Actually, They're ALL Insane!

Here’s my position on the upcoming government shut-down.  Today is Monday September 21, 2015 so we have now ten days.  Two years ago the issues were the deficit and massive cuts and more specifically funding Obama health care, a bill that had already been voted on and passed and needed to be implemented.  This time it’s different as I see it.  I would not choose to shut down the government over funding Planned Parenthood.  But the thing is if the Republicans vote out a budget that otherwise is OK except for no funding for Planned Parenthood, then if I were the President I’d sign it.  After all it’s just congress doing its job.  So actually I would not shut down the government in the name of EITHER side.  A government shut down damages the economy and in the end will make the republicans look bad.  (Though it was not an issue in 2014 and probably should have been)  But it cost the country 24 Billion dollars or something and is kind of a phoney bologna proposition to begin with.  It just meant shutting down National Parks, WW II memorials and White House tours, and this is nothing short of stupid and just makes the President look like a jackass.  Personally if I were a congressman I would vote to defund planned parenthood because I think the abortion tar brush has tainted the whole issue- - and maybe at a later date after this issue had side down I would again to vote money for Planned parenthood.  

Carley Feurina is a total loser selling items to Iran during sanctions, and she calls herself patriotic.  Apparently workers didn’t like her calling her mean spirited.  She fired a bunch of people, and she lost the company a lot of money and the stock price was driven down.  Then the price of the stock rebounded after Carley was fired.   At this point I'd say they're ALL insane except for Ron Paul and Petaki, and perhaps John Kasech.  I could not picture one of these dopes in the clown car - - - and you won't see a repeat of either when 2008 or 2012 when Mc Cain survived the rigors of that primary, and then Romney emerged as the "sane alternative" to the nutty bunch that ran in 2012.  Marco Rubio talks too fast and there is the sweating and drinking water thing he'll never live down.  Besides Rubio has waffled too many times on immigration to truely attract the Latino vote, which is the only reason why Republicans would pick him.  As to Walker- - if he's begun firing people in his campaign staff or at least night paying them, then his candidicy is not long for this world- - and this great hope of the Koch Brothers is fast fizzling out.

This whole issue about whether a Moslem should ever be president needs to be address.  I’ll admit that hearing the words “Moslem” and “President” in the same sentence causes me to crings.  But I only do this because I’ve been conditioned to hate all Moslems because of what I hear in the media day in and day out.  Ben Carson says he doesn’t believe a Moslem is qualified to run for President.  But Carson is a guy who acts as if he’s just woken up from some opim induced stupor and looking for his glasses or something.  Actually growing up I had a seventh grade teacher named Mr Hunter who spoke glowingly is Islam, and told us a little about the faith and I remember thinking Islam was kind of a neat religion.  That’s as close as I come to a “Madrassa” past.  But the issue as to whether a Moslem believes in “constitutional principles” reveals an appalling ignorance as to what’s actually in the constitutional.  Thomas Jefferson made a statement around 1800 that “We take no issue as the United States with Islam”.   And apparently in the past a high percentage of doctors were Muslims because they were educated and didn’t rely on “Western” methods of medicine such as leeches and eye of newt.  The constitution states that no religious test shall ever be applied toward seeking government office.  That pretty much settles the issue as far as I’m concerned.  We didn’t hold Romney’s Mormonism against him- - and I was amazed now suddenly being Mormon was now kosher- - after 150 years of shunning Mormonism.  (Of course I have Mormons in my family tree)

Debby Wasserman Schultz is a bit of an asshole, isn't she?  I don't even think her fellow democrats like her.  She's instructed presinct captains to inform people that there ARE no other democratic candidates other than Hillary and they only have Hillary campaign stickers and stuff at the party HQ.  Wasserman is in kind of a locked-down Hillary or nobody mode.  Howard Dean is in a Hillary defense mode and Thom doesn't have quite the respect he had for him previously.  It's time to replace this democratic leader.

I have five unopened packets of tea and did not open another last night.  I was out there before six looking for a cigarette and was pretty desperate going from one end of the parking lot to the other.  I managed on butts mainly.   Phyllis said to get my medication first at just after six.  I got medication from Tom and turned on Stephanie Miller.  I had the Rude Pundit on.  We had corn flakes for breakfast followed by generous scrambled eggs and toast and butter and jelly.  I got a full cup of black coffee I put a little milk in.  It was a robust cup.  The cat was at the door checking out people as they came out.  Obviously she was waiting for someone.  When she heard Wally’s voice she came running back and Wally had scrambled eggs for her.  Glenda said that Stanley told her that Lishia moved to another location.  There was talk about Bellflower being almost as bad as Watts. Rude Pundit says all of the candidates except Rand Paul are totally insane.  Rude Pundit said “He was rolling his eyes at the tone of the conversation”.   Now there is talk with someone else about Hillary and this phoney story about falling in the polls.  I heard that Scott Walker is beginning to not pay his campaign workers.  Good.

RUSSIAN SO-CALLED EXPANSIONISM

According to GlobalSecurity.org, Russia has 202 Air Force Bases, all in Russia’s various “Military Districts”; but now there is to be a 203rd one, and it will be in Belarus. If this actually happens, it will be a historic expansion of Russia’s armed forces abroad — something that for the U.S. to do would be inconsequential since the U.S. already has 41 Air Force Bases in foreign countries, surrounding Russia, East West and South. (Belarus isn’t even anywhere near the U.S.; it’s instead bordering Russia itself.)

On September 19th at 112.international (and then on 20 September at the subscription-only Financial Times), was reported (as headlined at 112), “Russia to Establish Air Base in Belarus.” Russia’s President Vladimir Putin on Friday the 18th had signed a document, “To intrust the Ministry of Defense with the participation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to carry out the negotiations with the Belarusian side and upon coming to an accommodation, to sign the agreement on behalf of Russian Federation.”

The anti-Russian Financial Times pretends that this is part of Russia’s aggression encircling NATO, instead of a response to NATO’s aggression encircling Russia, by the FT’s saying: “Belarus, which borders Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania and Latvia [they don’t even mention that it borders Russia], would give Russia a new asset right on Nato’s borders. The Russian military already has a radar station and some fighter aircraft stationed in Belarus, but the new base would be the first to be built there since the end of the Soviet Union.”

The FT then says: “News that the air base would be built comes after the US and its allies were struggling to respond to what Washington says is a Russian military build-up in Syria. Russian involvement in Syria complicates existing international operations against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, the jihadi group known as Isis.” This statement pretends that Russia is pro-ISIS and anti-Assad, while the U.S. is anti-ISIS and pro-Assad, but the FT thinks they’ve got lots of suckers (subscribers) and will exploit that asset for their aristocratic masters, who as advertisers are buying those suckers’ minds. The reality is that — as the people of Syria are well-aware — Assad and Russia are anti-ISIS, and the U.S. is the one that’s bombing the anti-ISIS forces (while the U.S. pretends to be focusing on bombing the pro-ISIS forces).

UPDATE: The FT’s online readership evidently isn’t as gullible as the FT’s editors expect. Though there was a bit of reader-comment in the nature of “They are building military bases around NATO, while Russia’s revenues are going down the tubes. Another stupid strategy from the Kremlin,” far more was in the nature of the following:

“How can more forces fighting ISIS be a negative?”

“Kathrin [addressing the newspaper’s Moscow correspondent, Kathrin Hille], please spare us this US propaganda drivel. We’ve really had enough. Start complaining again when Russia builds an air force base in Mexico. Until then………shhhhh.”

“The extraordinary thing of all is that NATO, the biggest and most powerful military alliance in history with bases essential surrounding Russia, is never reported to be ‘flying close’ to Russia’s borders. They are undoubtedly the most scrupulous pilots on earth.”

“The growing military and and economic relationship between Russia and China and the expansion of Russian presence, and presumably bases, in Syria is also a result of western policy, specifically American policy, that includes economic sanctions. In Ukraine and in the Middle East, neocon-Washington-driven policy has been a catastrophe.”

But, if the FT’s readers are really so smart, why do they then subscribe? Why do they subsidize propaganda, when there are a few authentic news sites (you’re reading one of them now) that are free? Readers can get the facts, and the honest and relevant context, without needing to subscribe to anything.