The New Haberdasher

Photo

Wed, 07 Mar 2012 10:17:50 -0500

I Made it onto Radio Havana Cuba’s Mailbag Show, with host...

Sun, 26 Feb 2012 23:27:53 -0500

I Made it onto Radio Havana Cuba’s Mailbag Show, with host Ed Newman. Newman read my email on the show, and even correctly pronounced my name. I am such a geek: I feel like a teenager who heard their request played on the radio back in the day.

Here is the Link to RHC’s English feed, starting at 7pm CST and playing, basically all night long.

kopoint: This is the KoPoint Political Explainer New...

Tue, 10 Jan 2012 19:11:53 -0500

kopoint:

This is the KoPoint Political Explainer New Hampshire edition. On this edition, I was joined by guest contributors Chris Poirier and Dan Patterson. Here are the Show Notes:

Ko Point Political Explainer, New Hampshire Edition.
Produced on January 9, 2012 by Doc Stodden

1. Intro
Element: Intro
Bed: Sgt Sterling Bed, Sampled from “Captain Sterling’s Little Problem” by the Coup

2. Talkset: What is a Primary, New Hampshire Edition
Bed: “Abject Worship of Authority” by Subatomicglue, downloaded from opsound.org

3. Element: Ko Short ID
Ramp: Fascistramp, taken from Bliiy Bragg and Willco, “All you Fascists”

4. Talkset: Christopher Poirier, Candidate Profile Mitt Romney
Bed: Guineo, “My Place”, downloaded from opsound.org

5. Element: AlamodeID
Ramp: Overseer Ramp, taken from KRS-One’s “The Sound of the Police”

6. Talkset: What is a Liberal
Bed: Avelino, “I love Rhodes” downloaded from opsound.org

7. Element: KPSweepHansen1
Ramp: JBGRamp, taken from The Sex Pistos’ “Johnny Be Goode”

8. Talkset: Dan Patterson, New Hampshire Intro
Bed: Alvelino” Aciiid” downloaded from opsound.org

9. Element: Kopointsweepvic
Ramp: Youthramp, taken from Matisyahu, “Youth”

10. Talkset: KoPoint Commentary, Why Do campaigns use Negative Ads?
Bed: HipHop Bed, sampled from “Bigger than HipHop” by Dead Prez

11. Element: South Carolina Preview
Ramp: 25or6to4 Ramp, taken from “25 or 6 to 4” by Chicago”

12: Element: Outro

Here’s a little about Christopher Poirier:

” I am a program/project manager with about five years of experience supporting public and private entities within the Washington D.C. Beltway. Though when I’m not busy battling the day-to-day bureaucracy of this great nation I am actively engaged in posting my random musings on life and the great pursuit up on twitter, Google+, Facebook, and what have you. Yet, the great pursuit will look mostly like technology, gaming, government, and current events related items of interest. If it happened or might happen, I probably hold an opinion on it and have probably posted something.”

January 2012 Iowa Caucus Roundup

Wed, 04 Jan 2012 13:27:00 -0500

What a night. First the Results: Mitt Romney wins Iowa Caucuses by 8 votes. A real nail biter, to be sure. Santorum comes in second, trailing Romney by 8 votes (obviously) and Paul finishes third with 21% of the vote going his way. The bottom three were Gingrich, who despite a massive surge that I predicted wouldn’t last right here on the Haberdasher, finished with a disappointing 13% (of course, he blamed it on the scorched earth type of politics that he himself popularized in the 1980’s and which helped him win the Speaker of the House role after 1994’s “Republican Revolution”), while Perry and Bachmann finished far back in the pack. Iowa’s first casualty, Perry, has gone back to Texas to reassess his chances for the future of his run (EDIT: It appears that Perry will be going on to SC after all.)

That’s the facts, Ma’am. Now let’s look at the analysis. The winner of the Iowa Caucus (and I can put that word out straight, without quotes, as in “winner”) wasn’t even working for Republican votes last night. The President of the United States was the real winner of the Iowa Republican Caucuses last night, regardless of what the television and the news paper and the blogs say. I don’t write that as a partisan: As a socialist, I resigned from the Party so I could vote for Obama and contribute to his campaign in 2008. I have since rejoined my Party and will very shortly be making my campaign donation to the SP’s candidate, Stewart Alexander, as well as renewing my dues in the SP for this year. I want to stress that Obama neither needs my vote, nor really demonstrates that he wants it, so I can with good conscience, return to my own Party and help them as I can. At any rate, I am not a cheerleader for Obama and I am not hyping him when I say he won last night.

What makes me say that he won the caucus last night? Well, the caucuses revealed that among the hard base, they still haven’t settled. I hear a lot of folks on television explaining that this is somehow a good thing, that Republicans are still making up their mind. And yet, it is obvious that few who are running on the right this year have the ability to attract a large enough coalition of voters to win in the General Election. Most of them have tried to out-right one another to the point that any move to the middle will seem disingenuous. What we have here then is the potential for a major crisis of rising expectations. Conservatives in the US, because all we have heard for the last few months are Republican Primary candidates on the television, are under the seductive spell that they are what is going on in this country. Even Democrats are talking about them. It gives them this idea that no matter what happens, Conservatism will win in the fall, and the only real questions is how conservative the President will be.

But the discussion itself is truncated in this fashion, and Obama is smart to hang out and let it happen. The more we only talk about the right in this country for the first half of the year, the further right these people try to place themselves. The result is a serious miscalculation of where the median voter is. The President, on the other hand, has the opportunity to let the Republicans have their discussion, to move their own median position as far away from that median voter and then capture the median voter himself, as well as a significant portion of the people to that median voter’s right. By the time the GOP realizes it, and tries to move back to the left, they will automatically shear off a huge chunk of their base who will immediately resent the fact that they, who were sure they were going to get their way because that is all we have been talking about for so long, will be forgotten as the candidate tries to move to the center. And that candidate will be squeezed between Obama, who will be running slightly right of center, and their far right base, who will not let them move any closer without threatening to bolt.

It’s a classic squeeze play taken right from the pages of Anthony Downs, which I am sure that Obama (or his strategists) have read, and the GOP is screwed. What is the evidence? Well, giving 13,000 + votes to Santorum and Santorum +8 to Romney. Romney may be closest to the median voter, and yet the Conservatives are bent on keeping that guy from becoming the nominee. They are guaranteeing the above scenario. And Obama and his crew, watching this scenario play out in the first contest of the year, have gotta be very happy. By September, they may not even have to try. They should simply say “Do you really want THIS guy (and it will be a guy, I predict… As I write this, I discover Bachmann will be suspending her campaign.) running the country? Really?” And only the deep south states who still think they are part of the Confederacy will vote for him, because everyone else lives in the real world. Contrary to what the GOP thinks, the median voter is not a conservative, but a real independent. Obama has to be pretty satisfied with the results there in Iowa.

As for the “winner” of the Iowa GOP Caucuses, Mitt Romney did his part by declaring the caucuses, for the most part, to be a three way tie. He congratulated Santorum and Paul on their victories (his words) as well as himself last night. While some may read this as a victory of a group of people who most people think are conservative and one who people don’t really believe is a conservative, I read it as an acknowledgement of the victory for conservatives and an attempt by Romney to place himself in that group among the viewers. It is a code that needs to be deciphered more completely, but this is what I suspect is going on. Romney was wounded last night, because for a couple weeks, he has been under the impression that he had an opening there, and groups affiliated with his campaign (unofficially, of course…) have been blasting a path through for him in that state with millions of dollars of ad placement. And for all that, he finished with an 8 vote lead.

So Congratulations, Mitt. For all your money, you won by 8 votes, a spread that in a real election would have automatically triggered a recount and probably a raft of court challenges. I’m not trying to take anything away from the “win” in Iowa, which Romney earned. But the fact is: The case can easily be made that Romney bought those 8 votes, at the very least, because Romney’s Iowa’s totals reflect his standing nationally. Only a quarter of likely voters support him. When there are fewer options, maybe those numbers will increase, but all of the others running are seen as “conservatives” and he is not, so as they drop out, those votes go to the other “conservatives” and not to the person that conservatives don’t count as one of them.

Slightly less “quotey”, Of the Republican “winners” of Iowa, perhaps the most consequential Republican victory in Iowa was Rick Santorum. But I can downplay this one: Santorum won, but it was unearned. It wasn’t anything he did or said or asserted. He got his vote result because 75% of Iowans don’t like Romney. It is true that he is the “anyone but Romney” candidate who happens to have risen at exactly the right time. And the benefit is a virtual tie with a person who outspent everyone else in Iowa and who has been campaigning there since 2007.

But I shouldn’t say it wasn’t anything he did. Santorum won in Iowa partly because 1) he is considered reliably conservative, and 2) there is a high probability that he met everyone, or at least someone that everyone knew, in the state of Iowa. Romney has been there for several years and couldn’t do much better than Santorum did in several months. And Santorum spent nothing in Iowa compared to Romney. Santorum did more with less, and his finish as a virtual tie in Iowa was that much more impressive.

But people talk about Romney’s ceiling. They say he consistently polls about 25% in the early states, and never gets much higher than that. Santorum has never ever been higher than the 25% he got in Iowa. That could be described as its peak: time will tell. As long as the conservative side remains as crowded as it is, with people who have VERY different (respectively) styles of “conservatism” all continuing to play in that field, it is possible that they will continue to cut one another up. Bachmann’s leaving the campaign may shake things up a little bit, and may boost Santorum a little. Bachmann after all was similar to Santorum, moreso than any of the other conservatives in the race, and it would not be hard for her true believer supporters to switch to Santorum. They were pretty much taking the exact same position, except Santorum has a Y chromosome. Many of those voters may also go to Gingrich, while Paul probably won’t benefit much.

So Santorum may get just the boost he needs to beat Romney, but it is also possible that winnowing the field strengthens Gingrich too. And as long as Paul remains in the race, the libertarians will not go to support some other candidate. So while Romney has a ceiling, so too do the other ones, and until someone leaves the race, nobody will get much more than like a quarter of the votes.

And yet: People in the US don’t really know Santorum. When they find out who he is, what he stands for, and what he will do, people will likely change their mind. The reason that Romney has a ceiling is that people know him. He has been around a while, and has already been vetted in 2008. People don’t know Santorum, but once he gets his share of the scrutiny, we may see his ceiling drop far below his showing in Iowa would suggest that it is at. And Gingrich will benefit then.

I won’t spend much time on Paul. He is an odd duck in this campaign, and is not a Republican. His policy statements are marginally in line with the Republican Party, and most Republicans think the guy is, as Bachmann said last night, “dangerous for the National Security of the United States.” And yet the segment of the electorate who supports him will support him, win or lose and will not abandon him despite poor showings in primary elections. And if he tries to use his nominees to help out a different Republican short of brokering a deal at the Convention, his supporters will likely reject that move. So his story still has yet to be told. And his influence will be that of king maker, not as a winner. And yet, he’ll also serve as the spoiler for many Republican hopes.

Finally, I want to talk a little about the Loser. First, I am vindicated and that’s what it’s really all about, for me anyway. There was some fellow who wrote, as Gingrich was rising, that “You know: this somehow feels like more than the flavor of the month, ABR candidate. For some reason, Gingrich really has a chance.” My answer was, “No he doesn’t. Romney has the machine, Gingrich doesn’t.” And I was right. Romney’s machine eviscerated Gingrich, and Gingrich’s only response was to complain about how it wasn’t fair that Romney could run a smear campaign against Gingrich, while Gingrich was trying to keep it clean.

Let’s be clear here: Gingrich is known for his no-holds-barred, take no prisoners type of campaigning. He, and Republican Party operatives, engineered scorched earth as a campaign tactic. And he would have used it this election if he could have. But the fact is that he couldn’t. He didn’t have the machine ready to go. He never did. He didn’t have enough money to have a machine anything close to the size of Romney’s. And when Romney’s machine ramped up, Gingrich went on television to complain about how Romney was using his own tactics against him, while he was incapable of returning fire due to his lack of money and organization. Gingrich was an accidental frontrunner who was never electable. His frontrunner status was a function of conservatives’ dislike of Romney, and not of anything he did. In fact, he was the frontrunner IN SPITE of the things he did.

But now, he predicts (probably correctly) that Santorum will get a bunch of money, and so he has more or less vowed to seek personal revenge against Romney, whose only real crime was being better this year at Newt’s game than Newt was. Newt has volunteered to sink Romney, and has therefore tied his wagon to a seemingly viable alternative, Rick Santorum. The battle between Newt and Romney is now personal: Gingrich said so when he called Romney a liar. And so Newt knows there is no way he will win anymore, but he is going to do what he can to ensure that Romney doesn’t either. Defacto win for Santorum, as things shake out today, if he can hold it together throughout the next few races. Unless Paul pulls something at the convention.

And so: I return to my original point. Obama wins the Iowa Republican Caucuses. And if the next few selection proceses turn out this way, Obama will win in November too. He will either have a battered and embittered Romney, who is hated by a significant portion of this party and enjoys the lukewarm support of the remainder of his Party, or Santorum, who is so far away from the position of the average American that there is no way in hell this guy will stand up to Obama in the fall after a brokered deal at the convention.

And as a leftist, that is fine with me.

PS. Stay tuned. Apparently Perry is not done, which may put a further cramp in Santorum’s style. Perry will be even easier for Obama who will run a clinic on him in the fall.

kopoint: Produced for KoPoint Stories by Doc Stodden Political...

Tue, 03 Jan 2012 19:08:19 -0500

kopoint:

Produced for KoPoint Stories by Doc Stodden Political Director of KoPoint.

— — —

This inaugural edition of the KoPoint Political Explainer covers everything you need to know about the Iowa Caucuses, including what is actually going on in Iowa tonight, who Ron Paul is, What are the major issues facing the potential winner of the General Election in November, what a conservative is, and why We should pay attention to Iowa. Voice credits include Doc Stodden, (Host) Mallary Allen, John Hansen and Victor Moses as supporting voices.Barry Goldwater also makes an appearance.

Full Post

Occupy and the Tasks of Socialists « Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist

Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:50:25 -0500

Occupy and the Tasks of Socialists « Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist:

I don’t know that I necessarily agree that the socialist left needs to take a more activist role in Occupy. It is perfectly legitimate work to declare allegience and do parrallel work toward the same goals, working together where it is applicable, and not where it is not. As far as OWS advancing socialism in the US, we can and should work together. But the fact is, they are on their own program, and it diverges slightly with the program of socialism, which is and must be abolition of capitalism as the dominant paradigmatic model of our social organization in the US. And so, as they try to build a new society within the camps, adopting an essentially inefficient and fundamentally dysfunctional government-like apparatus, this is where socialists need to leave them to it, and if they insist on maintaining that this is the only legitimate source of authority within the movement, let them drown with it. There is a reason that socialists take a dim view of their methods. It’s because socialists don’t trust anarchists to govern. Nor should we.

At any rate, this is a nice long article, which has a bit o the old Marxism splattered throughout, and I highly recommend reading it, despite the Marxism.

A sample:

Although the socialist left might see these problems as a vindication of its dim view of modified consensus and Occupy’s decision-making process generally, the task of socialists is not be vindicated but to aid the uprising in overcoming its stumbling blocks with practical solutions arising from the experiences of Occupy participants that utilize the uprising’s existing framework, infrastructure, and terminology. Instead of proposing at a GA or a working group to scrap modified consensus from the outset, a more fruitful approach would be to raise process reform proposals only after building close relationships with fellow activists through joint work.

The Rise of the New Confederacy: How America-Hating Right-Wingers Took Over the GOP | Tea Party and the Right | AlterNet

Tue, 13 Dec 2011 22:32:00 -0500

The Rise of the New Confederacy: How America-Hating Right-Wingers Took Over the GOP | Tea Party and the Right | AlterNet:

Seriously. It’s like, when the party of Lincoln and TR adopted the Southern Strategy in the late 60’s and early 70’s, they sort of forgot where they came from: The Party’s first President ran and was elected AGAINST this sort of nonsense.

Today, the currents of victimization, separatism and fatalism coursing through p.d. have spread beyond the true believers to dramatically reshape the GOP. What has recently come to the fore within the Republican Party, but has been building within it for decades as the religious right’s influence has grown, is a new Confederacy: a nation within a nation, certain of the degeneracy of the usurper “United States,” hostile toward its institutions of education and government, and possessing a keen sense of its own identity as a victimized, righteous remnant engaged in spiritual warfare. As Michele Bachmann put it when explaining her position as a tax accountant for the IRS, she took a government job because she wanted to infiltrate “the enemy.”

Moving On Up More Difficult In America : NPR

Sun, 11 Dec 2011 02:30:54 -0500

Moving On Up More Difficult In America : NPR:

The point: We think we are some how exceptional: that unlike other countries in the world, work is rewarded in America with upward social mobility, that our society is meritocratic instead of aristocratic, and that anyone can be whatever the set their mind to. Ideologically-based propositions like this are difficult to test, right? Well, apparently not. And what is more exceptional about America than our American Dream is that other countries have a MUCH greater equality of opportunity that is not tied to the status of one’s parents. And it really has nothing to do with the amount of money the kids parents have, but structural features of our society, like historical trends and institutions, which prevent upward mobility. Great listen!

Rick Perry confirms that individual mandate is a GOP idea - The Plum Line - The Washington Post

Thu, 08 Dec 2011 21:36:00 -0500

Rick Perry confirms that individual mandate is a GOP idea - The Plum Line - The Washington Post:

And the term “Obamacare” is actually a nice example of Orwellian Newspeak. Double Plus Good!!!

So there you have it. Perry first confirms that the individual mandate originated as a Republican idea. Then he says that now that Obama has employed it, the question of the mandate’s fate has become nothing less than a referendum on whether “big government liberals” will be allowed to destroy the country.

FOX says 'Muppets' are brainwashing kids, for SOCIALISM!!!

Thu, 08 Dec 2011 01:28:42 -0500

FOX says 'Muppets' are brainwashing kids, for SOCIALISM!!!:

Fantastic! Don’t see the Muppet Movie unless you want your kids to turn into Socialists!

“He suggested that there “should be” Occupy Wall Street Muppets, saying that Occupy protesters “have been indoctrinated literally for years” by TV shows such as 1980s cartoon “Captain Planet” or Nickelodeon’s “Big Green Help,” which focuses on recycling.”

Sebelius singlehandedly guarantees an increase in teen pregnancy

Wed, 07 Dec 2011 23:21:00 -0500

Sebelius singlehandedly guarantees an increase in teen pregnancy:

Sebelius Overrules F.D.A. on Freer Sale of Emergency Contraceptives - NYTimes.com

Looks like the Obama Administration fails on progressive issues once more. Seriously: except for the lack of an alternative not bent on sacrificing the very social fabric of our country to Mammon Profit, why would ANYONE vote for this guy?

“In her own statement, Ms. Sebelius said, “After careful consideration of the F.D.A. summary review, I have concluded that the data submitted by Teva do not conclusively establish that Plan B One-Step should be made available over the counter for all girls of reproductive age.” She was referring to Teva Pharmaceuticals, the pill’s maker. She noted that 10 percent of 11-year-old girls can bear children, so they needed to be studied as well.

“Dr. Susan Wood, a former F.D.A. assistant commissioner who resigned in 2005 to protest the Bush administration’s handling of Plan B, said that there were many drugs available over the counter that had not been studied in pre-adolescents and that were far more dangerous to them.”

For another take on the topic, check this article out as well

“It came a day after Sebelius traveled to Kansas on Air Force One with the president, but it is unclear whether the two discussed the decision. An administration official was not aware of any conversations about the pill between the two, and said the decision was Sebelius’s alone.”

In Major Gaffe, Obama Forgets To Dumb It Down | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

Tue, 06 Dec 2011 22:41:00 -0500

In Major Gaffe, Obama Forgets To Dumb It Down | The Onion - America's Finest News Source:

All satire is based in truth.

This could very easily be an entirely real story. From the post:

“Instead of saying, ‘There are many global variables at work here, and unless they all fall into place, we could find ourselves back in a recession,’ he should have just said, ‘Times are hard. We gotta be strong,”

Home - Stewart Alexander for President 2012 - Socialist Party USA Presidential Ticket

Tue, 06 Dec 2011 16:35:00 -0500

Home - Stewart Alexander for President 2012 - Socialist Party USA Presidential Ticket:

The New Haberdasher congratulates Stewart Alexander and Alex Mendoza on their nomination as the Socialist Party’s candidates for President and Vice President. On a personal note, I have had the opportunity to get to know Alexander in 2007 when he was nominated as Vice President Candidate for the SP, and he is a real good person.

Today the Bomb buried in Obamacare goes off. Halleluja

Sat, 03 Dec 2011 02:33:00 -0500

Today the Bomb buried in Obamacare goes off. Halleluja:

Today, the part of the law which requires for-profit insurance companies to pay 80% of their premium toward their customer’s care, or rebate their customers, takes effect. The Author seems to believe this is the beginning of the end of for-profits, and the beginning of the beginning of universalized, public health care as for-profits are wiped out by their inability to make unlimited profit.

Minecraft: The Kotaku Review

Fri, 02 Dec 2011 12:06:00 -0500

Minecraft: The Kotaku Review:

Here’s a great review of a fun game. Thank you to Dan Patterson, for both pointing out the article, and for hooking me up with a license to play this game to my little heart’s content!

Read the entire review at Kotaku.com

“For all that’s been written about Minecraft over the past few years, you’d think it was one of the greatest video games ever created. A liberating experience that’s showing big-budget game developers what the public really wants and helping revolutionize the way games are developed and sold.

In some ways, it totally is. In others? Eh…

Minecraft is a lot of things, but one thing it’s not is just a game. It never was when it launched and it’s still not now that it’s…launched. It’s always been about more than the thing you click on and click on and click on again. It’s been about the way it encourages community, gets people talking, sharing and co-operating.”

The Secret Army

Fri, 02 Dec 2011 01:58:00 -0500

The Secret Army:

The Secret Army does not exist.

On the Horse Race (Nov, 2011)

Fri, 02 Dec 2011 00:53:00 -0500

Recently I had the opportunity to comment on an editorial which discussed the possibility of Newt’s assendency, and possible threat to Romney’s inevitable primary victory. Since then, I am happy to say that at least one thing I have predicted is starting to happen: Romney is starting to feel the need to talk about Gingrich.

Anyway, here’s the commentary, taken from my feed at Google +

In response to this Editorial blog post by Josh Marshall, at the Talking Points Memo blog, where he asserts that Gingrich is somehow different than the other “Non-Romney’s” that have graced us with their presence this season of the ridiculous, I wrote:

Problem with this analysis is that Mitt has the Money and Newt doesn’t. [ed. See, for example, the fundraising totals for key battleground states from USA Today or his lack of fundraising by September]The GOP has (up until like 2000) a history of nominating the person whose “turn” it was. Goldwater, a completely unelectable fanatic ran against Johnson in 64. Nixon ran in 68, Regan ran in 80, then it was finally GHW Bush, and then Bob Dole. W sort of broke that cycle, because the GOP had become a party of religious fanatics by that time. They tied to get back on track in 08, but the party was far too split to match the ascendency that was Obama. In a way, the silent majority by this time was firmly in the “This is stupid” camp that later coalesced into an anti-Democrat TEA Party, and McCain lost.

Well, now it’s sort of old Newt’s turn. He’s been at it since the 1970’s, and everyone and his brother knows who the former Speaker of the House is (never mind that Congressmen rarely become presidents in this country…) So if anything is surprising, it shouldn’t be that he’s making a move on Romney’s lead, but that he didn’t have it in the first place.

Not too long ago, everyone wrote Gingrich’s campaign off as dead (same as McCain about this time in the last cycle, by the way…) And now all of a sudden he is a viable candidate? Well, let’s play: suppose he does knock Romney out in the early contests. What then? He doesn’t have the money to go much further, and it’s not like he (or any Republican, for that matter) is anywhere close to where Obama is (without a challenger.) If Romney is out of the early contests, this opens the door for Perry who can buy a “Yankee” like organization if he is ever so inclined, and then its a contest between Newt and Perry, with Newt, standing next to Perry, sounding more like a (liberal) elitist who actually speaks as though he has attained a 10th grade education. Which is, say it with me, the exact type of person that the GOP base voter hates, fears and resents.

If Newt plays seriously early, then the primary season is going to be LONG for the GOP, and it may actually come down to a compromise at the convention. Electability won’t be an issue then: the issue will be nominatability. (Hypothetically, then, enter the fanatics following the opportunist Palin and the true believer Bachmann to mess everything up and guarantee Obama an unearned win in November.)

Look: we can tell where these people are right now. Romney is running ads against Obama, and Obama is running ads against Romney. When Romney switches to ads against Gingrich, [ed. it appears that he is beginning to do this now, because, perhaps he, or his campaign read my post on Google +, I don’t know…) then we know that Gingrich is a threat. When Obama stops running ads against a particular person then we know that Gingrich is a threat. Until then, we should assume the status quo, which is: the non-Romney flares out after between two and four weeks, either because he puts his foot in his/her mouth, or some scandal takes them too far off message, despite their attempts to force the media cycle back onto their message. [ed. it is not too late for this to still happen, by the way. The campaign and the media is already starting to paint Newt as “arrogant”, with all his claims about inventing supply side economics and defeating communism in the 80’s.]

What it boils down to is that the fanatics want someone other than a Mormon, former governor of Massachusetts, and the moderates in the Party (which the media portrays as non-existent, but I know different) are bent on not letting the fanatics get their way. Which is why it appears that there is turbulence in the primaries. Used to be this matter was settled by the voters, and despite the efforts of our corporate media to convince us that this has all changed, I suspect this year will be no different. The fanatics get to vote first, but then the moderates get a say as we get closer to the convention, and usually the lunatic fringe is overruled. This may be Newt’s only chance, but I don’t think he’ll last that long, given my very first point. He doesn’t have any money. (relatively speaking of course. He has WAY more money than me, but then again I am not trying to build a nationwide movement capable of aggregating the opinions of sixty million people into a single vote for me.)

The Story Behind 420 - Pot Smokers' Favorite Holiday

Wed, 20 Apr 2011 17:13:33 -0400

The Story Behind 420 - Pot Smokers' Favorite Holiday:

It’s nice to see that ABC radio is covering this. It’s a sign of the times.

abcnewsradio:

(NEW YORK) — At 4:20 p.m. Wednesday—in whatever time zone they happen to be in—pot-smokers will be lighting up to celebrate an unofficial holiday whose origins are debated by stoners with time on their hands.

Does 420 refer to a police code for illegal marijuana use? Is it a veiled allusion to the number of chemicals in cannabis? Or maybe it’s teatime in Amsterdam, the global spiritual home of marijuana smokers. Don’t forget that April 20 is Hitler’s birthday, so that must have something to do with it.

And how do you spell this holiday anyway—420, 4-20, or 4/20?

Grammarians can debate the punctuation issue, but according to Dan Skye, executive editor of High Times magazine and an expert in all things weed, the true origins of 420 have been researched and are laid out in a Wikipedia entry largely composed by High Times savants. “People tried to create their own myth about this,” he says, but adds: “The start of 420 is fairly clear at this point—the kids back at San Rafael High School.”

He’s referring to some teenagers who back in 1971 reportedly invented the term, referring to the time of day when they would meet to smoke under the school’s statue of Louis Pasteur. Their password for the gathering was “420 Louis.” The kids were known as the Waldos, maybe because there was a wall near the statue. The term went viral the way things went viral in the 1970s, gradually over years.

“Some of their parents were associated with the Grateful Dead,” says Skye, and the term became common among Deadheads. Around 1990, High Times published the term and later it bought the web domain 420.com.

The mystique of 420 grew when the clocks in Quentin Tarantino’s film “Pulp Fiction” were set at 4:20, a practice that Sophia Coppola paid homage to in her later movie “Lost in Translation.”

“It’s basically just a celebration of cannabis. It’s mushroomed into our unofficial national holiday,” says Skye.

Not everyone sees it that way. At the University of Colorado Boulder, where 420 gatherings draw up to 10,000 participants in the main quad, officials see 420 as a downer. “It’s the biggest 420 celebration in the country, regrettably,” says spokesman Bronson Hilliard. “Facebook and Twitter certainly fuel it.”

The university sent students an email this week “outlining the safety, security and reputational issues for the institution that are at stake for this event,” Hilliard said. “It doesn’t really represent what our student experience is. This is an elite American public university. It’s just a party in the sunshine.”

Other big celebrations occur at college campuses around the country, in New York’s Central Park and in Minneapolis. Some of the events focus on the drive to legalize medical marijuana, but the festivities are overwhelmingly recreational, says Skye. At High Times, he says, everyone’s going to be working. “There’s no pot smoking in this office. It’s illegal!” he says.

BBC News - Arizona Governor Jan Brewer vetoes 'birther' bill

Tue, 19 Apr 2011 12:46:52 -0400

BBC News - Arizona Governor Jan Brewer vetoes 'birther' bill:

“The governor of Arizona has vetoed a bill requiring presidential candidates to prove US citizenship in order to get on the state’s election ballot.

Republican Jan Brewer said the bill would have allowed officials to judge who is eligible to run for office.

A lingering “birther” conspiracy theory asserts US President Barack Obama was not born in the US and is thus ineligible to hold the office.

But the bill’s Republican backers insisted it was not aimed at Mr Obama.”

Whoops. Looks like Ms. Brewer has become a socialist…

Project Dyszombie- Field Report: "The Character of the ADZ-Infected Human"

Tue, 19 Apr 2011 02:01:48 -0400

theinevitablezombieapocalypse:

Field Report, Johanna Ellas:

Update 0.2

Commissioned by Dr. Frederich Hausen

Civilian Defensive Control, Z Task Force

January 18, 2021

Atlanta

Introduction: The purpose of our field research and thus this short report on the nature of the person afflicted by “ADZ”, or the airborne variant of Derivative Z was to study the nature and habits of the human who suffers its effects. For brevity’s sake, subjects will be essentialized, and refered to as Z, while those not affected by ADZ are refered to as “people” or “Unaffected”. This task force began its work in Atlanta in the summer of 2020 and observed Z for a period of six months.

Note1:

Z appears to be every bit like a person, alike in all manners of physical appearance. However, every aspect of the Z is static. There is no evidence of additional hair growth or loss. There is no evidence that fingernails grow either. There is however, a healthier glow about Z previously only seen in those of excellent physical health and adequate nutrition. Skin appears to be the normal color, there is no loss in pigment in skin, eyes, or hair, teeth remain precisely as they were at the outbreak.

Dissection of previously deceased Z reveals all internal organs to be in the correct locations and all of the right appearance. No evidence of putridness, rot or decay indicated. Genetically, Z are no longer human. Upon testing blood at the start of the outbreak, Z cells demonstrated significant genetic alteration and damage. It was hypothesized then that the damage arrested cellular metabolism, and caused Z to enter a state of biological stasis.

One defining characteristic of Z is his lumbering walk, which is not very efficient in its energy transfer, but serves him well to allow him to do what he normally does at all hours of the day. Z spends his days and often nights walking aimlessly. Tracking devices placed on the clothing of Z have demonstrated that Z moves mostly at random, though if unencumbered by obstacle he will continue to walk in a straight line. Furthermore, during the early periods of the outbreak, Z was known to walk several hundreds of miles in a straight line before those tracking him lost contact with the device. We presume the device fell into a lake or was in some other fashion destroyed, but it is just as likely that Z walked completely out of range of the electronic component.

The other defining characteristic is Z’s blank but slightly depressed look on his face, which indicates a complete lack of interest in the world around him.

Read More