What is Joe Manchin's Game?

 

A basic rule of thumb with politicians is that when they start blabbering from a soap box about ‘principles’, you can bet that they’re basically talking through their anus.

‘Follow the money!’ should be the SOP whenever a pol starts soap-boxing. Case in point is Joe Manchin, who has been stamping like a child on the soap box labeled ‘filibuster’. He’s gone so far as to state, "I'm not willing to destroy our government," by ending the filibuster. 

WTF? As if the filibuster was the lynch-pin by which the entirety of our Constitutional Republic hinged.

So, what is Joe doing? Playing political games, of course, as the Palmer Report has explained. Yes, Joe is playing a power game by holding off from voting with the other Dem Senators. But what is he actually hoping to gain from such faux recalcitrance? It must be for more than some marker for a favor to be done at a later date.

Let’s be clear; curtailing the filibuster will in no way end the government. The filibuster was not present at the beginning of the Republic and has gone through several variations since. It’s also clear that Joe Manchin is not trying to preserve and protect the cinematic heroism portrayed in ‘Mr Smith Goes to Washington’. 

It must be admitted that the filibuster is a functional tool. Yet, it is a tool that has been over-used inappropriately; akin to the maxim that to a hammer every problem looks like a nail. In this case, Mitch McConnell – the self-styled ‘Grim Reaper’ -  has used the hammer to bash in the brains of bills presented in the Senate.

So, what is Joe Manchin’s game? He’s certainly playing hard-ball politics but for what end? What personal gain does Manchin see as the outcome for his soap-boxing?

Whatever  Joe's angle might be, it will become known sooner or later. As adroit Joe Biden is at playing the senatorial game, I'd bet on sooner, rather than later. I'd also wager that Joe Manchin will rue the day he chose to play hard-ball with Biden.

 

S.E. Cupp, Republican whisperer

 

S.E. Cupp, Republican whisperer, proclaimed on CNN that “It’s not a lie if you believe it.”

Wrong!

It’s a lie; whether you believe it or not is immaterial. You might not feel like a liar when you re-iterate the lie, but it’s still a falsehood. It is still a lie.

Goebbels’ assessment “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it…” remains accurate but believe does not alter the falsity of the lie. A lie remains a lie.

That goes as much for the ‘Big Lie’ as it does for the smallest, whitest lie about your age or whether you truly like your mother’s new dress.

The topic in which Ms Cupp declared her misapprehension concerning the promulgation of falsehood was regarding Drumpf’s ‘Big Lie – or one of them.

A query was made speculating whether or not the Lard of Mar-A-Lardo actually believed that he was still president despite losing the popular vote by seven million votes. Speculation was shared that he did not – could not - believe his own lie. That dubious appraisal was accepted as consensus.

 The reasoning (?) went like this: ‘How could the Former Guy actually believe that he was still the president?’ The answer to that rhetorical question was not considered or voiced.

 The answer is obvious; The Donald believes the Big Lie – that he is still president – for the simple reason that the Orange Buffoon is insane. 

(see my previous post: 'Donald is Nuts')

Not being a mental health care professional, the word of one who holds a PhD in clinical psychology and, moreover, knows the subject intimately can be taken as gospel. Mary Trump has declared, “He's the only person I've ever met who can gaslight himself.”

BTW, Elwood P. Dowd believed in Harvey, a 6-foot rabbit.  Nice. Elwood P. Dowd was still a nut lying to himself.

Donald J. Trump believes he can be 'reinstated'. Not so nice. Donald J. Trump is still a nut lying to himself.

 

 

Donald is Nuts!

 

Donald J. Trump is insane. 

That’s been well-established as fact for a long time. Ask his niece, Mary Trump; the one with the Ph.D. in clinical psychology. Or ask Dr Bandy Lee, author of ‘The Dangerous Case of  Donald Trump’. If one were still unconvinced of Donald’s ‘peculiarities’ by now, perhaps, you, too, need professional help, as they say.

He’s nuts. Round the bend. Off his rocker. Cuckoo. Bat-shit crazy.

Listen to him speak. He spins fairy-tales. He’s in Ga-ga-land thinking he’ll be back in power in August. (exact date TBD). He’s a dotard; a tottering old fool whose trophy wife has to tell him to pull up his pants in a whisper.

I prefer to accept that as the more accurate manifestation of his insanity. Although the more violent one certainly has its merits.
Donald the Dotard as opposed to Donald as Lex Luthor, which I find too hilarious to contemplate for long.
(More on that later...)

The temptation is to try to fathom Donald’s mind. The Pundits succumb to that temptation as part of their job. They usually make the mistake in assuming that Donald is not insane. Unfortunately, he is insane.

Bonkers. Out to Lunch. Gone.

Long ago, I determined that going into the mind of an ‘unbalanced’ individual was a no-no. It led only to shared insanity. It was a very unhealthy exercise.
However, I can imagine Donald’s mind being akin to watching ‘Plan 9 From Outer Space’ meets ‘Serpico’ in a shattered carnival mirror.
With a Danny Elfman sound-track.

Trying to figure out some rationale to explain the action of Donald J. Trump at this time in his life would require entering his demented, deluded, narcissistic, fractured and corrosive world.
He’s nuts and that’s all I need to know. That goes for the (chortle) Proud Boys, too. 

Side-bar: Has anyone tried to explain to those schmucks what a fakakta name that is? Really. When geeks get geeky over guns and start their own secret club, is that it? 

Donald J. Trump is a mewling simpleton. Or he will be by the time the prosecutors in New York are done with him. Right now, His minders have to remind him that they are his minders.

He wanders into a private wedding and blathers on about election fraud and secret ballots. Imagine if he were your Uncle ‘Whats-his’ (poor thing…). Crashes a wedding, grabs the mike and proceeds to rail utter, absolute nonsense.

He’s not even drunk and he does that? Wow!

I contend that Donald has gone ‘round the bend and off the deep end.

The alternative to Donald as Dotard is Donald as Lex Luthor.
It is too laugh.

Donald as an evil genius? Or rather a kind of crafty, devious bad-guy who wants to believe he’s a Mafi Don but from a TV sit-com. Hilarious, right? 

But, when ‘Evil-Normal Genius Don’ is coupled with a whole passel of ammosexual MAGA-mutants who watch for Q-drops and secret instructions in the smoke, watch out! 

Aviso! Mis en garde! Peligroso!

Now, bad to worse, add the Proud Boys (smirk) in the mix; listening for coded messages in the insane gibberings of an ambulatory basket-case, while simultaneously planning ‘The Storm’ with the pudgy, addle-brained WWGOWGA mob, who give the ‘Boys’ encouragement from the bleachers to do something so radical that it goes like, viral on all platforms in… like… immediately!

Then, what can we expect?
Here's what: Dotard Donnie meets up with the minions from their mother’s basements and the QA-ninnies who all manage to shoot themselves in the foot and get it posted on Instagram at the same time. 

 

 

 

The GOP Balks at Democracy

 

The GOP are balking at setting up an investigative hearing on the January 1^st 'Tourist Excursion' at the Capitol. The reason gleaned from their preposterous word-salad of excuses is that such an investigation would result in their doing poorly in the 2022 election. (smirk) 

One might think that Brainless Kevin and Mitch the Bitch are unaware that there is an on-going criminal investigation being conducted by the DOJ. More than 400 ‘tourists’ have been arrested and indicted; many are sitting in jail awaiting trial because they were deemed a public danger or a flight risk.

Of course they know. Moscow Money Mitch has even alluded to the existence of other investigation on the events of that terrible, totally normal day. One of his nonsensical arguments against a 9-11 style commission was that having another such one would simply be unnecessary.

(One word rebuttal: Benghazi.)

MTG, of the  QAnon Party, has whined publicly on the floor of the House about what she considers unfair treatment, seeing that all those ‘tourists’ were simply expressing their desire to establish an autocracy dictated by the Orange Grope Fiend. 

Or something.

Since Mitch knows that GOP members and the Lard of Mar-A-Lardo are culpable and that criminal and civil charges are pending against His Lardship, why is the GOP leadership digging in their heels about a Congressional investigation? The Former Guy isn’t going to be spared indictment. Neither will various Congressional miscreants be spared.

(Looking at you, Mo Brooks.)

What Mitch doesn’t want are the headlines and the click bait alerts that will announce on an hourly basis the reprehensible behavior of many of the GOP House members and Senators. Indeed, that would be very bad ‘optics’ - given that even the most disconnected voters would clearly see what a pack of utter scoundrels Mitch and his bunch are.

Mitch would just as soon see that revelations on their perfidy and treason were reported on the back page in ‘judicial news’ or unread editorials.

 

Mike Pence's Brother

 

Dear Mike,

‘Sorry, I know those patriotic tourists wanted to hang you but I had to vote against the Constitution and reality. I voted ‘No’ on setting up the January 6^th Commission.’

‘As Drumpf’s previous lap-dog, I hope you’ll understand that I couldn’t possibly put my fledgling career in national politics in jeopardy by publicly supporting democracy and bucking the Lard of Mar-Lardo and his psychotic refusal to accept losing the 2020 election by more than 7,000,000 votes.’

No way.

‘I mean, what would I do if I lost the best phony-baloney job I’ll ever get? Go back to the bank? Ha! You understand, right? For 4 years, you stood transfixed behind him as if deeply in love.

(Speaking of which, I’ve never seen you look at Karen that way; where did get your motivation? Did those drama lessons with Scott Baio pay off, after all?)’ 

‘Anyway, I knew that bill was going to pass the House. 35 Republicans voted in favor of the bill; House Whip, Scalise, told us beforehand. My vote was to show all the MAGA folks in my district that I wasn’t Pelosi’s bitch; that I was the Former Guy’s bitch, instead.’

There’s even a scuttlebutt that some of us might get an invitation to Mar-A-Largo and press the flesh with His Orange Lardship. I’m sure there’ll be a photo-op; you know how he loves to get his picture taken! Imagine what that’ll do for me come 2022 – to be seen on a campaign poster with the Man himself! Those MAGA-folks will fall all over themselves to fill my war chest.

By the way, here’s a brotherly heads-up; I’m going to have to keep my distance from you until after the next election cycle. Gee whillikers! They wanted to hang you, Bro’!

Best to Karen!

Greg

 

Citizenship - such a chore...

 

Here's what citizenship is all about.

We know how the MAGA-loonies and QAnon ninnies respond to the slightest imposition on their delusions by the realities demanded by citizenship. They not only balk but shake their heads and stalk around befuddled by the suggested imposition.

’Mah freedom!’, they belch on cue.

‘Wearing a mask (or fill the blank) is a violation of my Rah-ahts.’

As if their rights weren’t under girded and founded upon obligations.

Want to be a citizen? Act like one. 

Don’t grouse when you’re called for jury duty. You want a fair judicial system? That’s the price; your involvement.

Want free and fair elections? Register to vote and beat the bushes to get others registered.

Want to be COVID free and back to doing whatever you were doing pre-pandemic?

Wear a damn mask!

And get the jab! As many as are prescribed. 

This is the requirement of citizenship.

Duty. Responsibility. Obligation.

I don’t want to sound like a Marine Corp recruiter but these are the fundamentals which many of the MAGA/GQP crew seemed to have failed to pick up on.

It’s not about skin color or place of origin or nation costume or native language. It’s about acting like a citizen and shouldering the load when it’s your turn.

Noam Chomsky once pointed out that the most joyous day of a citizen’s year should be Tax Day. (whoa!) He reasoned that paying one’s taxes was an expression of one’s commitment to the system of government and the down-payment on the benefits of that government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Where does that leave the fabulously wealthy who tuck their bundle in a post box in the Caymans? Or any of us who grumble about taxes, for that matter.

 

Science and Belief

 

It’s time to make the plea again; the plea to tighten up and formalize and limit the use of the words ‘believe’ and ‘belief’. I’ve mentioned it before and seen eyes glaze over and roll back. It’s the same look I get when confronted with an insurance salesman on the make.

Which leads me to revealing why I’ve taken up the task yet again to address the problem when discussing science with ‘believers’. That confusion – at least in part – stems from the casual use of the words cited in inverted commas above. 

Kent Hovind. If you don’t know who Kent Hovind is, count yourself lucky. Think: ‘Ken Ham’, the schmuck who built the Ark theme park for ‘True Believers’. That’ll bring you into the ball park. 

Mr Hovind is a Creationist and a Bible literalist. He’s a promulgator of ‘Intelligent Design’. (Now, there’s an oxymoron worth its salt.)

Mr Hovind has been on a very extended quest to debate Aron Ra on the verisimilitude of the Theory of Evolution. During one episode (on YouTube, if you must know), Kent decided to build his straw man out of the words of non-scientists found in a Google search. Kent chose some quotes in which the word ‘believe’ was used informally. (e.g. ‘Science believes that the universe started from a singularity.’)

From there, he set the straw man on fire with the errant declaration that ‘science is a belief; science is a religion’. This is one of his primary assertions; science is faith-based because – get this! – since the concepts of black holes, the Big Bang, cosmogony, evolution, etc are not completely understood, then they are accepted as articles of faith and are ‘believed’ by scientists. That is; these theories are accepted as matters of faith and therefore are indicative of religion. ‘Science is a religion!’, he proclaims.

Q.E.D. 

Balderdash.

Science is NOT a belief system. Science is the exact opposite of a believe system as science is based on evidence. Are there dogmas in science? NO, there aren’t. There are theories which are accepted. There are hypotheses and proposals which are considered, examined and challenged.

That’s the difference between science and religion; the theories and hypotheses of science are meant to be challenged but the tenets of Faith are not to be challenged except under penalty of eternal damnation. Challenging articles of faith is forbidden and anathematized.

Think ‘the Spanish Inquisition’.

Try challenging the dogma of ‘Virgin Birth’ or the ‘Resurrection’, for example and watch heads explode amongst the ‘Faithful’.

Contrarily, challenge ‘The Big Bang’ and prepare to be engaged in weighty conversation. Is that discussion passionate? Of course, it is, but the debate is not considered blasphemous or heretical as it would be if one were to challenge virgin birth or the resurrection of Jesus.

Why?

Science is not faith-based. Nothing proposed by scientific method is ‘sacred’. Even the most establish, accepted theories are subject to change as verifiable evidence is presented supporting that change.

Consider the Theory of Gravity. Just recently, evidence of ‘gravity waves’ were observed and verified. The theory was amended.

Dogmas are not amended. The amendations are branded as heresy. They are stamped out. 

Speaking of gravity; try believing you can fly, then launching yourself from the roof of a building. 

Splat! 

‘I believe I can fly’ makes for a wonderfully up-lifting song lyric but it’s shite as a rational appreciation of gravity. 

It might seem that this discourse has strayed too far afield but it has not. The point made at the beginning, citing the lax, casual use of the terms ‘believe’ and belief’ is a sound one. When, in discussion of science versus religion, that wayward use of those terms become the sticking point, as Mr Hovid demonstrated when he cited the use of those terms to set up his straw-man argument equating science with religion.

That misuse, that acyrologia, is a stumbling block to sensible discussions of every-day matters. In a conversation with a friend about this rather pedantic misuse of the terms of faith, he asserted that in order to sit on a chair one must have faith that the chair would support one’s weight. The simple, ordinary act of taking a seat was an act of faith, therefore. 

The counter-argument was that while one may assume (or hypothesize) that a chair could support one’s weight, that assumption could be nullified by evidence that the chair was too feeble or ill-made. If, as one sat, the chair wobbled or creaked or gave some other sign that it was structurally unsound, then one would take another chair.

Hypothesis: the chair can hold my weight.

Evidence: the chair is unsound structurally. It wobbles.

Revised hypothesis: the chair can’t hold my weight.

Conclusion: choose a different chair. 

An even more banal example; ’I believe it’s going to rain’, may sound sophisticated in its phasing but it is erroneous at its base. It’s not expressing a belief. One senses the moisture in the air, sees low, heavy clouds, feels the cooling breeze and concludes from that evidence that there will be precipitation.

Better to say 'I think'…
Or 'I surmise'...
Or 'I contend'…

Deduce. Guess. Conjecture. Conclude. Suspect. Speculate. Presume.

The intention, here, is not to belabor a pedagogic point. It is to reveal a common malapropism as a stumbling block to intelligent discourse about science, religion and matters of everyday life.

Especially with a 'True Believer'.