|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Hey, I'm feeling kinda woozy here.
(I'm pretty sure I signed a post Hunter S. Anklebiter once.)
(And did he write any novels other than that one Johnny Depp discovered? I thought he was a gonzo journalist not a novelist.)
Aaaand looping back around to my habit of posting links, it seems Trump has now repeated a comment that one of Clinton's mentors was a KKK member.
I liked the "super predator" quip and wondered why no one (that I saw) mentioned his full-page ad in the Daily News antics calling for the death penalty back when the Central Park Five were being tried.
I liked Comrade Fergie's analysis of the Michael Kimmel quote, googled around some, and found a NYT review of Angry White Men saying much the same. Maybe I'll get around to reading it after finishing Undocumented, maybe not, but it still strikes me as a historical irony that the phrase "white skin privilege," invented by Maoists in the mid-'60s to get privileged student radicals to throw in with the Black Panthers and the NLF, came to prominence at a time when, thanks to neoliberal deindustrialization, it is worth less than it ever has in the country's history.
As for anti-vaxx, well, since the last time I posted about it that didn't include Jill Stein, a bunch of my friends went and had kids. Two of them bowed to the will of their headstrong wives and didn't vaccinate. One of them is married to a Rand Paul fan who's holding her nose and voting Trump; the other is married to a raw foods vegan who does, indeed, believe in crystals and recently founded a New Hampshire chapter of Black Lives Matter. I think she's voting for Hillary, but I could be wrong.
I quipped that they should get their kids together and one of the fathers, studying to be an RN, said "I don't think that's such a great idea."
"Then stand up to your crazy wife!" I didn't reply.
Some non-Saudi Arabia deals:
Interesting. Apparently, Boeing made a(nother?) $900,000 donation after Hillary pressed Russia into signing a multi-billion dollar deal with them.
I'd have to doublecheck my timelines, but I think these Boeing deals are all going down while they were setting up operations in South Carolina to bust the union, but I guess that's neither here nor there.
Don't know about this website, but you can google around if it's ideologically unacceptable:
Anyway, as I said above, it doesn't make much difference to me if it's a question of personal venality or realpolitik. Personally, I think it's more about networking, access-peddling and influencing policy ("She's great at making deals!" I believe is one of the constant refrains of her supporters).*
Nothing out of line with that, right? Must take some squinting to see something wrong in all that mess. As I had occasion to mention regarding the Wall Street speeches, I don't think she's any more monstrous than your average power-hungry capitalist stooge, just more successful. And, I guess, if you're a supporter of international capitalism, as most of you are, or supporters of American imperialism, no matter how begruding or reluctantly, as most of you are, you probably don't see anything wrong with hobnobbing with union-busters and facilitating deals between the captains of western capitalism and blood-soaked feudal monarchies and dictatorships.
I mean, even Carter did it, right? That's the way the system works.
And then Dicey wonders why I don't vote.
I don't think we're saying more trade or business increased under Obama, although that may be true, I wouldn't know.
What we're talking about is selling fighter jets and other items of mass death at a higher rate to blood-soaked regimes who donated to the Clinton Foundation than those who didn't.
the jeff wrote:
Does this reflect an overall change in arms sales policies or other changes in the political situation? Or just Clinton corruption?
IIRC, in 2011, Saudi Arabia invaded Bahrain to crush the Arab Spring movement there. Maybe that's the change you're looking for that required more fighter jets?
If it's a choice between personal venality or blood-soaked realpolitik that would make her mentor Kissinger proud, I'm not sure it makes much of a difference.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
the local lesbian UNITE-HERE organizer as part of her "queer labor mafia" (not my words)
Speaking of whom, just saw her tooting her union's horn regarding work at Yale that paid off in a recent NLRB decision:
Organize the unorganized!
I hate to speak for Comrade Fergie, but I don't think he's necessarily talking about the generalized imperialist war-mongering and weapon sales to dictators that are, indeed, the United States' stock in trade, but rather the explicit "pay-to-play" nature of the "donate to the Clinton Foundation, get greenlighted for weapon sales" game that appears to have been going on while she was Secretary of State.
I'll quote the first two paragraphs of the Mother Jones article on the chance that posters aren't reading it:
"In 2011, the State Department cleared an enormous arms deal: Led by Boeing, a consortium of American defense contractors would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, despite concerns over the kingdom's troublesome human rights record. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, Saudi Arabia had contributed $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, and just two months before the jet deal was finalized, Boeing donated $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to an International Business Times investigation released Tuesday.
"The Saudi transaction is just one example of nations and companies that had donated to the Clinton Foundation seeing an increase in arms deals while Hillary Clinton oversaw the State Department. IBT found that between October 2010 and September 2012, State approved $165 billion in commercial arms sales to 20 nations that had donated to the foundation, plus another $151 billion worth of Pentagon-brokered arms deals to 16 of those countries—a 143 percent increase over the same time frame under the Bush Administration. The sales boosted the military power of authoritarian regimes such as Qatar, Algeria, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman, which, like Saudi Arabia, had been criticized by the department for human rights abuses."
Lord Dice wrote:
Since we've been having this argument since 2012, I looked up the ballot initiatives in our respective states in that election. I used a site called Ballotpedia, "The Encyclopedia of American Poliics." I know many states had referendums on marijuana legalization and gay marriage in 2012, but it doesn't look like either of our fair states were among them.
Rhode Island--Seven ballot measures; two about opening casinos, five for the issuing of state bonds. Some of the latter look supportable, but I think I'd be happier taxing the rich. The two scheduled for 2016 look pretty blah, too.
New Hampshire--Three ballot measures; would ban new personal income tax, something about the chief justice of the state Supreme Court, create a convention to revise the state constitution. There don't appear to be any scheduled yet for 2016.
I think I can resist the urge to register this year.
What a pity you're going to vote for her, Dicey.
Bomb those Houthi babies and MSF hospitals with Hillary-approved war materiel!
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Yes, found out about that a couple of weeks ago.
Mr. Comrade's now taken up with a pre-op transman who was recruited by the local lesbian UNITE-HERE organizer as part of her "queer labor mafia" (not my words) and he went down to Atlantic City for a week.
Win some, lose some.
Anyway, Democracy Now! did its main bits today on the Saudi war in Yemen, and the responsibility born by the United States (refuelling their planes, our intelligence providing them with targets, etc.). Wanted to do some searches for all those articles about the Saudis making donations to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary was greenlighting weapon sales to them as Secretary of State, but La Principessa and the Nigerian Princess are waiting for me to take them shopping.
No? From whom do you expect more?
Don't have much of an opinion of them myself (second more presitigious bourgeois paper in the USA?) but I was amused by this line in conjunction with your post.
"Spencer S. Hsu is an investigative reporter, two-time Pulitzer finalist and national Emmy award nominee."
On the pretext that they were likely to "become a public charge" as employment opportunities evaporated, both Mexicans and Mexican Americans were rounded up for deportation.
--Aviva Chomsky, Undocumented: How Immigration Became Illegal
All depends on the vigor of the mass offensive and the kind of leadership it gets.
--George Novack, "The role of the Transitional Program in the revolutionary process" in The Transitional Program for Socialist Revolution by Leon Trotsky
Woah, synergistic weirdiosity.
I just clicked over to Facebook and I had a notification that I had seven new "message requests." I had never seen that notification before, so I clicked on it and found seven messages from people I wasn't "friends" with that I had never seen before. Two of them were people who had seen me at the Lowell Solidarity Vigil asking about the rally the next day in Manchester.
Depends on what you're trying to accomplish, I guess.
I found that my speech at the Alton Sterling/Philando Castile solidarity vigil in Lowell garnered six new contacts for international proletarian socialist revolution, so, I think that's the most effective I've been lately.
But I am not a very good speaker, alas.
I think we've been having this conversation, on and off, for four or five years now, haven't we?
Your least effective tool is still more effective than no tool at all. I fully endorse using all your tools, from most to least effective.
Sure. If you haven't gathered signatures, organized a protest, or, in general, been out on the street week after week organizing for a higher minimum wage and against police violence (or whatever tickles your fancy), go ahead, vote.
As Citizen Betts put it one of the other threads, your vote in a presidential election is one of the least effective tools you have at your disposal as a citizen. (Rough paraphrase)
I did, however, help collect 6,000 signatures to get Jill Stein on the ballot here in the Granite State, but I wouldn't vote for her either, even if I was registered to vote, even if she was the only candidate that stood with us in Manchester at a BlackLivesMatter rally against armed racist provocateurs (well, not me, I was in Philadelphia at a funeral).
For nostalgia, RT footage of my anti-Trump demo.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
Yeah, I've read a bit more about him since that post.
[Clenched fist salute]
Not really a Michael Moore fan, but I enjoyed this article.
I, of course, don't agree with your assessment of Clinton (and I'd hazard a guess that I'm one of the few posters in this thread that helped organize an anti-Trump demonstration) but I'll take a stab at the question:
Eight years of a neoliberal "recovery" that has left the masses screwed , with the prospect of four to eight more under Clinton, combined with the usual racist scapegoating that often goes along with that, plus an electorate weaned on a nostalgic belief in a never-was greatness of yore, along with a very American love of con artists and carnival barkers.
Well, I like fire, so I lean towards the other side.
Article with non-GOP accusations and lots of links to poke through:
Also, can't say I've looked through all the links in this thread, but if we're going by the link provided by Citizen Spalding, the only speaker who commands more than her is Ben Bernanke. Don't understand how that translates into her fees are relatively low or below the market rate, but maybe I missed a link.
Abraham spalding wrote:
Bumps, because it was four pages ago and pretty much every page has a dozen links.
I pretty much expect that corporate shills like Hillary (and all the Republican candidates, probably Chafee and O'Malley, too, though I didn't particularly follow them) get paid big bucks to come into corporate offices and give them verbal back rubs about how great they are for the economy, innovate technology, whatever, so, as I said, I always thought this issue was pretty weaksauce and the fact that Bernie couldn't come up with better material was further evidence that Bernie really wasn't any danger to the kleptocratic, plutocratic rulers of this country.
That being said, my initial thoughts when looking at the above articles:
First one: that is a very diverse group of financiers, capitalists and plutocrats that have lobbied Congress or the White House since 2008. Kind of reinforces Citizen Rednal's concern about her being a "corporate candidate."
Second one: I tried to click on the "See Below" link where it says she gave most of it to charity. For some reason, it didn't work on my computer, but when I got to the bottom I found the following passage:
"Clinton spends the money three ways: for her own expenses (which are high partly because she’s running for office), on her election campaign ($468,037), and on the Clinton Foundation, 89% of whose funding goes to charity (an excellent track record)."
I don't know if that's where the link would've lead, but I find it a bit disingenuous to say she gives most of it to charity when she's giving it to her own foundation.
The write up about the Clinton Foundation's charitable activities was interesting, too. I wonder how many of those speech buyers benefit from such charitable activities. Don't recall, for example, if Monsanto was on the list in the first article, but I do recall that they're a donor to the CF. I wonder who profits from "training African farmers to get access to seeds, etc."?
I, alas, have never looked too deeply into the muck-raking exposes of the Clinton Foundations activities, but I know that their dealings in Haiti, for example, have come under a lot of fire from a lot of different corners. Something about a lot of money going missing while Roger Clinton made bank? Don't recall, exactly.
Anyway, I don't expect that Hillary's particularly worse than any other power-hungry capitalist stooge, but hey, I don't layout the parameters of political debate in these elections. Alas.
Gonna go ahead and directly link the study from the article above.
Interestingly, they seem to be doing it (to have done it? article's a few months old) to inflame the populist-cum-social democratic wing of the Dems, not their own party because, as Comrade BeeNee put it above "We are corporate shills" is kinda their motto.
EDIT: Gave up on first skim because my computer kept sticking; second read reveals that they hoped Trump could outflank her on the left. Woopsie.
Also, was having fun with the "wage stagnation" links provided by Citizen Blast and poked around some more.
They seem to keep using that phrase which, as Citizen Quest points out, suggests that real wages have stayed the same. All kinds of bits, though, indicate that for us lower orders, real wages have been falling.
Op-ed piece with links worth poking about in I found while googling:
Were any of the other candidates neoliberals claiming they would rein in the banksters facing a revolt by their party's populist-cum-social democratic wing?
I always thought the Goldman Sachs speeches issue was pretty weaksauce, but still, did it get much traction outside of the Berniecrats? I admit to being largely unaware of what goes on in right-wing discourse.
So, due to the word-of-mouth nature of my DNC posts, lack of internet access and lack of interest in who Citizen K(e)rensky believes, I never got around to looking into what Comrade Martin had to say about her detention.
Finally did, most of the articles seemed to be the same transcription, a couple of others, but couldn't find any where she claimed that she got lost going from the convention hall to the park. In fact, in one of the videos, she mentions the park is across from the hall.
I couldn't find any mention of where she claimed she was coming from (swank hotel? trendy restaurant? leftie swingers party?) but seeing as she claimed she wasn't credentialed for the DNC, I'm guessing it wasn't the Wells Fargo Center.
What a waste of time. I should've stuck to my guns and ignored Alex's mud-slinging.
Was up in the "Do people enjoy non-medieval European fantasy settings?" thread, saw a post that I wanted to respond to, but couldn't bring myself to press "Submit Post."
Instead I copy-and-pasted it here:
I tried really hard to restrain myself after reading Citizen Ashiel's original post, but self-restraint isn't one of my strong points, so:
Tales from the Shop Floor
Surly Italian Teamster and Puerto Rican Teamster are the best of work friends (I'm not sure how much they hang out off the clock) and, in the best (worst?) traditions of New England proletarian male-bonding, most of their relationship is based on busting each other's balls. This, alas, includes quite a bit of racist trash-talking on both of their parts. In fact, they used to make a ritual of it: new hire sits down in the office, they go over their litany of racist greatest hits, the supervisor tells them to knock it off, they keep at it until everyone in the room is laughing and/or shaking their heads.
Anyway, part of Surly Italian Teamster's stock material is his insistence that every Latinx comes from the "Dominican Republic of Mexico" and that there is no such place as Puerto Rico. This upsets Puerto Rican Teamster for two reasons: a) the obvious one and; b) he harbors the unfortunately-too-common chauvinism of Puerto Ricans against Mexicans and Dominicans. (This has only been slightly tempered by the lastest new hire, Afro-Dominican Teamster).
One day, Puerto Rican Teamster took leave because his girlfriend (known on the shop floor as "Big Mama" ever since Surly Italian Teamster went on the former's unattended phone and learned their terms of endearment for each other and, pretending to be Puerto Rican Teamster, asked her to marry him; his nickname, in case you're wondering, is "Mookie Mookie Bum Bum") is expecting their second child. Surly Italian Teamster was noticeably bummed out for the next five weeks and missed his partner-in-razzing terribly. One day he got to reminiscing nostalgically about his first encounter with Puerto Rican Teamster.
"So I was working in smallsort with [Random Hated Supervisor], that [creative and colorful expletives deleted], and he sent [Puerto Rican Teamster] to come work with me. So [PRT] comes up, and he says, 'How long you been here, Billy?' And I say, 'My name's not Billy.' And he sez 'Oh, sorry, I call all white people Billy.' So I sez to him, 'Yeah, well, I call all you people Mexican.'" Then they fought, said some more shiznit to each other, and simultaneously realized that they were both really inventive and creative with racist insults.
And thus was born a beautiful friendship.
Also, I don't think, but again, I could be wrong, that the Roman Republic, the Republic of Venice nor the Old Swiss Confederation ever claimed to be "democratic." It was just the elites deciding amongst themselves which member of the elite got to be Doge (for life) or Consul (for a year?) or whatever.
[Goes back to reading about the Old Swiss Confederation]
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Yeah, well, the Republic of Venice, was apparently founded in the 7th century AD and lasted until 1797. I think the Middle Ages were in there somewhere.
My apologies, master of pedantry, for spilling my first thoughts before going and looking shiznit up.
IIRC, and I may not, some of the Renaissance-era Italian city-states were republics.
Former Comrades of Mine in the News, well, Democracy Now!
Being internet-less for a couple of weeks means that I missed a lot of the recent news. I had heard, briefly, of Bill Bratton's resignation, but it was only when he showed up today at the Anti-Gentrification, Racism and Police Violence march in Brooklyn (man, that was f*#!in' hot!) that I realized that a former comrade of mine was one of the organizers of the action. Hats off, Comrade Nabil!
As for the march itself, Comrade Imani (who appears to be a member of Workers World} remembered me from the last meeting I attended with La Principessa and it was a source of amusement to me that he kept referring to people coming "all the way from Maine" ("New Hampshire!") for the march. Runner-up in amusing me was the number of women who didn't shave their legs but painted their toenails.
Pretty spirited march, despite the heat, that ended poignantly in front of the precinct station of the officers who killed Kimani Gray while a particularly foul-mouthed public defender led us in various chants before she closed out with the Assata mantra.
I, and, I believe, a portion of Hillary's supporters, feel as strongly about woman's health care and the right to an abortion.
But, she appears to have finally jettisoned that position this election cycle, so I guess the point is mostly of historic interest.
Huh, must have missed this kerfuffle. Don't watch "The View" that much, alas.
Looks like the same exchange about the same quote we had about Jill and vaccination in the other thread.
Got me wondering, though. Remember back in 2008 (I think) when Hillary's position on abortion was that it should be "safe, legal and rare and when I say rare I mean rare"? And something about morality?
I can't recall, but I wonder if anyone ever tried to blur the line between her pandering to anti-abortionists and her being anti-abortion.
Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Can't remember what else has been going on since I last posted.
Oh, duh. We helped collect 6,000 signatures to get Jill Stein on the NH ballot. Which is twice as many as we needed so, hopefully, most of them won't get invalidated.
God, that was boring.
Voting is still for ninnies!
Can't remember what else has been going on since I last posted. The Nancy Donovan drama drove a, thus far, irreparable schism between Mr. Comrade and the Nigerian Princess (I feel like a Cassandra; as I told them, over and over again: the only way living together after you break up works is to not date other people; I mean, srly, the lease runs out in one month, they couldn't keep it in their pants for that long?!?); this has only been mollified by the realization that Nancy Donovan is, um, not mentally stable and Mr. Comrade has already broken up with her. Plus side is that Mr. Comrade realizes that he needs to do something about his low self-esteem or he's just going to end up bouncing from crazy woman who treats him like dirt to crazy woman who treats him like dirt (for the record, the Nigerian Princess is not crazy, but wants to date women, even though when she talks about it with me, gotta be honest, she doesn't sound like a woman who wants to date women). Anyway, messy, messy, messy.
Oh, that's right: There was this dude who was coming up to Lowell from Rhode Island for the Capital reader's circle who we hooked up with our Providence branch and it looks like he's our latest recruit. Woo hoo! And Mr. Comrade said the Capital reader's circle was a waste of time...
Also helped start a BLM chapter in Manchester, NH which was weird. I've been to BLM-esque stuff in Lowell and Boston and Brooklyn but it was only smack dab in the middle of New Hampshire, which is, IIRC, 93% white, that I've ever been to a BLM-esque type meeting that was actually, you know, MAJORITY BLACK. In New Hampshire. Weird.
Anyway, it's been a chore trying to keep the Nigerian Princess involved while she's fighting with Mr. Comrade (and I won't even mention the nastiness that Nancy Donovan tried to pull), but it's been moderately successful and tomorrow, La Principessa and I are taking her down to Brooklyn for what looks to be a fun march.