not seen, but I doubt it's that. A silly attempt at humor, more likely.
Wikipedia is helpful re petit mall (AKA absence) seizures [Click] and there is a link under "External links" to a series of videos. Definitely not like HRC's behavior, which looks like an attempt at juvenile humor to me. One video, taken from her left at eye-level, shows her interaction with Chelsea and two other young women; she is obviously hamming it up for their benefit; Chelsea appears amused rather than alarmed or puzzled. The other video is taken from above, to Clinton's right and forward, so the interaction with the young women is not visible.
For those with a yen for understand of economics, here is an article quoted in our local newspaper today: Economists Turn a Blind Eye to Historical Data [Click] The main thesis is that the 2008 crash was debt-driven rather than part of a normal business cycle, and recovery from such recessions is normally very slow, deflationary, and hardly responds to normal measures. I was moved to purchase a copy of a book the author referenced, This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly [Click] Hardback 99 cents plus shipping at alibris.com, or available at amazon.com
Clinton's 50-state plan seems to be a three-state plan: Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio. [Click] What makes me think that Honorary Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz may not be very busy…or might be assigned to the Nebraska office?
ReplyDeleteAnd thanks again to Susan for turning me on to alibris.com. Even if I can't combine orders, it beats Amazon on price and supports small businesses across the country. For ordering music I can listen to tracks on Amazon, then buy from alibis--turning the tables on Amazon doesn't make me feel guilty at all.
--Alan
P.S.: I had a dream last night that I double-ordered a small bone box inlaid with semiprecious stones from Amazon! The dream was vivid enough I had to check my orders this morning. I think the dream must have come from one or more stories about medieval artworks--reliquaries--that I had perused.
Wow, Alan. That's my kind of dream. *grin*
DeleteAndy Borowitz
ReplyDeleteThe question of whether or not Trump should be trusted with our nuclear codes misses the point. I would not trust him with my Netflix password.
LOL
DeleteOf course, it isn't funny really, but...
Building a Progressive International [Click] by Yanis Varoufakis
ReplyDeleteI found more than one column today about the “Liberal” establishment’s concerted counter-attack on upstart populists, and the opening it presents for Fascism etc. Also the US misreading of the collapse of the Soviet Union and things since. This is the most hopeful article.
—Alan
-3 points; reference not clear. "Building a Progressive International" is the most hopeful article.
DeleteAlan
That was clear.
DeleteIt is early days yet, but I see close to zero action by ourrevolution.com and brandnewcongress.com beyond accumulating donors and e-mail lists.
ReplyDelete—Alan
http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/reaching-beyond-the-candidates-to-create-a-progressive-future
ReplyDeleteI've said it so many times I am sure people are tired of hearing it from me, but...... War is our biggest business and death is our primary export.
DeleteThese things can never be said too often. Susan, are you involved with Code Pink? Sounds like the perfect fit for you. They're on FB. Just search codepink, like that with no spaces. I've given them a little money and plan to give more. It's true what you said the other day about there being too many causes to donate to them all. IMO Code Pink belongs on the shortlist of ultra deserving causes.
Have folks seen the letter from The Harvard Republican Club? It's well worth a read. Included below, divided into two posts:
ReplyDeleteDear Members and Alumni,
In every presidential election since 1888, the members and Executive Board of the Harvard Republican Club have gathered to discuss, debate, and eventually endorse the standard-bearer of our party. But for the first time in 128 years, we, the oldest College Republicans chapter in the nation, will not be endorsing the Republican nominee.
Donald Trump holds views that are antithetical to our values not only as Republicans, but as Americans. The rhetoric he espouses –from racist slander to misogynistic taunts– is not consistent with our conservative principles, and his repeated mocking of the disabled and belittling of the sacrifices made by prisoners of war, Gold Star families, and Purple Heart recipients is not only bad politics, but absurdly cruel.
If enacted, Donald Trump’s platform would endanger our security both at home and abroad. Domestically, his protectionist trade policies and draconian immigration restrictions would enlarge our federal deficit, raise prices for consumers, and throw our economy back into recession. Trump’s global outlook, steeped in isolationism, is considerably out-of-step with the traditional Republican stance as well. The flippancy with which he is willing to abdicate the United States’ responsibility to lead is alarming. Calling for the US’ withdrawal from NATO and actively endorsing nuclear proliferation, Donald Trump’s foreign policy would wreak havoc on the established world order which has held aggressive foreign powers in check since World War II.
Perhaps most importantly, however, Donald Trump simply does not possess the temperament and character necessary to lead the United States through an increasingly perilous world. The last week should have made obvious to all what has been obvious to most for more than a year. In response to any slight –perceived or real– Donald Trump lashes out viciously and irresponsibly. In Trump’s eyes, disagreement with his actions or his policies warrants incessant name calling and derision: stupid, lying, fat, ugly, weak, failing, idiot –and that’s just his “fellow” Republicans.
He isn’t eschewing political correctness. He is eschewing basic human decency.
TBC
Continued:
DeleteDonald Trump, despite spending more than a year on the campaign trail, has either refused or been unable to educate himself on issues that matter most to Americans like us. He speaks only in platitudes, about greatness, success, and winning. Time and time again, Trump has demonstrated his complete lack of knowledge on critical matters, meandering from position to position over the course of the election. When confronted about these frequent reversals, Trump lies in a manner more brazen and shameless than anything politics has ever seen.
Millions of people across the country are feeling despondent. Their hours have been cut, wages slashed, jobs even shipped overseas. But Donald Trump doesn’t have a plan to fix that. He has a plan to exploit that.
Donald Trump is a threat to the survival of the Republic. His authoritarian tendencies and flirtations with fascism are unparalleled in the history of our democracy. He hopes to divide us by race, by class, and by religion, instilling enough fear and anxiety to propel himself to the White House. He is looking to to pit neighbor against neighbor, friend against friend, American against American. We will not stand for this vitriolic rhetoric that is poisoning our country and our children.
President Reagan called on us to maintain this, our shining city on a hill. He called on us to maintain freedom abroad by keeping a strong presence in the world. He called on us to maintain liberty at home by upholding the democratic process and respecting our opponents. He called on us to maintain decency in our hearts by loving our neighbor.
He would be ashamed of Donald Trump. We are too.
This fall, we will instead focus our efforts on reclaiming the Republican Party from those who have done it considerable harm, campaigning for candidates who will uphold the conservative principles that have defined the Republican Party for generations. We will work to ensure both chambers of Congress remain in Republican hands, continuing to protect against executive overreach regardless of who wins the election this November.
We call on our party’s elected leaders to renounce their support of Donald Trump, and urge our fellow College Republicans to join us in condemning and withholding their endorsement from this dangerous man. The conservative movement in America should not and will not go quietly into the night.
A longtime student of American democracy, Alexis de Tocqueville once said, “America is great because she is good. If America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.”
De Tocqueville believed in the United States. Americans are a decent people. We work hard, protect our own, and look out for one another in times of need, regardless of the color of our skin, the God we worship, or our party registration. Donald Trump may not believe in that America, but we do. And that America will never cease to be great.
The Harvard Republican Club
This is enough to restore my respect for Republicans.
DeleteIt is will written, and paints a nice picture of a Republican Party that has not existed in a very long time. I see no allusion to Nixon's Southern Strategy, for instance. But if the Harvardians want to make the GOP into something resembling the party of Eisenhower, I certainly approve. Civility, rationality, respect and responsibility are fine things. First comes thinking of something, then saying it, and then the action. Or put another way, "Great oaks from tiny acorns grow."
Delete--Alan
Yes, very impressive.
DeleteCongressman Backs Libertarian Presidential Candidate in Campaign First - Click
ReplyDeleteWell, if backing someone other than one of the two major party candidates is good enough for a congressman I reckon it's okay for us ordinary folk. :P Who knows? It may become all the rage.
Made it there and back again. :-) We had a barrel of laughs and some really great talks with our three Maine grands!
ReplyDeleteAnd now that I'm home… I was asked by a friend to comment on this Noam Chomsky article. So here's the link to the article, then my response. I'd be interested in your views as well. (Yes, you too, Susan!)
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/noam-chomskys-8-point-rationale-voting-lesser-evil-presidential-candidate?akid=14512.1955002.jXoaBV&rd=1&src=newsletter1061430&t=9
I have read the Noam Chomsky article. I found myself impatient with his wordy, almost snobbish phrasing. I think he could have said the same thing in less than half the space. That said, I will speak to the only real point he was making:
"4) The suffering which these and other similarly extremist policies and attitudes will impose on marginalized and already oppressed populations has a high probability of being significantly greater than that which will result from a Clinton presidency."
We are reminded that Trump's policies would create far worse consequences that Clinton's. This may be true, especially with regard to international relations, given how swiftly DT antagonises people. On the other hand, Trump may simply blunder so much as to render himself ineffective, possibly impeached, or worse. While, it's possible that Clinton would be more likely to get us into a war that drags us into an recession and costs many lives. So I'm not sure he's right, but given how much I detest the thought of DT as President, I could give him the benefit of the doubt. That still doesn't erase the reality that Bernie Sanders would have kept us out of war and helped the poor, while leading us in such a positive way, lifting spirits, including improving world relations. And it doesn't erase the fact that both of the main candidates for President are under investigation. And it doesn't erase the fact that our election was tampered with, and voters were suppressed. So there remains a reasonable doubt about whether Clinton is the rightful Dem candidate.
Be that as it may:
"5) 4) should constitute sufficient basis to voting for Clinton where a vote is potentially consequential-namely, in a contested, “swing” state."
I also take issue with the notion that voters in Swing States have a different responsibility than voters in other states. This was never the intention of our Founders, and needs to be rectified! I maintain that we need to invite anyone qualified to run for President, give each the exact same amount of money (no donations at all) and the same amount of time to make their case to the American people (such as six months!), then let all the voters vote ONCE. No donations, no parties, no superdelegates, no shenanigans. One vote, one voice.
PS: Also "Qualifications" should include a psychiatric exam! Think of the time, money and frustration this would save the American people! My goodness.
DeleteStarting to read the article. First off, not voting is *NEVER* an option. Write in Snoopy if that's what your conscience dictates, but the deliberate choice not to vote (obviously as opposed to some exigency or accident preventing your doing so) makes a mockery of the blood that has been spilt and the bodies that have been maimed winning and protecting *your* right to vote. Such a choice also removes you from the debate. If you don't exercise the right to vote, you lose the right to bitch.
Now, this makes sense to me:
DeleteFinally, it should be understood that the reigning doctrinal system recognizes the role presidential elections perform in diverting the left from actions which have the potential to be effective in advancing its agenda. These include developing organizations committed to extra-political means, most notably street protest, but also competing for office in potentially winnable races. The left should devote the minimum of time necessary to exercise the LEV choice then immediately return to pursuing goals which are not timed to the national electoral cycle.
I agree, Cat. Voting is our civic duty. I can't see voting for the nominees of the Democratic, Republican, Libertarian or Green Parties this time, but I WILL find someone to vote FOR. The Peace and Freedom Party nominating convention is Aug. 12-13 (Fri.-Sat.). The official list of certified write-in candidates in California is due to be posted Oct. 28th, as memory serves me. Gloria La Riva is growing on me. Granted that California not being a part of Clinton's Three-State Strategy could alter the dynamic for some folks.
Delete--Alan
DeleteAs for the points themselves, they make sense. Certainly, he is correct that those of us on the Left will be savaged by the Clintonistas if Trump wins. He would seem to indicate that some of such blame would be warranted since we would have facilitated the election of an administration that preys on the marginalized and vulnerable. But I don't think that's true. As Alan points out, a vote for Trump is a vote for Trump. A vote for somebody else is a vote for somebody else. Of course, that logic is beyond a great many people, especially supporters of HRC.
I really don't know. As a marginalized and vulnerable person myself, do I have an obligation by Chomsky's lights to vote for Clinton? Or is he too using the bludgeon "It will be your fault if Trump wins?"
After reading the piece I'm confused and beginning to feel trapped again. I'll go see what Listener has written.
Alan, I'll have to look at the Peace and Freedom Party again, but my fuzzy recollection is that something about it alarmed me. What that something was has, of course, slipped my sieve, er, steel trap of a mind. But I think I'll probably be going with Stein.
DeleteI don't think you need bother, Cat; so far as I know they are only on the ballot in California. They ARE a pretty far-out bunch. Gloria La Riva is a frank Stalinist, but she doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of getting elected dogcatcher, much less President. I am sure she would appreciate the vote (unlike others who will not be named), and she can't do any harm. Perfect protest candidate, no? The American Independent Party still has a ballot line in California, but that's again something you don't have to worry about in the Bay State.
Delete--Alan
About 8 years ago I was on a panel at a science fiction convention where we were asked whether we typically voted *for* a candidate or *against* the candidate's opponent. It took only a moment's thought to realize I typically voted against someone. Then, on second thought, I realized that election was an exception: I was voting *for* Obama. But this election is not an exception. I will be voting against Trump.
DeleteWhether Illinois will be a swing state is difficult to predict at the moment. Probably not, if nothing changes. But it's close enough that a Trump surge could make Illinois a swing state.
From Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, 14th Ed.:
ReplyDelete"Tall oaks from little acorns grow."
--David Everett (1791)
"The lofty oak from a small acorn grows." [translation]
--Lewis Duncomb [1711-1730], De Minimis Maxima
Parvis e glandibus quercus.
Tall oaks from little acorns grow.
--Anonymous Latin saying
--Alan
Nope, Chomsky has joined the ranks of the scolders. The ones who try to shame or bully you into doing what they want. I will not vote for Hillary because she is NOT the legitimate nominee. She won the nomination through fraud and vote rigging and voter suppression. Why would I reward corruption with my vote? Because Trump is scary? Believe me, Hillary is even more scary. I oppose almost everything she supports and I don't trust anything about her. Also I've heard rumors about her healthy for a few years now and today I saw a video of her that looked frighteningly like she was having a seizure.
ReplyDeleteTrump is a total bombastic idiot and he flails around like a beached whale. Should he win the election he will face opposition on all sides. Hillary, on the other hand, will be cheered as she quietly makes her back-room deals, starts the next war and gives Netanyahu even *more* of our tax money. She just had a big fund-raising do with the fracking industry and I believe she will allow and expand fracking - poisoning what water Nestle hasn't stolen or Gov. Snyder hasn't poisoned with lead.
I want the Democratic Party to get the clear message that we are NOT okay with their cheating and their secret deals and their preference for corporations while ignoring the people.
How did our country come to this? Two truly terrible and dangerous candidates, either of whom will be very bad for us - though business will love them, not to mention the military/industrial complex. It's going to be a rough ride.
Thank you, Susan. Well said!
DeleteOh, and the video of Hillary's seeming seizure is on YouTube. Date was July 21. Snopes rates it "unproven", but it sure as heck looked like a seizure to me!
ReplyDeleteMum must not have seen it. Or else she chose to ignore it. And Sis didn't mention anything about Hillary having a scary episode. Interesting.
DeleteThat ain't no epileptic seizure, at least not a gran mal--i've seen them. Petit mal seizures I have not seen, but I doubt it's that. A silly attempt at humor, more likely.
Delete--Alan
DeleteWikipedia is helpful re petit mall (AKA absence) seizures [Click] and there is a link under "External links" to a series of videos. Definitely not like HRC's behavior, which looks like an attempt at juvenile humor to me. One video, taken from her left at eye-level, shows her interaction with Chelsea and two other young women; she is obviously hamming it up for their benefit; Chelsea appears amused rather than alarmed or puzzled. The other video is taken from above, to Clinton's right and forward, so the interaction with the young women is not visible.
Ugh! Not *my* idear of humor!
DeleteFor those with a yen for understand of economics, here is an article quoted in our local newspaper today: Economists Turn a Blind Eye to Historical Data [Click] The main thesis is that the 2008 crash was debt-driven rather than part of a normal business cycle, and recovery from such recessions is normally very slow, deflationary, and hardly responds to normal measures. I was moved to purchase a copy of a book the author referenced, This Time Is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly [Click] Hardback 99 cents plus shipping at alibris.com, or available at amazon.com
ReplyDelete--Alan