A Chicken Is Not Pillage

Politics Really *IS* a Game

So it's time to play it! 

There's a bunch of folks all puffed up with 'principles' thinking that voters are uninformed, and candidates have an easy job manipulating that lack of knowledge. Really?  Let's find out how much the intelligencia actually know about pleasing people who live and know where and what they live.

Play Gaffe Dodger, if you dare

Why I love the Twitter

Comedy.  Belly-shaking, can't resist the public laugh, joy to your roots - Comedy.

Being a football fan, this is the funniest thing I've read in months.

Nuance?

A few reminders for those who have become so learned that they've gotten stupid about the most basic things.

A linear function does not need to describe a "straight line".  It simply means that it's variable or variables are constrained by at least one constant.  Non-linear functions are (generally speaking) not constrained by a constant, but still subject to the extremity of inputs.  Regardless, it remains clear that all functions will moderate (become more controllable, more predictable) the more that extreme inputs are removed.  (And further clarification for the stupid, high school geometry *is* high school math.)

Triangulation is the effort to identify two points on the given line by taking a  position that is not directly between those points.  In political terms, it means staking a different position between the points of extreme, not on the line between them, in an attempt to draw one linear point towards the center.  Those who subscribe to triangulation as a net bad are truly engaging in straight line thinking.  They're being stupid.  One can triangulate by taking a point outside the linear boundaries of Democrats and Republicans to pull the median volume of the triangle to the right or the left.  The right has been very successful at that, using shock doctrine to accomplish the effort of pulling the popular will further to the right.  The deeply stupid scream "nuance" while thinking in terms of straight lines and blaming anyone who wants to move the triangle's volume in a favorable direction for not just wizarding such a miracle up.  A reminder.  Triangulation can take place outside the boundaries of the set extremes on the run of the triangle such that the volume moves leftward.  That's what many on the left are screaming for, but don't understand how they're shooting themselves in the foot by replacing movement with magical quantum leap.  Yes, if "we organize" this magical jump to personal satisfaction could happen .... And monkeys could fly out of my butt.  What organizing can do is move the volume of the triangle in a favored direction.  The Tea Party is committed to doing that, and that's why they will support Mitt Romney, even though they hate him.

Vacuums (discretely) do not exist in a vacuum.  If you remove all the air from a bottle inside a chamber filled with chlorine gas, it will not magically fill with liberal fairy dust.  If you uncork that bottle, it will fill with toxic gas, and it will do so in such a hurry, it's likely to break the bottle.  Removing Obama, Bauchus and Tester will not open the way for progressive heroes who will save us.  It will allow in Romney, Gingrich, Rehberg.  The vacuum will be replaced with toxic representation.  The deeply stupid think that somehow, some way, this will lead to 'organizing' that takes control of our governance.  I'd certainly appreciate it if even one of these so-called smart folk could explain how we're supposed to get to self-governance from that point, especially since they've rejected the idea of violence (which for the record, I have not.)

Finally, it is the ultimate of stupid to rely on chaos theory when you've already bought into Illuminati conspiracy.  Politics is chaos, if you actually wish to ignore the variables that make you uncomfortable and focus on those you prefer.  It is the height of stupidity to claim that politics is chaos when you've spent years insulting others because they don't understand how controlled politics actually is.   To claim that the rich choose our candidates and manipulate our representation and yet it's all CHAOS is truly and deeply stupid.  Pick one, Mark, because only the stupid think both can be real.  Either way, my post still holds true.  Defeat the extreme and you're closer to getting what you want (or didn't you think that chaos was describable by math as well?  Sorry kitten, it is.)

Finally, I appreciate Tokarski affording me another 'Wanda' moment.  I'm glad for him that he was born a white male American and never had to want beyond his desire to be 'different'.  I'm happy that he continues to read people smarter than himself, and pigeonhole them into his particular delusion, his mythology.  This gives me many laughs.

Otto:  Apes don't read philosophy!

Wanda: Yes, they do, Otto.  They just don't understand it.

Update:  Shorter Tokarski response:  I don't really know what he's talking about so I'll just denegrate it now,  and insult the reader's intelligence later.

 

New Years Comedy

It's a common and somewhat threadbare line of comedy that people make New Year's resolutions and then break them often in record time.  Here's an example I find to be laugh-out-loud funny.

The Delusional One boldly pronounces :

2012 is my Kailey free year.

So, what is his first blog post of the New Year?  A conspiracy theory focusing on Montana Cowgirl, Left in the West, and of course, myself.  I doubt that smashes any records for breaking a New Year's resolution, but it did make my morning a little more amusing.

Here Be Da' Funny

The Drama Queen Haz A Sad

The neighborhood drunk was apparently unhappy with his efforts at sympathy.  Not content with his sloppy "I Luv You, Man', he again attempts to turn the beige house against others in the neighborhood by mischaracterizing what has been written by others.  It's a classic troll.  And the Drama Queen bites, hook, line and sinker.

JC stupidly pens:

If politics is only all about process–the nuts and bolts an mechanics of electoral politics (the fluffery), then there is no room for vision or leadership, or building one’s actions out of a base built on solid principles, or motivated by the vision of a charismatic leader like MLK.

Well allow me to retort.

Not only is your premise flawed, JC, but your conclusion follows from nothing.  Politics isn't "only" about process, as you state. I've never said that, and neither has anyone I know.  Some of us focus on process, because that's who we are, and what we do.  What you've just stated is that those who are not you are denying what you desire.  We're stopping you from getting what you want, in your narrow mind.  Actually, we agree about much of what we want.  I just think you're a full-of-shit emoprog when you deny that there is a process by which we reach such a destination.

Here's a clue or two for you.  MLK is dead.  Get over it.  Nor was he solely responsible for the Civil Rights act.  Politicians passed that act, y'know, legislators?   Those folk get elected by a process.  At no point does a process like that negate a principle, or any of the principles which drive it.   What does negate that process and the principles behind it is whining about the process folk who are attempting to get you what you want because we haven't succeeded in providing you with a 'leader'.  Grow up.  This ain't recess, and you don't need the teacher to protect you from the bullies or demand that you get chosen first for dodgeball.

JC:

I’m learning that my cynicism needs to be tempered with letting others have their own experiences.

Seems like you need to learn a little bit faster, kitten.  No one owes you a "leader".   That isn't anyone elses role.  But we all do have  a part to play.  For some of us, like your daughter and myself, that part is process.

Just as Tokarski keeps wailing that "we" need to organize, and won't do a damned thing to accomplish that, JC keeps calling for a leader and refuses to be one.  No problem.  That happens all the time.  JC has been writing a great deal of good stuff about the Occupy Wallstreet protests.  But he won't go, he isn't there.  He would, no doubts, talk smack about others who aren't there because this is the Most Important Thingy Ever,  but yet he's not there.  Think on that for a second.  I'd bet that he doesn't have the money and he has to work, and that's why he hasn't joined this brave protest.  You know what?  That's process.  That is what process folk focus on, like me.  That's why I'm not there.  For me it was a simple decision, as I'm certain it was for the Drama Queen.  But his angst is so much more important.  Why would that be?  Why isn't he challenging Mark, the champion of extra party organizing,  for sitting on his ass in Colorado and instead JC's  uttering bullshit about what process folk do?

~sob~ "I luv you man, an him, an him too, an ..."

This sad tale has played out enough to be a cliche.  The increasingly drunk fool travels to every abode at the block party, telling the folks at the beige house that the folk at the gray house all have the clap.  He tells the folk at the brown house that the folk at the beige house are saying that they 'have the clap', and then tells the folks at the blue house that everyone is saying they have the clap, but really it's the folk at the gray house who are diseased.   Regardless of any objection, he'll stop every now and again to piss on someone's shrubbery, forget to zip up, and then mortify some passerby with tales of his superhero mental powers and going native on his wild safaris.  At random times he'll run from one end of the block to the other, proudly proclaiming that The World Crime League is out to get him, and all of us as well!  This he does, of course, before hiding behind someone's screen door or the random Hollyhock.  At least a couple of times, he'll saunter smoothly (at least as he sees it) up to someone, give a false name and tell them everything that is wrong about them.

As his personal prowess grows in his own mind, he will attempt to pick fights with just about everyone.  Some will attempt to reason with him, some will ignore him and a few will grab him by the face, tell him to leave, and throw his discombobulated ass to the sidewalk.  Those will become his 'mortal enemies', (he is a superhero, you know.)  He will spin tales about how he defeated those enemies, just as the Spartans defeated the Persians at Thermopylae.   Besides, he will sigh, they aren't really worth fighting anyway ...

Late in the evening, or early in the morning depending on your perspective, he will throw his arm around those who can barely tolerate his presence, as opposed to those who won't, and utter the slurred speech we all expect:

"I luv you, man!"

No Shit, There I Was In The Congo, Part 2

I thought the dumbest thing I would read today was that the President wants to kill a Supreme Court Justice.  I was wrong.

Apparently, when politicians play their roles, it's just Kabuki theater, worthy of much disdain.  When citizens act like complete jackasses, it's "art".  Whocouldaknowed ...

Let's At Least Keep Things Honest

In a post about raising "hell" in Wisconsin, jhwygirl writes:

For every action there is an equal an opposite reaction. Those crazy tea party people! Look what doo-doo they got themselves into over there.

I'm probably just being pedantic in pointing out that the reaction equation only works in Newtonian physics.  It's never worked very much or at all in the social/political sciences.  The bulk of her post is worth reading and crowing about.  Wisconsin did good, and that's no lie.  Keep in mind, though, that the Wisconsin primary vote wasn't about the Tea Party.  It was anger at the people that these same folk who voted for true Democratic candidates yesterday elected just 9 months ago.  If there is a reaction then it was from those who 'acted' in the first place.  I find jhwygirl's post adorable, if only because she can't use the term "shit" when it's really deserved.  And shit is truly what the Tea Folk have offered to Wisconsin, and Wisconsin reacted appropriately.  This is their fight.  The rest of us can support them, with money and praise, but making the larger point that the Tea Party is facing annihilation due to their actions is a bit over the top.  Let's see what happens in the general of the recall.  (For the record, I think those six state Senators are going down.)

As most of you who have read me for than a day can well sense, I haven't brought this up without a more serious disagreement.  jhwygirl writes:

Thank Goddess for those crazy radical storm-the-capital union-loving progressives! It sure as hell wasn’t a bunch of milquetoast leftys out there camping in the capital, or marching the streets or gathering signatures up within weeks of their legislative session’s sine die to recall the Republicans and regain control of their state.

 

I'm having a real difficult time knowing exactly what the hell she's writing about here.  Union loving progressives?  I don't know how familiar she is with what actually happened in Wisconsin, but the first salvo in this progressive fight was from students at UW Madison with a bunch of Valentine's cards to Scott Walker.   When the capitol got "stormed" it was by those students and public union members themselves.    I will likely remain curious as to why jhwygirl was so intent on pointing out "progressives" as opposed to the actual unions, which organized very quickly.  Within a day of the first protest march, the SEIU and the AFT were organizing protest against provisions which had already passed the Wisconsin budget repair bill, but not it's more loathsome requirements.  Within 2 days the Capitol hill (which lies in the middle between two large lakes, yes, I've been there) was occupied by between 30,000 and 50,000 people.  Most of those folk were union organized.  So why should there be a distinction between " union-loving progressives" and the unions themselves?  That makes little sense, unless one has an agenda  beyond promoting union activism.

Quite recently, here in Montana, we had a bunch of "anarchists" protest big oil.  They acted like a bunch of buffoons, but it seems important that some Montana progressives promote them as doing important stuff.  They didn't, but the folks in Wisconsin did.  Which leads to the real quandary I have with jhwygirl's post.

It sure as hell wasn’t a bunch of milquetoast leftys out there camping in the capital, or marching the streets or gathering signatures up within weeks of their legislative session’s sine die to recall the Republicans and regain control of their state.

If that's sarcasm, it really isn't very good.  It reads way too much like an indictment.   Democracy for America were those milquetoast lefties out there garnering signatures.  The SEIU were those camping out at the capitol.  The union protesters weren't trashing the place as the right accused them of.  Are some of the left accusing them of the same?  It wouldn't surprise me.  It was the milquetoast lefties that got this damned job done.    There is more to do, and the DFA, the SEIU, the AFT and other organizations (not anarchists) will see it through.  It hasn't been radicals (extremists) that have seen this calling to this point.  It's been working people who actually care about what happens beyond dancing on tables.

Snappy Sloganeering

"Obama lied and Osama died"  just doesn't have a real rhythmic appeal to it.