muleboy blues

Brave NEW World

2008-05-25T12:47:00.000-07:00

... or, "all this too must pass" for muleboy ist movink to:

but before i go, i must say...

"Thank You

Hillary Rodham Clinton"

"... following in the footsteps of the past ten years of Madeleine Albright, Pat Schroeder, Geraldine Ferraro, Janet Reno, Condoleeza Rice, Harriett Miers, Janis Karpinski, Katherine's Harris and Blanco, Nancy Pelosi, and countless others... your Presidential campaign has proven beyond any doubt, that women can be just as ruthless, unethical, petty, corrupt, selfish, dishonest, barbaric, incompetent, devious, and arrogant, as any man or men who've ever lived. and if that is not "equality", i can't imagine what could be."

thankya again, bye-bye

everlasting regret

2008-05-18T19:00:00.000-07:00

In late October 2006, I forced my daughter to go with me to see Gore Vidal and Maureen Dowd talk awhile at Austin's Paramount Theatre, while less than a mile away barricades were being moved and streets blocked off around the UT campus to accomodate the already growing crowd waiting to see and hear a Senator from Illinois who was going to run for President of the United States.

I was so excited at the opportunity for my daughter to personally experience the wit and wisdom of Vidal and Dowd, people who had over a century of combined experience observing, living, and chronicaling the American political scene, that I gave little thought to the nearby Senator who's main claim to fame then was that Oprah was crazy about him. I dismissed him as a fad along with some internal thoughts that would not be conducive to good race relations were they to be uttered aloud.

I was so wrong. I've learned so much since then. He ran under my political radar and has caused me to reassess my most basic assumptions about the people of this country, especially those younger than I.

And in an ironic twist of fate, by not taking my daughter to see/hear Barack Obama on that beautiful day in Austin in 2006, I replicated a non-experience of my Grandfather, who lamented for over five decades not taking advantage of his opportunity to make the short trip to Magnolia Arkansas in 1932 to see Huey Long speak to 30,000 people in support of Hattie Carraway's campaign.

I now know how he must have felt, for I too will regret for the rest of my life.

Her Exact Words

2008-05-08T09:32:00.000-07:00

at 4:51...
"Um, You know, I remember very well what happened in the California primary in 1968 as Sen. Kennedy won that primary."
- Hillary Rodham Clinton 7 May 2008 in Shepherdstown, West Virginia

the full context quote:

"But I also think it's still early, I mean everybody is so focused on where we are right now, I, I, guess I remember in June of '92 that's when Bill really wrapped up the nomination, the middle of June after the California primary. Um, You know, I remember very well what happened in the California primary in 1968 as Sen. Kennedy won that primary. I mean, we traditionally have gone longer and there isn't any problem in closing ranks..."

first of all, "it's still early"?

secondly, many older Democrats, and some younger ones who've studied their history books, also "remember very well what happened in the California primary in 1968 as Sen. Kennedy won that primary."

Hillary could've cited the 1972 primaries (a campaign she had personal experience with) or those in 1976 or 1988, as examples to make her point.

She didn't. She used 1968's and mentioned Senator (Robert F.) Kennedy and "what happened" while doing so.

It was on purpose. The Clintons are well-schooled in the practice of using words very carefully. Within a dozen hours of Hillary's devastating loss in the North Carolina primary coupled with her pyrrhic victory in Indiana, as the chorus of talking heads proclaimed the race "over", Hillary sent a heavy handed message to the Democratic party Super-Delegates who have not yet publicly committed themselves to a candidate.

The message ? "Wait"!

Hold off on jumping on the Obama express for another few weeks, at least until the primary voting has concluded, ....

because ... um, ah, you never know WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN

UPDATE: apparently Senator Ted Kennedy heard Hillary. 48 hours later he said:

MR. HUNT: What's your view of an Obama-Clinton ticket?

SEN. KENNEDY: I don't think it's possible.

MR. HUNT: You don't. And what type of vice president choice do you think he should make? What type of person?

SEN. KENNEDY: Well, the first is always a demand that you're going to have someone that's going to be able to assume the responsibility. I would hope that he would also give consideration to somebody that has - is in tune with his appeal for the nobler aspirations of the American people. And I think if we had real leadership - as we do with Barack Obama - in the number-two spot as well, it'd be enormously helpful.

Kennedy Dismisses "Dream Ticket"

Hillary Clinton 7 May 2008

2008-05-08T09:31:00.001-07:00

at 4:51...

"But I also think it's still early, I mean everybody is so focused on where we are right now, I, I, guess I remember in June of '92 that's when Bill really wrapped up the nomination, the middle of June after the California primary. Um, You know, I remember very well what happend in the California primary in 1968 as Sen. Kennedy won that primary. I mean, we traditionally have gone longer and there isn't any problem in closing ranks..."

Winning

2008-05-07T10:31:00.000-07:00

For far too much of United States' history, Politicians and their supporters have sought to pit red against blue, white against black, and all against yellow and brown, in a most cynical and successful effort to make GREEN.
(not to mention what immigrants did to the natives)

It is time for a change. It is time for a new definition of "winning".

I submit that the new definition come from a line I heard Bruce Springsteen use many times when he was making a plea for contributions to the local food bank during his concerts...

"Remember, nobody wins unless everybody wins".

I thought it quaint and naive when I first heard it 25 years ago. Now that I am older, I understand.

Can it be done? No.

But there is no shame in trying. Indeed the only shame is in not trying.

Thy Name is Pyrrhus

2008-05-04T11:39:00.000-07:00

Thy name is Pyrrhus

students of History can describe with a single word, the methods leading to losses sustained in gaining a victory that renders the achievement as worse than worthless. the word is "Pyrrhic".

students of modern American politics can also describe the same concept with one word, "Clinton".

the longer definition is "campaigning in such a way as to achieve electoral victory without regard to the consequences it has upon limiting the potential latitude for governing".

but being the President of the United States, circa 2009, will have far less need of consensus-building and adherence to the rule of law than previous Presidents, courtesy of the Bush-Cheney administration's "Unitary Executive" assertions/actions, the U.S. Federal courts, Congresses both Republican and Democratic controlled, and ultimately the American people.

therefore, the current Clinton candidate is unconcerned with returning to the standards and practices of the past, in Congressional oversight, consensus-building, and public opinion, because only a signature will define "the art of the possible" for the 44th POTUS. previewed by a quote attributed to the first President Clinton's aide Paul Begala in 1998 "Stroke of the Pen, Law of the Land. Kinda Cool".

thus, with so many things 'Clinton', apparently "the consent of the governed" is also subject to redefinition. for if the American people continue to work, buy things, and pay taxes, without resorting to strikes, civil-disobedience, or armed revolt, to the Clintons (and far too many other "public servants") that constitutes "consent".

in 2008, the American people are being given the opportunity to begin to turn away from the destructive politics inherent in the consolidation of power. it will be their choice, but it will not come as easy as by voting, writing a check, attending a rally, or wearing a button/t-shirt, for the forces that have benefitted so very much from the evolution of government power residing in fewer and fewer hands, will not give up without a very ugly fight, regardless of the costs. and they will have many minions of supplicants ready and eager to do battle for them in the vain and misguided assumption that it takes a candidate toughened and corrupted by experience to defeat another one.

only Time will tell if indeed the "times have changed" or if Pete Townshend's axiom "Meet the new Boss, Same as the old Boss" is more relevant and prophetic than ever.

meanwhile Pyrrhus is making his way toward the stage, just in case.

stephenhsmith
4May2008

"you don't understand"

2008-04-25T09:49:00.000-07:00

one casualty/consequence of the rapid changes in US society over the past 50 years is quite possibly little understood, and as far as i know, little remarked upon. but the generation gap looming in 2008's POTUS contest might present the opportunity to change that. (pardon the pun)

a short list of societal changes in the US during the past 50 years:

rock n' roll
civil rights/race relations
the pill
the space race/ballistic missiles
vietnam, the draft
movie codes/practices
drug use (legal and illegal)
cable tv, videocassettes, cds, dvds
imported cars
roe vs wade
women in the workplace
aids
government/society relations
immigration/multi-culturalism
commercial/political religion
commecial/political "news" reporting
personal computers
the internet
cell phones

each new change created a rough delineation between the people who grew up before, during, and in the increasingly distant aftermath of the assimilation of the changes, many of which were simultaneous.

every age difference of more than twenty years, even just ten years, will span one or more of the comprehensive societal changes, therefore any discussion/argument between people with such age/experience differences will likely include the assertion or retort "you just don't understand". and when it is uttered, it will likely be grounded in truth.

because the experiences of those people old enough to remember what things were like before the change(s), renders them severely crippled when attempting to relate and interact with those who have only known the after effects. those to whom the new technologies and new standards/methods/values are all they have ever known, and are considered by them to be "normal", also are impaired when trying to imagine that so many things were 'different' before their own experience. even people who grew up in the same town, but more than 30 years apart, literally grew up in different countries.

the dissonance created by this 'experience gap' will manifest itself in countless ways during the next decade, especially between the oldest and youngest in society. the race for President in 2008 will be a watershed moment, largely defining the battleground.

to embark on a radically new path, embracing the priorities/methods/standards of the younger generations, while accelerating the discarding of the older ones. or to remain largely on the path of the past 50 years for a few years more.

either way, it is going to be a long and painful war.

stephenhsmith
25april2008

Wanted: Another Bill (with a key difference)

2008-04-23T08:47:00.000-07:00

to reduce defense spending, re-emphasize diplomacy in foreign policy, reduce the national debt, more tax fairness, more inclusive of non-white/non-rich in policy making, and "focus like a laser-beam" on specific domestic issues (derisively called "small-ball" by the Bush administration)

one gets the impression that what the Democratic voters are looking for is another Bill Clinton, with one key difference. they desire a President like Bill Clinton, that they don't have to constantly worry about being embarassed by.

until the campaigns began in earnest, the common perception was that Hillary was that candidate, because she was perceived as being smart enough, tough enough, and assertive enough to offset lingering doubts about Bill's role in another term. but as the early campaign unfolded, those doubts multiplied to the point where the "unknown" candidate became the frontrunner because he sounded very much like Bill did in 1992 and had unprecedented character and discipline for a young Democrat with charisma.

then the "guilt by association" campaign began.
Obama hangs out with:
a sleazy businessman
a momentarily angry black preacher
an unrepentant vietnam war protester
people who look down their noses at the working class,
church-goers, and hunters
people who drink orange juice instead of coffee,
and can't bowl worth a damn.

to the older, whiter, less educated, and less affluent voters, the "old" politics that has worked in the past, still works (but thankfully, not as well as it used to)
but just as with the studio system in the movie industry decades ago and the current music industry, a new way of doing business (mostly due to new technology) is ascending while the old way is fighting hard and dirty to preserve it's power.

and the results will be similar because after decades of "top-down" (dare i say "elitist"?) decision-making by elders corrupted by too much "experience", the younger generations now have the means and the numbers to insist on a different method of consensus-building, from the "bottom (the people) up".

For the Record (Predictions) McCain's VP choice is...

2008-04-20T09:56:00.000-07:00

John McCain has, according to Hillary Clinton, "a lifetime of experience he would bring to the Oval Office". Yet that "lifetime" consists of two distinct phases. the first is of a youth spent growing up in a military household, and then wearing the uniform himself. following in the footsteps (carved path?) of his father and grandfather (both Admirals in the U.S. Navy), McCain spent decades training to use, and using, military force.

afterwards, for the past quarter-century plus, McCain's public service has consisted of elected office in Washington D.C. where he has largely focused on "defense"/foreign policy issues when not working to solidify and perpetuate the upper-classes' monopoly on power.

for over five decades John McCain has focused almost entirely on training to use military force and deciding when and how to use that force. it is almost literally, all he knows.

therefore, in my opinion, McCain will be consistent when the time comes later this year to make his first "Presidential-level" decision, the choice of a running-mate for Vice-President. a selection that will be most revealing of his character and priorities, and will have a far-reaching impact on the election and the future of the GOP beyond.

i will be most surprised if McCain does not select Rudy Giuliani for VP.

8 Lifetimes

2008-04-19T08:22:00.000-07:00

if a week is a "lifetime" in Politics, then using the GOP in 2008 as an example, just 8 weeks ago large chunks of the Republican base voters, and many prominent spokespersons were lamenting 'the death of the GOP' and wailing utterly. whereas now they are muted and more unified by the illusion of electability because of better poll numbers.

i expect something similar will occur on the DEM side, and using the 8 weeks blueprint would mean that "hostilities" would need to cease by the end of June, which coincides roughly with the end of the voting schedule.

thus by the time of the convention in Denver, where the DEM nominee will make the most anticipated and watched political speech in a generation, all of the bitterness of the primary season will have been forgotten as the focus becomes not just winning the GE in November, but winning it while bringing in another 30 new DEM House members and up to 9 new DEM Senators.

i will argue that close poll numbers in September and October are to be expected, with up to near double-digit undecideds, and will be a benefit to the DEM nominee and Congressional candidates ultimately, as the undecideds will break heavily toward the DEM after the debates when the electorate has to fully face the prospect of four more years of Bush policies implemented by a rather older man who only truly understands war, but nothing else.

The 3 Most Obvious Things about Hillary

2008-04-16T14:17:00.000-07:00

the 3 most obvious things about Hillary are the very 3 things that will prevent her from winning the Democratic nomination.
(unless the "unspeakable" happens)

Hillary is a Woman
Hillary is a Clinton
Hillary is .. Hillary

all of her adult life, Hillary has worked in a field dominated by men, and for the past 28 years, men predisposed to espouse 'conservative' rhetoric/image/values (irrespective of reality), to gain electoral victory. thus she has worked, especially since winning elected office, to emulate the success formula by developing a centrist resume and a reputation/record of being "tough" (like a man/leader).

the advantages afforded by her marriage to a Clinton, along with his historical record, now hamper her efforts as much or more than they help.

but ultimately, Hillary is herself, and but a few minutes of television and/or headlines everyday for a few months has revealed her true self to all who have paid any attention.

THE TIMES HAVE SO CHANGED... and Hillary did not have the foresight to see it coming. but even so, should the "unspeakable" happen and Hillary became the Democratic nominee by default, the three obvious things would still only be enough to make her victory in November "a close run thing".

that is how desperate the American people are for CHANGE.

The FIRST Test(s)

2008-04-14T12:03:00.000-07:00

the FIRST TEST(S)... plural

the first tests to determine if a candidate
for President of the United States
should/will become the next
.... President of the United States.

1. assembling campaign staff and outlining strategies/"message".
2. raising money
3. spending money
4. handling "winning" (maximizing)
5. handling "losing" (minimizing/rebounding)
6. how/when to "attack"
7. how/when to "defend"

this process unfolds sporadically over only a few weeks or months for all but the most ardent politicophiles, and even then many of the nuances of decision-making are knowable only in retrospect.

the 'tip of the iceberg' is always the candidate, while most of the heavy lifting is done by others, but even that is reflective of the candidate's abilities to adopt, adapt, and improve, but most importantly of all, manage money.

and if all that is successful enough, the candidate becomes the nominee who then makes what is called the "first truly 'Presidential' decision", the selection of a running-mate. and by it, and informed by the sum-total of so many decisions and actions that preceded it, the electorate should know quite a lot about the character and abilities of the respective nominees.

combining that assessment with the realities of political demography in relation to the perceived current/future state of world affairs, the nominees' pre-campaign records, and proposed policies, should make the decision an easy one for any voter who knows what they truly want.

2008-04-14T11:19:00.000-07:00

303 . 1 d # iw sp . at . an . dg . dg1 . goo . hm . ym . my . cp . anti . pjb . wprn . fr . du . hp . lew . nyt . frm . wthr . ras . tpv . itx . oped . ed . wiki . $s . ca . $$ . mkt . blmb . trsx . truk . v . sevr . hitch . hw . strat4 . bq .hrtz . jp . yt . 13 . polls . brm . rcp . rcm . tdal . ecal . tun . hill . fmk . pmk . mw2 . bbc . rwb . ard . ger . vots . kos . wsj . jw . fee . 8 . hm . rwn . ii . sa . lies . gulfs . polfs . wap . ich . taki . mic . hot . 84 . time . rjc . jf . sci . w2k . fps . poac . cpd . bart . gas . ire . au . tli . dvd smc . pop . gm . iq . map . gal . fb . pof .. cam .cam. exc . wd . gr . pco . iht . tap . big . galv . bb . cf . polls . tt . pt . ev . ntyp . mm . fb . mt . red . dow . calc . coop . rge . jud . fdl . lc . pw . cfn . ray . un . oil . amp . us . mt . jf . foe . tdb . cb . lm . ru . ur . bp . rtv . adn . 11 . muk . geo . sr . aj . os . ergo . tb . sec . qb . bdi . htz . rsc . W . mf . oilx . arbiz . cams . bistro . bb . $ub . pt . hou .

Hillary's 'Kvetchin'-Sink Strategy

2008-04-14T08:36:00.000-07:00

"Obama is not a Muslim (As Far As I Know...) but he is an "Elitist" - HRC 2008
For someone, who, with her spouse, has grossed more than a million dollars a month since George W. Bush took office, to label her opponent as "Elitist", well... "chutzpah" doesn't begin to cover it. And after downing a couple of whiskey shots this weekend in Indiana, what's next? Pork Rinds ?

And when it comes to "bitter"?

Methinks Hillary doth project too much!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

George W. Bush's Iraq policy is doing to the U.S. military (especially the Army & Natl. Guard) the exact same thing that Gov. Mike Huckabee did to the Arkansas State Police's airplane.

to wear it completely out, for his own political advantage, so that his successor has to replace it at great cost to the taxpayers.

thus, in W's case, forcing massive future expenditures on his own pet government programs, while simultaneously limiting the amount available to spend on the successor's priorities. in other words, a "set-up", another in a long line of geo-political acts based firstly on domestic partisan political considerations.

=======================================================

"if the use of an ill-chosen word and the failure to repudiate/jettison his spiritual guide of 20 years for temporary political expediency, because of his long ago ill-chosen words, is the worst you can say about a man who'd rather spend hundreds of billions of dollars feeding, clothing, building roads and power plants for people in lieu of bombing/killing/torturing them in order to steal their natural resources, then the people of the United States are well on their way to having the opportunity to correct many of the mistakes they've allowed for the past 60 years." shs 14apr2008

=======================================================

"as this political year has unfolded, it certainly seems as though the frontrunner for the Democratic Party's nomination is asking the people of the United States for a chance to lead them, while his opponent for the nomination continues to assert that she is most qualified to rule them. and perhaps that explains the difference in their votes/delegate counts ?" shs 14apr2008

Paraf**kinoid

2008-04-12T11:54:00.000-07:00

being that the interests of the corporate media, the military-industrial complex, the criminals of the Bush Administration, the Israeli and Religious Right-Wings, and the Clintons are in near complete alignment, it comes as no surprise that particular attention is paid by them to promoting the perpetuation of the Democratic Party's nomination contest.

i don't know whose "brilliant" (read: idiotic) idea it was to allow the primaries/caucuses to be frontloaded onto the calendar and then have the conventions as close to the general election as possible, but as it stands now the only things that stand in the way of Obama's nomination are:

a: an unprecedented mistake by Obama
.......................... (think Gerald Ford/Poland to the tenth power)

b: an unprecedented series of mistakes by Obama
.......................... (think Michael Dukakis to the third power)

c: another Sirhan Sirhan
.......................... (in which case it really is 1968 again and Hillary IS Nixon)

d: a major terrorist attack
.......................... (in the U.S. or China during the Olympics, Pakistan, or ?)

e: Bush or the Israelis ginning up another WAR in the Middle East
.......................... (not the big one IRAN, Gaza or Lebanon will do)

the longer Hillary stays in the race, (even if she pulls a "Huckabee" i.e. 'campaigning without attacking the presumed nominee) the greater the chances are for one or more of the above to change the political calculus of the Democratic Party's nomination.

'tis 20 weeks until the Convention in Denver
.............................. ('tis gonna be a long goddamn 20 weeks)

p.s. Dear Madame Clinton: if thou doth not understand how so many people are "bitter" and want real change, thou hath not been listening. (neither did they gross over $100 MILLION in income during the Bush Administration's tenure)

The Biggest Lie ?

2008-04-12T08:18:00.000-07:00

"I will not wait on events, while dangers gather. I will not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons."

... George W. Bush SOTU January 2002

President Bush's Statement on North Korea Nuclear Test
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary October 9, 2006 9:58 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Last night the government of North Korea proclaimed to the world that it had conducted a nuclear test. We're working to confirm North Korea's claim. Nonetheless, such a claim itself constitutes a threat to international peace and security. The United States condemns this provocative act. Once again North Korea has defied the will of the international community, and the international community will respond.

The Trick Question ?

2008-04-09T11:05:00.000-07:00

I want :

the number of dollars spent by the U.S. Federal Government on subsidies/welfare, both social and corporate (especially high-tech weaponry and the militarization of space) to be set on a path of incremental change, resulting 8 years later in significant, some would say "radical" reductions. (-20% at least, correlated to fewer/fairer taxes and a true balanced budget)

fewer Federal laws more fully and fairly applied. (and fewer FedGov programs/departments/employees) with only 3 categories of persons in the Federal Code: 1. Full Citizen 2. pre-Full Citizen 3. non-Citizen

full restoration of "Habeus Corpus", 4th Amendment protections, 'due process', and 'the rule of law' (regardless of race, creed, colour, orientation, financial status)

50% reduction in the U.S. Armed Forces stationed outside the U.S. (in 8 years or less)

pre-WWII 'checks/balances' of power restored, between the U.S. HoR/Senate, the Judicial Branch, and the Executive Branch.

pre-WWII 'balance of power' restored, between the States and the Federal Government.

the integrity of the U.S. borders restored/enforced. (with a fairer/more competent legal-immigration policy, and illegal-assimilation policy)

the elimination of all Federal drug laws and agencies enforcing them.

U.S. FedGov policies/laws to NOT impede research/market solutions to protect/preserve/restore the quality of air/land/water. (and Federal land/water use policies to support, not subvert, those solutions)

U.S. international Trade policies to reflect the need for slower incremental reductions in the gap between foreign workers' standards-of-living/wages and the American labor force's.

The "Trick" Question? ...

Are such desires "Liberal" or "Conservative" ?

Clinton "Logic"

2008-04-08T12:16:00.000-07:00

"How can anyone assert that a candidate/campaign that began with such enormous advantages in polling, money, and name recognition, and then performed so poorly as to squander those leads to the point of being too far behind an "inexperienced newcomer" to be able to catch up or win, without massive help or 'divine interference', ... is still the one best suited to take on the GOP nominee in the general election?" - stephenhsmith 8Apr2008

Their "logic" escapes me. (but then again, they've never made sense to me)

Gross Income

2008-04-04T15:54:00.000-07:00

over $109 MILLION in 8 years (*2007 totals not in yet)
over $108 MILLION in 7 years (since BC42's leaving office)
= $1.135 MILLION per month or... $37,000 per DAY

= $1.28 MILLION per month or... $42,000 per DAY

(ironically the same as Arkansan's median income for one YEAR)

$108M - $34M(taxes) - $10M (gifting) = $64M /84months

= $761,ooo per month, $25,ooo per day, $1,042 per hour

2 lawyers, 1 a former President, 1 a future President*

(*at billing time, pardon the pun)

for $521/hour each (net)

24 hours a day, every day since George W. has been POTUS

"i know living in New York is expensive, but DAMN...

or maybe they just missed the '80's ("decade of greed")

and are catching up"

*p.s. does not include NY State taxes

which i'm sure are a bitch

The Opening Shot

2008-04-02T10:35:00.000-07:00

Barack Obama's campaign is "The Opening Shot" of the coming 'war between the generations', and/or the last echo of those whose worldviews were shaped by, or prior to, VietNam/the '60's.

Those born in the 1960's now find themselves sandwiched in between people who grew up having to deal with the Draft and those who were raised on cable tv, vcr's, computers/internet, and cell phones. The demarcations also include different views and experiences on/with the role of Government in society, it's methods, and most importantly, it's priorities. The 'in-between'ers' will have to decide whether the U.S. government continues to try to 'police/democratize the world' as it has for the past six decades via economic coercion and military force, or to focus inward to reform itself into a fully-functioning example for others to admire and emulate.

The 'in-between'ers' with few or no personal memories of VietNam/the '60's impact upon U.S. society, including the Democratic Party nominee, will have to choose. Between a man who personally remembers the news of Pearl Harbor, whose views of the proper role of the United States on the world stage were shaped by WWII, the Cold War, his own experiences in VietNam, and the ensuing fallout and rebound from it.

Whereas the younger supporters of Obama have few or no personal memories of Ronald Reagan. Their worldviews are shaped by the ubiquitous interactive technologies they were raised with, and the post-'60's social and political trends accelerated by those new communication tools. Indeed if an 18 y/o voter this November was born to 3 preceding generations of 18 year old parents, John McCain would be but 1 year younger than their great-grandparents.

I expect that a McCain/Obama contest will be the largest generational/age/policy/worldview gap in U.S. history, both literally and figuratively. And it will be but the harbinger of very substantial and often ugly and bitter policy fights over government spending to come over the next decade.

To what extent those born in the 1960's commit themselves to making sacrifices for the future well-being of their children will be the determining factor in the 'generations war' to come. They may act decisively in 2008 or they may not. Only time will tell. But at least they will have a choice.

Unless another Sirhan or another 911 takes that choice away.

The Math of the Aftermath

2008-04-01T09:15:00.000-07:00

"Our future is Hillary's Decision"

in politics, MATH TRUMPS ALL, in votes, polls, calendars, and MONEY.

which means that Hillary's quest for the nomination now has an exceedlingly slight possibility of success, due to the dearth of states/delegates left to vote, the margins of victory that would be necessary, and most importantly perhaps, the amount of money such an effort would cost.

normally such numbers would mean that an Obama/Clinton ticket is almost a necessity. but, beginning with the fact that it's the first wide-open POTUS race, on both sides, in 80 years, 2008 began and continues to be anything but a "normal" year.

Hillary has a reputation for being "tough" or to put it more bluntly, as an "attack dog", which is historically the role of the VP nominee in the GE campaign. (yes, such a ticket would undermine somewhat a key component of Obama's message of "moving beyond the 'politics of the past', but politics, especially national, makes for strange bedfellows, ala 1960, 1980, 2000 etc.)

in the past 8 weeks since John McCain effectively won the GOP nomination, the Hillary campaign has repeatedly sought to paint Obama as unqualified to be POTUS, even to the extent of asserting that McCain is. such campaign "hardball" is to be expected, and it has taken a toll on both Obama's and Hillary's poll numbers, but it hasn't yet become disabling. (6 weeks ago large and vocal sections of the GOP were declaring their discontent with McCain, to the point of voting for Hillary or not voting at all. amazing what a few good poll numbers can change)

but as April becomes May and then June, such intramural squabbling, if it escalates, or merely continues, can definitely cripple the DEM nominee, in what should be the easiest election victory since 1932. (and to quote the most ardent wing of the DEMs "if it's not close, they can't steal it")

thus if the MATH dictates, Hillary will have only a couple or few months with which to heal the wounds of the primary season, assume the role the electorate has decided she should play, and go on to make History. she (and a few million others) will need help during the next month or so, in not only realizing it, but embracing it.

or not. for Hillary has the power to render Obama unelectable if she so chooses. how she proceeds in Pennsylvania and onwards, will be most revealing.

for now, it is truly up to her, and her alone.

and the whole world is watching.

Compare and Contrast

2008-03-28T13:16:00.000-07:00

"they thought it would be so easy and never bothered to wonder what they would do if it wasn't" ... stephenhsmith 28Mar2008

WHO am I talking about ?

a: Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld et al, on taking out Saddam and occupying Iraq?

b: the Clintons, on Hillary's quest for the Democratic Party nomination?

c: both

... isn't "foresight" and "prudence" something a President should have (in massive quantities) ?

Three Words

2008-03-28T13:00:00.000-07:00

the 3 most under-utilized words in Government (especially Washington D.C.) are:

"STOP" "DON'T" & "NO"

unfortunately, elected officials and hundreds of thousands of appointed bureaucrats hear backwards, as in:

"NO, DON'T STOP"

And How ?

2008-03-28T08:12:00.000-07:00

"When did having successfully evaded indictment become one of the main prerequisites for electability ?"

stephenhsmith 27Mar2008

"Enron, WorldCom, Arthur Anderson, Global Crossing, Tyco, NYSE, Qwest, Bear Stearns, CountryWide, etc.etc.etc... can anyone argue that more harm would have been done to the US economy, (besides just the pension funds, bond and shareholders) if those corporations' books, taxes, and compensation practices had been overscrutinized ?"

stephenhsmith 28Mar2008

The Worst Kind of Racism... Political Expediency (1992)

2008-03-25T18:58:00.000-07:00

....

"These are examples of a kind of racism that is rarely seen in our country in this day and age, the racism of political expediency. When it is to Governor Clinton's benefit in a campaign or the molding of his "image", he will make a very public show of small acts, while allowing a never-ending myriad of small scale injustices to perpetuate themselves. To correct them would cost Clinton favor with the people whose support will be necessary if he is to be successful in his life-long drive for the Presidency of the United States. For his ultimate success, Bill Clinton is entirely willing to play "racial politics" and to allow disadvantaged people to be denied equal rights, equal treatment, and equal protection under the law." ... stephenhsmith july 1992

... from Muleboy's archives, summer of '92 ... a list and a concluding observation

ADDENDUM: such "political calculations" by the Clintons in 1992 were arguably defendable, in light of 12 straight years of GOP occupation of the White House, and after all, they did WIN! (or as James Carville put it "they didn't so much as 'break' the GOP electoral college lock, as 'picked' it) yet the Clintons are evidently stuck in 1992 (and arguably 2002) when obviously, by the fundraising totals, delegate count, and popular vote count in favor of Obama, the times and methods have changed.

but the Clintons have not.

stephenhsmith 25Mar2008

liberating

2008-03-24T11:28:00.000-07:00

in my time of dying, as the date draws ever nearer
i'm heartened by the simple fact that life becomes much clearer
contrary to the axiom, it's "darkest 'fore the dawn"
my light burns ever brighter, up until it's gone

and if my words have purpose, only time will show
to follow from the dying light and leave a teaching glow
the love is in the labor, for those who dare to think
of others and not just themselves, the chain, and not the link

stephenhsmith 24Mar2008

Racism and Religious Fundamentalism

2008-03-24T09:39:00.000-07:00

"Racism and Religious Fundamentalism are the oxygen and petroleum, without which the fires of ethic-less crony capitalism, militarism, and imperialism could not continue to burn"

stephenhsmith 24Mar2008

the number is FOUR THOUSAND

2008-03-23T07:00:00.000-07:00

or, if you are George W. Bush the number is FOUR (Comma) THOUSAND.

what does that number represent ?

a: the number of U.S. KIA's in the War/Occupation in IRAQ over the last 5 years?

b: the number of Iraqis killed/wounded in sectarian conflict so far this year?

c: the number of DOLLARS PER SECOND being spent by the US Govt. on an illegal and immoral WAR?

d: all of the above?

THE ANSWER IS ... D

It's Time We Stop...Hey, What's That Sound ?

2008-03-21T11:52:00.000-07:00

It may well be the sound of ICE "breaking", as Governor Bill Richardson endorses Barack Obama's Presidential candidacy, especially timed after the Rev. Wright "hit" and "rebound".

As the GOP slime tactics were perfected over the past 40-50-60 years (depending on whether you start with Nixon's POTUS runs or his first Senate campaign) a large portion of the Democratic Party concluded that the only way to "fight" against the slime was to adopt similar tactics ("fight Fire with Fire", so to speak)

along comes a younger candidate, imbued with the sensibility of a new generation whose whole lives have been conducted during the escalating political slime wars (even as the culture grew more tolerant on social issues, though more militant on foreign policies) and are rightly revolted by it. and he argues that perhaps it would be better for all concerned if such "Fire" were fought with "Water".

so far it seems, that somewhere between 1/4 and 1/3 of the american electorate are already on board with such a "new kind of politics" with perhaps an equal amount only waiting to be convinced that it can really work before they too jump on.

Richardson may be correct in his "once in a lifetime" assertion. and after what i've seen in my life, my conclusion is to "give it a try" (as it is damn near impossible to imagine that it could fail so badly as to be worse than what we've already known)

5 years ago and 6 years ago

2008-03-19T10:43:00.000-07:00

notice how the Iraq War anniversary is dated from the invasion and not from two days before when President George W. Bush went on national television to announce an ultimatum that Saddam Hussein had 48 hours to leave (and then 10 hours later W ordered the US Air Force to assassinate Saddam, but they failed) *a harbinger if there ever was one.

yet, it was what happened a year earlier that is perhaps even more important, as an article in the McClatchy newspapers told anyone who was really listening what was going to happen.

Bush has decided to overthrow Hussein
By Warren P. Strobel and John Walcott Knight Ridder Newspapers
Posted on Wednesday, February 13, 2002

WASHINGTON — President Bush has decided to oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein from power and ordered the CIA, the Pentagon and other agencies to devise a combination of military, diplomatic and covert steps to achieve that goal, senior U.S. officials said Tuesday.

No military strike is imminent, but Bush has concluded that Saddam and his nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs are such a threat to U.S. security that the Iraqi dictator must be removed, even if U.S. allies do not help, said the officials, who all spoke on condition of anonymity.

... per the chart (above) apparently those who shape world's currency markets were most definitely listening, as the US DOLLAR lost over 20% of it's value in the months before the "war" (and another 20+% since)

Ferraro Dog Whistles Naked

2008-03-14T06:26:00.000-07:00

after so much attention to Geraldine Ferraro's 'dog-whistle' (pardon the pun) earlier this week, the political media equivalent of her tearing off her clothes (pardon the visual), running into the middle of Rockefeller Center and yelling the 'N' word, one begins to wonder how such an assertion could be made many times more than a week before, yet comes to the shout shows and newspaper headlines at that particular time.

i suspect it was largely not a coincidence, but rather a part of an operation to distract voter's attention long enough to give the supporters of the Senator from New York time to convince the Governor of New York that he dare not even think of employing the 'Bill Clinton' strategy of fighting through the publicity storm, potential legal charges, and defying the legislature should they try to impeach him. no, he had to go as quickly as possible, because the next six weeks are critical to Hillary's declining chances for the Democratic nomination, and they must not be spent being reminding voters of the darker side of her '35 years of experience'.

but for argument's sake, which is essentially my life, let us take Ferraro's assertion and apply it as equally as possible.

an articulate, inspiring, 47 year old, white first-term Senator from Illinois, running on a classic "outsider-against Wash.D.C." message that includes the most powerful and credible "anti-Iraq War" component among the many candidates, is pitted after a couple of months of primaries, caucuses, and the carcasses of the other's failed campaigns, against a wonkish, 60 year old, white female second-term Senator from New York, running on a classic "insider" message of "i know where the power levers are, and how to get things done" which includes the persuasive argument of having a great deal of experience at withstanding and prevailing against the opposing party's dirty-tricks campaigning.

i would expect that if Barack was not Black and Hillary were not a Clinton, that both the Black and Female voting blocs would be split almost evenly, which ironically, would likely create a delegate dilemma very similar to that which now exists.

lines of distinction and conflict already exist between urban and rural, black and white, male and female, and young and old. whether a candidate/campaign seeks to blur or sharpen those distinctions should be quite telling. both candidates will be defined by the conduct of their campaigns, the power of their messages, and their ability to adapt to unforeseen events, but eventually it will be the character of the american electorate that is most revealed.

4000 ? 100,000 ? & $4,629

2008-03-10T08:22:00.000-07:00

During the next six weeks before the Pennsylvania Primary on 22April, a most sad but important benchmark number is likely to become reality.

It is the number 4000.

If you don't know what that number represents, then the number itself is even more important. The numbers 100,000 and also $4,629 should be making news and re-inserting themselves into the public conscience as well.

And what impact will the number 4000 have on the national discourse on the issues of the day when it arrives?

GOP BHO JAP

2008-03-03T09:20:00.000-08:00

the only way the GOP can beat BHO is to turn him into a JAP
(Just Another Politician)

which, with the negative "Mighty Wurlitzer" megaphones of O'Reilly & Limbaugh, should be easy to do, BUT...

rather large chunks of the american electorate (mostly under 40)
have demonstrated so far this year an increasing willingness to punish, with their votes, candidates deemed to have engaged in "the politics of the past",
("personal destruction"), i.e. attacking their opponents with distortions and
innuendo, even "triangulation".

many of the under-40 voters have also come to believe that the system
itself is corrupt and corrupts those who participate in it (especially in regard
to Wash D.C.) therefore they often equate "experience" with corruption.
(and arguably they may well have a point)

conversely, they see inexperience (relatively) in a different light than those
of us who have witnessed many more elections, as not a disqualifier at all,
but instead as an asset.

some of this was revealed during Huckabee's early campaigning, though
he chose not to try to expand his support beyond his base after initial
success and his revealingly clumsy failure to stealthily practice the
politics of personal destruction without leaving fingerprints.

time will tell if Obama is indeed "slicker than Slick", but arguably so far he
has been. and the fact that the electorate is displaying a desire for
"something as different, from what they have known/seen, as they can get"
dovetails into the new paradigm of internet communications (fundraising, organizing, message assertion and rebuttal from the top and the bottom/grassroots) and a very large number of new voters who have grown up, as Obama has, after the Civil Rights/Desegregation fights of the 1960's and '70's. (indeed, mention Watergate, even Reagan, to them and watch their eyes glaze over)

for over two years now Polls have shown that well over half (actually often
two/thirds) of Americans want reversals in US-Iraq policies and
disapprove of the job that the current POTUS has been doing. The US
economy is not likely to dramatically recover between now and the
election, and the presumed GOP nominee is a "carbon-copy-on-steroids" of "W" when the issues are War, Israel, Iran, etc. so much so that even another terrorist attack inside the US may not produce the expected knee-jerk reaction by the American people after so many years of headlines and lies that have conditioned them to be skeptical.

perhaps the question will come down to: "do a few JAP spots (rezko,
finesse, nuance, flip-flops etc.) on an otherwise clean slate, damage
Obama's ability to win?"

to me the answer is absolutely, NOT.

the only way i can see Obama losing the GE this fall is if he makes a mistake.
not any old mistake. it'd have to be a mistake of historic and unprecedented proportions. like liberating Poland ala Gerald R. Ford, only to the 100th power.

and even that might not do it. that is how hungry Americans are for CHANGE.

Inheriting Mencken

2008-03-01T09:26:00.001-08:00

of every bastard's printed word
who dares to show the sublime's absurd
there's one man they've surely read
Mencken. more alive after he's dead

Goodbye Bill

2008-02-27T08:42:00.000-08:00

In the gospel of H.L. Mencken, one must respect, even admire "competence".

Accordingly, I hereby say a heartfelt "good-bye" to William F. Buckley.

For he was often right, but always entertaining, and more importantly, he made you think.

When he came to feel that he had been wrong, he corrected himself.

I am afraid we will not see much of that in the future.

Bill now joins an evergrowing list of writers whom I dearly wish could have lived to see what the next few years will bring.

stephenhsmith 27Feb2008

8 Months ago 8 Months to go

2008-02-25T13:03:00.000-08:00

Next Tuesday, 4 March 2008, voters in Texas and Ohio will go to the polls, perhaps to decide the Democratic POTUS nominee for 2008. The same day will mark exactly 8 months before the general election.

And how long is 8 months?

Well, 8 months before March 4th was July 4th, 2007.

Irving "Scooter" Libby had just been pardoned... oops pardon me, "commuted".

England's new Prime Minister (Gordon Brown) had been on the job for two weeks.
France's new President (Nicolas Sarkozy) for six weeks.

Pundits wondered if Fred Thompson was really going to run. Polls showed him behind Rudy Giuliani but ahead of the moribund John McCain (RG 33, FT 21, JM 16) while on the DEM side Hillary Clinton polled almost as much as Barack Obama and John Edwards combined (HC 40, BO 28, JE 13)

The DOW was pushing to clear 14,000 for the first time (up 29% from 10,800 in a year) and the FED reassured everyone that the difficulties within the "subprime" market had been "contained" and the "slump" in housing sales had "bottomed" already.

The "Surge" had not yet been fully implemented, but American KIA's in Iraq came down from over 100 per month to less than 80.

And despite calls from within his own party, US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would not resign for another 10 weeks.

... and that was just 8 months ago. a long time ain't it ?

you still owe me $200

2008-02-23T17:39:00.001-08:00

love, DAD

the MENCKEN test

2008-02-23T11:28:00.000-08:00

the MENCKEN "test"

type without the slightest
inhibition
no self-censorship is
allowed

stop and re-read
the accumulated text
sit back and roar laughing
out loud

then you've passed the "test"

as if it will matter

2008-02-20T13:38:00.000-08:00

Why Voters Do What They Do

Fundamentally, voters answer 3 basic questions in an election.

A: Do you want "more of the same" ?

B: Do you want something "a little different"?

C: Do you want something "completely different"?

These questions carry the highest stakes for Americans in Presidential contests, but they are applicable all the way down the scale. And for so-called "one issue" voters, the overlapping congruities and paradoxes of other tangential issues can complicate or sharpen the contrasts between the choices.

The most under-reported "secret truth" about American voters is that they more often than not, vote "against" a candidate, than actually voting "for" the candidate of their choice. In other words, the voter is more motivated by their opposition to a particular candidate because of that candidate's positions, record (resume'/character), and most importantly, the kinds of people who support that candidate, than they are compelled to vote for a particular candidate "on their side".

A psychological version of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" adage, voters sublimate the negatives of the candidate they come to support because of their hatred/loathing of those who oppose that candidate.

This complex psycho-drama serves to consistently enable a continuity and stability of policy, for good and bad. But it also perpetuates tragic consequences, in the form of a majority or substantial plurality finding after the fact that:

They voted for C, but got B.

And all too often even worse, they voted for C and got A.

While You Were Sleeping

2008-02-13T14:54:00.000-08:00

at the very hour the votes from the Potomac Primaries were being counted last night, providing Barack Obama with overwhelming majorities and his first lead in the pledged delegate count, and only a few hours after Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki visited the city, Israel's MOSSAD was in Damascus taking out via carbomb, Hezbollah's top military operative, Imad Fayez Mugniyah.

coincidentally, Zbigniev Brzezinski (foreign policy advisor to Obama) arrives in Damascus a few hours later, along with other RAND Corp.ers, Jimmy Carter included, to meet Syrian President Bashar Assad.

mighty curious wouldn't you say ?

Hillary isn't out of it yet, the Israelis will see to that in the next two weeks.

the question is "HOW" they will see to it? (Gaza, Lebanon, Syria again, or IRAN?)

enter KOSOVO

2008-02-07T08:22:00.000-08:00

Italy is 200 miles away with a broken government.

Turkey is 200 miles away with an attempted assassination of it's Prime Minister.

Russia is a few hundred miles away with Putin's new role to be tested.

NATO on the brink of crumbling over Afghanistan deployments.

What better way to re-focus the regional powers attention, as well as that of the American electorate, than to have another 'civil war' in the Balkans?

(complete with Muslim extremists and conveniently providing cover for a new Israeli "incursion" into Gaza. scheduled for the same day as Pakistan's elections. coincidence ? )

Why Hillary is so "Hated"

2008-02-05T09:20:00.000-08:00

Why Hillary is so "Hated"

George W. Bush's SOTU address in January of 2003 is most famous for the "16 words". But as I listened to it on the radio, as is my custom, I was struck time and again by the eery notion that I was actually hearing LBJ. (more Medicare, Education, civil service programs etc, and of course, more WAR) It was then that I began to view W as the reincarnation of Lyndon Johnson, which quickly beget the realization that Bill Clinton was the same to JFK. The logical extension for a History buff was of course, that the next in the series would be another Nixon. And having followed the careers of the Clintons since the mid 1970's, I was fully aware of Hillary's ambitions. It was then that I realized the enormity of the parallels. Hillary IS Nixon.

In the heat of Campaign 2008, the major media, inspired by polling data, has begun to ask "Why is Hillary so Hated"?

The reasons are many and complex, but seldom fully explored or explained, as is unfortunately the norm in US national politics and the corporate media that "reports" on it.

The single biggest reason that Hillary Rodham Clinton is "hated" by such a large percentage of the electorate, is that ginning up "hatred" for/toward a prominent politician, is profitable. It is profitable to all concerned, except those whose future depends on an "informed electorate".

The benefits accrue not only financially to the parties,(and always the media) and advocacy organizations that oppose and support them, but they also serve to create a false dichotomy within the electorate's perception. As is said of Academia's squabbles, "the fight is so vicious and intense, because the differences are so insignificant". The same applies to national politics. The 'fight' is personalized because the policy differences are so slight.

To further understand the animus toward Hillary Clinton, the old cliche' "history repeats itself" comes into play. For those old enough, or who have studied enough 'history', the parallels between Hillary and Richard Nixon are at once, amusing and disturbing.

Both rode cultural waves of 'change' to rocket to POTUS power in two decades time, both 'detested' for 'dirty tricks' (smashing "decorum's/previous standards' boundaries successfully). "Successfully" being the key word, for the resentment toward both was multiplied many times by the simple fact that they could and did succeed in gaining the power to implement some of their policies, while of course, simultaneously thwarting, and sometimes co-opting, the forces/policies of their opposition.

Nixon was perceived as an overly ambitious and underly ethical, partisan ideologue who exploited the 'Anti-Communist' wave to achieve too much too soon. Hillary is perceived as the embodiment of anti-'Traditional Values'. A 'nanny-state' advocate of big government solutions, especially on women's and children's issues, to restore and advance the FDR/LBJ paradigm, by exploiting the "Feminist Revolution".

Ike's 1950's is the mythology of right-wing conservatives (race relations, military competence, cia competence, white males as sole providers ruled home and political roosts) *Then came the pill in 1962 and roe/wade in 1973. Hillary is a walking, talking, breathing example of the destruction/reconstruction of the "model family of the 1950's".

LBJ was the apex of FDR "liberal" wave, culminating in debilitating WAR, whereas GWB is the apex of Goldwater/Reagan reaction wave also culminating in debilitating WAR. (WJC was a curious exception, re: balancing the budget through tax increases, sound fiscal policies, welfare reform, military reductions, etc. also known as "small ball") Funny how no matter which cultural wave is ascendant/descendent, WARs continue, courtesy of the MFMIICC (MilitaryFinancialMediaIntelligenceIndustrialCongressional Complex)

HRC's Wellesley speech/Alinsky thesis, her work on Nixon's impeachment, nanny-state solutions for women in workplace, childcare, extension of civil rights laws to women, gays, (curious exception, WARS and Executive Branch powers), fits into Nixon-like perception that she'll modify/camoflauge herself in the pursuit of power). Her suppression work to cover her husband's personal foibles, up to feigning ignorance of the ML truth all the way to 17Aug1998 etc.. also feeds the "suffer anything to get power" perception. Both also share a reputation for secrecy, vindictiveness and political pettiness. (her examples... WH travel office fiasco, AG search, aftermath of VF death, health-care plan written in total secrecy.. ala Cheney's 'Energy Policy', selling 'perks' for campaign cash, pardons, lincoln bedroom, etc.) The monikers "Tricky Dick" and now "Tricky Dickless", though crude and politically incorrect are not as ambiguous in connotation as "Slick Willie" (as some saw it as more of a compliment than derogatory), but will prove historically accurate.

Recently, the idea that HRC is only where she is because of her husband, is a touchstone of right-wing women especially, who resent her (his/their) electoral success (the resentment of their 'jumping the line' has now faded due to the passage of time, but is echoed by the right's desire to thwart another "restoration", hence the bumpersticker argument 'no third term for Bill").

The major, unremarked upon, irony is that Nixon continued and amplified LBJ's policies (with the exception of CHINA which was only possible/acceptable by a "conservative anti-communist, LBJ could never have gotten away with it) Nixon drew down forces in SE Asia when it became politically expedient, as well as dispensed with the DRAFT for the same reason and timing. Policies that in retrospect could well be described as "third way".

Which portends that an HRC administration would continue the GWBush policies with small revisions (US troops will stay in Iraq, with a smaller footprint perhaps, but the rhetorical, muscular, 'sabre-rattling' will continue unabated) HRC would continue to push for amnesty for the illegals already here and like Nixon/China (Reagan/Gorbachev, WJC/Welfare Reform) may be able to 'shut the door' to Mexico, where a Republican could not.

An HRC administration is most feared by those who do not realize that it's very existence will provide the foundation for the GOP's rediscovery of it's "conservative" roots/principles (that were abandoned during the 6 years of House/Senate/WH control... how power doth corrupt and the lack of it focuses the mind... and the wallet?)

It is to that extent to which "Hillary Hatred" is most irrational.

The baby-boomers split in the 1960's is the foundation of the Clinton's political views, the perception of the Eisenhower-1950's is the foundation of the GOP base's political views. An almost pure culture/counter-culture, retro/progressive, ideological schism. Hence the intentional blurring of the lines by HRC since 1998 (standing by her man, vote for war powers, expand executive branch authority, without apology etc.) including the drafting/grooming of the emptiest suit to ever win a primary, not coincidentally from her old hometown, for the purposes of making HRC look more 'centrist' while also fulfilling the political expedient of thwarting any more threatening candidates from opposing her quest for the nomination (worked like a charm), and creating the perception of Hillary having "fought" her way to the nomination, thus becoming "forged in the fires" a.k.a. "earned it".

The countless celebrities endorsing HRC's opponent, from Oprah down, or Raven Symone, Ben Affleck, Dave Matthews up, serves to "innoculate" Hillary from the dreaded and previously fatal perception among the electorate of being identified to closely with elitist "Hollywood Values".

Expect a lot to happen post-convention. HRC will copy the "new Nixon" with a charm offensive. She will not be able to appear on "Laugh-In" and warble "Sock it to ME?", but modern media will provide countless other opportunities for the "humanizing" effort. The "New Hillary" offensive will be assisted by a strategically timed "heart episode" that puts Bill in hospital/home for several crucial weeks, garnering sympathy and simultaneously keeping his mouth shut (win one for the "Slicker"?)

Even a third (perhaps a fourth, fifth) party candidate will dutifully appear to shade the vote in Hillary's favor, and world events, especially those related to Israel, Pakistan, and the Balkans, will redirect the debate away from domestic issues.

It pays to read your History books or listen to the people old enough to remember elections past, and to understand the American appetite for sequels. Though the calendar on the wall says something different, it really is 1968 all over again.

stephenhsmith 5Feb2008

Experience on Balance

2008-01-14T20:44:00.000-08:00

When judging the criteria upon which one makes a decision about whom to support, or vote for, as President of the United States, inevitably one has to weigh one form of experience as more important than others, as it is rare for a candidate, let alone a nominee to possess them all.

There is Political Experience. Campaigning for election, advocating policy, spinning the debate, etc.

There is Legislative Experience. Proposing and voting on legislation, working with others, the art of compromise, etc.

There is Executive Experience. Being on the initiating and deciding ends of command decisions in law and at the POTUS level, foreign/military policy.

There is Business Experience. Meeting a payroll, dealing with government regulation and employer/employee decision-making, etc.

There is Military Experience. Learning the pro's/con's of socialized bureaucracy, command and subservience, up close firsthand, teaches valuable lessons on the efficacy of government programs.

There is Life Experience. Being a spouse, parent, grandparent, p.o.w., first lady, or simply living long enough to have seen a ton of shit go down and process it all for future reference.

Becoming POTUS changes the people who attain it. In some ways for the better, other ways for the worse, it always is a mix of both. There is always a major deviation from a campaign promise, and always a surprise 180 degree turn from expected action due to character/history. (Nixon/China, Reagan/Arms Control, etc.)

Thus, no matter who you support, or who gets elected, the result is always a crap shoot/roll of the dice.

Hope-ing Season's Over Already ?

2008-01-09T07:33:00.000-08:00

the forces that determine who will get elected have their self-interests all in alignment (including the current Bush Administration)
that is why HRC will be the DEM nominee, and the 44th POTUS.

watch it happen.

Posted by: muleboy303 January 8, 2008 11:59 AM
----------
the american people (especially independent voters) are demonstrating their desire for an end to the ridiculous level of partisan bickering and the level of US military forces in Iraq.

this is their season of "hope" (and like all of them before, 'twill not last, as events "conspire" to turn their attention back to 'pragmatic incrementalism' and known commodities)

the good feeling that comes from being pre-eminent, successful, and hopeful will endure and override the coming disappointment (that is the function of the current 'tidal waves'/'earthquakes') as those voting blocks historically at the "back of the bus" (on both sides) will resume their historic place during the next six months.

last week's "repudiation" of the politics of personal destruction is but a moment in what will be the longest, most expensive, and ugliest election campaign anyone alive in the U.S. has ever seen.

to borrow a phrase from the Carpenters, "We've only just begun"

Posted by: muleboy303 January 8, 2008 11:14 AM
---------
more food for thought...

on 9-11-2001, children who were as young as ten (who turned 11 before november 2001), and as old as 14, will be eligible to vote in the general election in 2008 for the first time.

the broadband internet, cell phones with music players and cameras built-in, and wars, have been a central part of the culture for all of their post-puberty lives.

they and their predecessors up to around age 22 have used the internet to relate to their peer groups, especially during the past few years with the advent of social-networking sites such as MySpace and Facebook. this new phenomenon may play a large part in getting the "youth vote" to the polls in larger numbers than ever seen before in American politics, though probably not as large as many predict or hope.

for young people see politics as a simple linear progression from the current point A to the desired point B, and when reality intrudes to create it's inevitable deviations from that simple line, young people react with disgust, disdain, and disappointment, and are more likely to drop-out of the process.

on the other end of the electorate scale, old people, by virtue of bitter experience, know that their vote has little effect, but it is the only way to have any impact at all. and in a small state's primary election, that impact can have larger, more amplified implications.

thus you have an experience like yesterday's Democratic Party primary in New Hampshire, where several thousand elderly women, who for the last week have absorbed a constant barrage of Barack O'mania threatening to eclipse their only realistic chance to have a woman President in their lifetimes, troop to the polls to register their "OH HELL NO!" reaction.

in ten more days we will learn if the AA vote in South Carolina has a similar reaction to the NH reaction to Iowa. i doubt it will, as African-Americans are conditioned to being taken for granted by the Democratic Party (as are Evangelicals in the GOP) and as the media blitz and other events unfold, they will set their sites on the VP slot, which will still be a history-making elevation for both.

i suspect the AA vote will split 60/40 one way or the other, but no monolithic block to either HRC or BHO. whereas the elderly vote in SC, especially female, now have their "eyes on the prize" to make history, compounding the NH votes effect. with the still small possibility that a third candidate, John Edwards will be the "agent of surprise" there and return briefly to contention.

during the next few months, the media's focus on the election campaigns will serve to diminish the electorate's attention on the faltering US economy. (the campaigns will comply by extending and continuing their current "no clear-cut winner" status, complimented by the addition of the "will Bloomberg, Nader, Paul, (or even Gore) run 3rd party" parallel theme)

ultimately, later this year, the season of "hope" and the "youth movement" will subside and the system will produce the longest known commodities as nominees, with possible historic surprises on the ticket as VP candidates. as one already disaffected young politico sarcastically phrased it last night,

"nothing screams "CHANGE" like John McCain and Hillary Clinton".

'tis gonna be a fun damn year.

stephenhsmith
9Jan2008

IOWA aftermath

2008-01-04T06:25:00.000-08:00

The United States has changed alot since 1974, so much so that it is entirely arguable that the film "Blazing Saddles" could not be made in America circa 2008. But that doesn't mean that it does not echo through the ages.
Last night's political earthquakes (plural) in Iowa brought to my mind two quotes from Mel Brook's comic masterpiece.

"What's a dazzling urbanite like you, doing in a rustic setting like this?"

and

"You've got to remember these are people of the land, the common clay of the New West, you know... Morons!"

I suspect that during the next few weeks of the OHuckabamabee campaigns, memories of another Brook's classic will also come to the fore. "Young Frankenstein"

---
biggest winner? MIKE... (Bloomberg) if folks want "change" you can't get any more different (including either a woman or a black man) than a Jewish Bachelor Billionaire Independent.

biggest loser? professional 'race/victim' hustlers (Jackson, Sharpton)

honorable mention? (emphasis on "Honorable") the U.S.A. (where a dazzling urbanite of african descent, literally, can win a political race in one of the whitest, most rural states in the Union)
---
the GOP South Carolina race on the 19th is all to themselves as the DEMs SC race is on the 26th, which means that the media will have to decide how much attention to give Michigan on the 15th (possible Romney victory there, if McCain wins New Hampshire, then the first 3 GOP races may have 3 different winners) thus making South Carolina (reagan's, w's "firewall" state and scene of McCain's most bitter political memory) even more important. and then Florida 10 days later. (a long long time in today's politics)

96 Hours 'til New Hampshire's polls open. "Let the blood-letting continue"!

always deal

2008-01-03T09:29:00.000-08:00

the rhetoric of leaders
the most difficult wire
ever walked by a flawed
human being
controlled by events
beyond anyone's scope
whilst straining to be seen as
all-seeing

'tis a ridiculous task
to ask of just one
but it's done by us all
everyday
to deflect, circumspect,
and thus re-direct
the weight of it all
away

for those who will stand
at the head of the band
you'll be called divisive,
and narrow,
enigmatic
so speak of high ideals
every chance you can
but always deal
in incrementals
pragmatic

stephenhsmith 3Jan2008

F U 2008

2008-01-01T19:56:00.000-08:00

Americans love sequels, so get ready for 1968 II.
with some predictions by muleboy303...

Several beltway reporters drown when a Cat3 Hurricane comes ashore in the U.S. because the politicians whose campaigns they are covering, scramble to be televised standing in the driving winds and rain alongside the weathermen.

CHINA has it's coming out party (not gay, Olympics. vote-rigging topic of the day)

Record number of Church Burnings reported in U.S.

Another WAR (or reasonable facsimile) in the Balkans.

Fidel LIVES. (to see the 11th US President since his 'revolution')

GOLD & OIL hit new all time highs as US Dollar goes other way.
DOW remains in 10% channel due to Inflation offsetting profit stagnation.

W's approval ratings climbs to 44% (prophetic, due to his soon departure)

and in May, June, July 2009 an unprecedented reduction in the US birth rate baffles scientists * (possible exception... the Spears family) found to be caused by a near cessation of "relations" between the sexes after Hillary Clinton's nomination/campaign from 9 months earlier.

All Walls Are Temporary

2007-12-21T19:25:00.000-08:00

there is an old saying about "fighting fire with fire" which doesn't make sense to me anymore. it seems to me that fire would best be fought with water. with that in mind, i will now strive to piss on Mike Huckabee and his supporters as much as is divinely possible.

firstly, it should be noted for the record that every mass political movement contains a percentage of idiocy that positively dwarfs that of almost any individual's or the population as a whole, simply because any political movement that achieves mass popularity can be found to be but a reaction to the circumstances that preceded it and caused it. and as with the popular saying about fire, the masses seem always determined to "fight idiocy with idiocy".

secondly, if i but had the power it would not be so, because power so corrupts.
but religious fundamentalists, under the U.S. Constitution, have every right that everyone else has, to organize and assert themselves in the public arena in furthering their proscriptions/beliefs into law. whether they should be able to do so from a foundation of tax-exempt institutions is a debate for the future, which in turn will be a reaction, if religious fundamentalists continue to succeed as they do today.

reason and logic in the civic arena should rule the debate. morals derived from experience and faith have a place in the debate, but once one religion becomes disproportionately influential, the other religions will be compelled to try to match it. then religions, rooted in the logic and reason of centuries ago, now meta-morphisized into only faith, will rapidly distort questions concerning the raising and spending of public money, demanding that it be directed to the ludicrous, while calling it sublime.

this applies to 'progressives', 'neo-cons', and 'baptists' equally, whether in the form of the 'war on poverty', the 'war on terror', or the looming war over the role of a semi-standardized belief in God and the traditional values associated with it, in future public policy. for every solution has consequences, some unintended and unforeseeable, some perhaps not. and from every negative consequence will come some good.

over 200 years of practice in the history of the U.S. has shown repeatedly that action and reaction are primarily the result of a dedicated, activist minority. yet it is also true that in every case, the majority allowed change by foregoing the use of it's power to stop change. the old saying "evil triumphs when good men do nothing" comes quickly to those who have sought to maintain the status quo and failed.

ultimately Government, hence Politics, is about the raising and spending of money for publicly directed purposes. every policy, large or small, momentary or generational, should be subjected to as thorough a cost/benefit analysis as humans are able by as many as practicable. each citizen must be an accountant when assessing public policy in order to hold public officials accountable. it is proper for each individual to use their faith and beliefs in the accounting process. then they should assert themselves in public with "it is MY opinion", "it is MY belief", or even up to "it is my religious teaching/belief" on the questions of the day.

but when their assertions begin with "GOD says", "GOD requires" or "GODdemands", the injection of spiritual/existential faith and belief is intruding upon reasoned debate and will quickly succeed in destroying the use of reason and experience upon questions of public expenditures.

and of course, the same applies to "Science says", "Science shows", and "Science demands", especially when the Science is, as yet, undefinitive. most unfortunate it is that there is, as yet, as much disagreement over what constitutes "definitive" in Science as there is with Faith. such is the nature of humans when dealing with questions concerning how to force their neighbors to act. even more so when incomprehensible sums of money are involved.

yes, STATISM is a religion, one that currently has even more consequences and almost as many differing versions of it's principles and applications as does Faith in God's Word (which is also just about as many different versions as there are people who subscribe to the tenets of it, for it is entirely arguable that no two people's belief systems are identical)

while it is impossible to remove sentiment and emotion completely from any question, emotions are even more an enemy of reason and logic in the public sphere than they are in an individual. the struggle to sublimate emotion and muster as much reason as possible to public questions will be a never-ending one for humanity.

A Constitution proscribing limited and carefully delineated powers to various branches and subdivisions of Government, is the most powerful tool yet devised by man to assist in reason's perpetual struggle with emotions of the day.

stephen h. smith 21Dec2007

short version

2007-12-10T18:42:00.000-08:00

do not assume, do not expect, don't hint around, just be direct
don't ask for much and you will find, returns far greater than in kind
do for yourself and others too then everyday life starts anew

stephenhsmith 7dec07

Easier Done Than Said

2007-12-10T06:23:00.000-08:00

How do you motivate an electorate desperately wanting change,
to desperately want stability?

Short Answer: Unleash HELL!

Longer Answer: Engineer the two most vocal, diametrically opposed, activist political sects to 'go to war' with each other. Add generous doses of inflammatory media coverage. Let simmer and boil alternately for five to six months... and there you'll have it.

Fresh-cooked public desire for "stability". (link)

Beware of SATAN in 2008

2007-12-08T17:28:00.000-08:00

For if "SATAN" eclipses 'health care', 'immigration', 'the economy', or 'the war' to become one of the top issues in the 2008 elections, then the turnout could be historically low and the results very close. Factor in possibly 3 or 4, perhaps even 5 candidates capable of getting more than 3% of the vote, and the winner could get less than Lincoln's 39% in 1860.

A referendum between "GLAAD(EMS)" and "GO(d)P'ERS" will be the ugliest, most divisive campaign in modern U.S. history, continuing and magnifying the current animosities throughout the next President's term, regardless of who prevails in November.

Huckabee Quote : )

2007-12-06T15:06:00.000-08:00

"I did NOT have supportive relations with that convict, Mr. DuMond"

SHS Quote 111807

2007-11-18T17:46:00.000-08:00

"In Politics, even more than in WAR,

the adage 'the Enemy of my Enemy is My Friend' applies.

Thus, because I am everyone's Enemy...

I can also be anyone's Friend"

.

stephenhsmith 18Nov2007

the warner's lament and dilemma

2007-11-18T14:51:00.000-08:00

'tis an adage so old, it's cliche'
but applies more than ever, today
in coxtext, text's to and fro
'tis best, to write 'what you know'

'what you know' may make a good read
it may potentially cause you to bleed
for the record to serve
thus requires some nerve
to put pen to paper indeed

so always take care where you go
and in timing the ebb and the flow
so that you're not burned
by the things that you've learned
lest you come to regret 'what you know'

stephenhsmith 17nov2007

the evolution of Sophistry

2007-11-02T08:47:00.000-07:00

particularly poignant on the anniversary of Diem's assassination?

"Sophistry becomes Sophistory, then History for Sops"

stephenhsmith 2 nov 2007

...

FOUR WORDS

2007-11-01T14:09:00.000-07:00

US Foreign and Economic policy for the 21st Century

explained in FOUR WORDS (oh how i wish they were mine)

"We're CHINA's Bitches Now"

Justin Wilson - Prize Bull

2007-10-31T20:15:00.001-07:00

Justin explains how to handle Government Bureaucrats

Armed "Capitalism"

2007-10-25T14:17:00.000-07:00

when the ship is taking on water
the pumps come on full throttle
but someday the pumps will falter
nevermind the ship's in a bottle

some think the ship cannot sink
that illusions of 'good times' and honey
can be maintained in perpetuity
by pointing guns and printing more money

There is a Difference

2007-10-25T12:28:00.000-07:00

There are very large differences between:

1. What I wish to happen

2. What I expect to happen

3. What I wish to happen as a result of what I expect to happen.

For example, I do not trust and do not like Hillary Rodham Clinton (especially when she says something with which I agree), but I certainly expect her to be the next President of the United States.

I like and wish that Ron Paul would be the next President, (though I do not agree with him on all subjects and if by some miracle he were elected, would expect him to be hamstrung by the establishment system, thus yielding little more than a "moral victory"... a.k.a. a step in the proper direction)

What I wish to happen as a result of the expected election of Hillary Rodham Clinton, is for the people of the United States to finally and fully recognize that the political system of their ancestors is irrevocably broken, requiring it's dissolution, the re-writing of laws, and the re-drawing of multiple national boundaries. Such a result is as yet, beyond the realm of a "reasonable" expectation, but is daily becoming more within the bounds of "possibility".

Thus, to recap:

I fully expect Hillary to be the NEXT President of the United States.

It is my wish that,

Hillary will be the LAST President of the UNITED States.

A Sorry State

2007-10-17T15:13:00.000-07:00

I estimate that nearly half of the people who will give their vote to the Republican or Democratic party's nominees in next year's Presidential election, will do so because they believe that the other party's nominee would be the worst thing to ever happen to the United States were they to be elected.

This is especially true if the respective parties nominees are the current frontrunners, Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani.

It is not much of an exaggeration to say that the Republican base voters truly expect a President Hillary to double taxes on everyone, eliminate the ability of insurers, doctors, and pharmaceutical companies to make money, and appoint lawyers from GLAAD to the Supreme Court.

Conversely, the Democrat's base voters expect a President Giuliani to place policemen on every street corner who will beat and sodomize with their batons every person caught not wearing an American flag lapel pin, when he isn't busy dropping nuclear weapons on muslims.

This is the "politics of fear". But it is also grounded in self-interest and far too much Truth.

Both would, and will, use the power of the State to coerce scores of millions of Americans into living under laws and paying for government programs with which they violently disagree.

As always, the owners of the United States who hire Presidents, will not only escape untouched, they will profit from whoever is in office.

And they will call it "democracy".

Will you still believe it?

intentions

2007-10-04T10:11:00.000-07:00

sometimes you can hurt by helping
sometimes you can help by hurting
the outcome is always uncertain
a fact which is most disconcerting

alas it comes down to intentions
and the value of learned moderation
for good can be bad and vice-versa
i submit for your consideration

strive for the delicate balance
'tween levels of honesty and deceipt
remember how it feels when you find it
say 'thank you' and 'i'm sorry' and repeat

remember that no one is perfect
life's hard in it's simplest conventions
what is done will have many consequences
but what matters most are intentions

War Made Easy - TRAILER

2007-10-01T16:24:00.001-07:00

and y'all fall for it EVERY time

unforgivable

2007-10-01T07:58:00.000-07:00

only in art can true bliss be portrayed
or the disturbing incongruence
of mixed feelings betrayed
or the darkest truths in which
we all are mired
the range is a mirror
never fully clear
but always inspired

and yet there is a beauty
in the noble and the rotten
art turns unforgivable
when it cannot beforgotten
but unforgettable it is
no matter how hard
it's tried
for once you've felt the feeling
it cannot be denied

nothing left

2007-09-25T18:12:00.000-07:00

the more one learns, the more unnerving

the rocking boat's erratic swerving

the course unknown and untrue

what is a conservative to do

when there's nothing left worth conserving

Wouldn't You ?

2007-09-16T12:14:00.000-07:00

If War-Profiteers murdered your brother, installing eight subsequent puppets in his place, ginning up trillions of dollars worth of two world wars, over a dozen regional wars, two domestic psuedo-wars, murdering another brother when he threatened them, and there wasn't a damned thing you could do about it even though you are a United States Senator...

Well... is it any wonder that Ted Kennedy drinks alot?

Wouldn't YOU ?

Bill Moyers Special Buying the War Part 12

2007-09-16T12:13:00.001-07:00

at 4:20 ... I have heard no persuasive evidence that Saddam is on the threshold of acquiring the nuclear weapons he has sought for more than 20 years.

And the Administration has offered no persuasive evidence that Saddam would transfer chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction to Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization.

War with Iraq before a genuine attempt at inspection and disarmament, or without genuine international support -- could swell the ranks of Al Qaeda sympathizers and trigger an escalation in terrorist acts.

Senator Kennedy 27 September 2002

2007-09-16T12:02:00.000-07:00

I have heard no persuasive evidence that Saddam is on the threshold of acquiring the nuclear weapons he has sought for more than 20 years.

And the Administration has offered no persuasive evidence that Saddam would transfer chemical or biological weapons of mass destruction to Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization.

War with Iraq before a genuine attempt at inspection and disarmament, or without genuine international support -- could swell the ranks of Al Qaeda sympathizers and trigger an escalation in terrorist acts.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FhZDL9ece4&mode=related&search

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0930-05.htm

So what is to be lost by pursuing this policy before Congress authorizes sending young Americans into another and in this case perhaps unnecessary war?

'Tis very telling how the Senator from Massachusetts got it right, and it took five years for someone to notice.

For Want of a Nail

2007-09-14T14:09:00.000-07:00

September 1977

Steve Biko

............................

30 years ago this week, South Africa's best hope for the future was lost.

Americans BOO the Constitution

2007-09-06T17:59:00.001-07:00

and in New Hampshire, of all places. Texas or New York you'd expect, but NEW HAMPSHIRE?

Deering 1998

2007-09-05T07:36:00.000-07:00

The Sight of the Conditioned

2007-09-05T07:16:00.000-07:00

Oh how those who've been
thoroughly conditioned
must look upon those
who've yet not
through the prism
of their own reflections?
as a brutish and cowardly lot?

Or spoiled and selfish and greedy?
idealistic to an absurd degree?
or but symptoms of
youth and prosperity
no longer beholden to thee?

Just as real
to the aged and advantaged
perhaps why they so quickly
condemn
without pausing to answer
this question
'ever wonder
how they look to them'?

'Tis a natural order of things
it's inherent in a system
to condition
just as naturally
there are
the contrarians
they are those
who must fight
the transition

As salmon must battle the currents
for the chance
that their kind may last
so are those who must fight
for a future
not repeating mistakes
from the past

Always fearing
that none of it matters
akin to holding back tides
and their efforts will go
unremembered
the die's cast
only Nature decides

But 'Civilization' is
to go against Nature
for only as much
as can be beared
to go faster
requires no courage
to slow down
is what must be dared

So hark, and reject
the conditioning
or face the inevitable wrath
the famine
of a soulless dictatorship
at the end
of our nature's cruel path

stephenhsmith
5Sept2007

Too Late

2007-09-04T17:11:00.000-07:00

'tis never changing and ever changing
but rarely the way one supposes
analogous to and subject to
boiling frogs and camel's noses

the thinnest wedge or razor's edge
dominoes or foot in the door
by whatever terms the seed or germ's
relentless in it's score

it never parks, leaves few marks
until it's last distinction
'tis then too late to abrogate
the coming of extinction

Pat Oliphant Nails It

2007-08-28T20:15:00.000-07:00

Balancing Act requires a tool

2007-08-26T09:51:00.000-07:00

"In order to establish and maintain an effective and proper balance between seeking to have a substantial influence upon and/or adjusting to, one's daily environment, you must develop a personal, reliable method of forecasting what forces will have the most bearing upon your immediate and longer-term futures"

stephenhsmith
26Aug2007

What Flowers

2007-08-14T13:34:00.001-07:00

success reveals as much character as failure
and impotence can corrupt as does power
'tis the circumstance 'n' reaction that determines
the hue of the eventual flower

and whether or not others know it
our function is mostly concealing
keeping to one's self what's determined
for learning is simply revealing

stephenhsmith
14August2007

Dissolve Secede Start Over

2007-08-03T09:47:00.000-07:00

from Cicero to the present day
the age old question has been
what's most needed to govern ourselves
better laws or better men ?

the answer is: why both, of course
but even more is needed
for the power to give and take destroys
when history goes unheeded

fewer laws more fairly applied
are the remedy in this hour
before the structure falls in on itself
from such accumulations of power

over 200 years the words were ignored
as the Leviathan was surely aborning
and thus 'tis probably far too late
to reflect upon Franklin's warning

what's coming next is inevitable
with perhaps but a short time to wait
the solution is dissolution
and starting over with a clean slate

stephenhsmith
3Aug2007

the roughest balance

2007-07-31T12:32:00.000-07:00

perhaps i'm learning just in time
before it is too late
the reason i try to Love so much
is to counteract my Hate

for Hate must have a balance
more than any other feeling
lest it take you on a downward plunge
with the life it's ever stealing

but Love can only go so far
and that's a crying shame
i've learned how both can be much worse
when they become one and the same

stephenhsmith
29july2007

the drawing of lines

2007-07-24T10:09:00.000-07:00

The list is endless, but especially in the realms of religion, politics, and individual's choices of how to spend their own time and money, some people see certain activities as immoral, while others find them moral and engage in them. Some people see finer distinctions within categories of human behavior, where others do not.

Each one of us must make our own judgements and develop our own codes, with a certain amount of tolerance for other's differing choices.
Some abhor all hunting, whereas I disdain hunting deer with dogs, but if I had the power, I would not make such an activity against the law. I see no particularly disturbing problem with raising chickens to fight and kill each other, whereas I do very much so when the combatants are dogs. That is my distinction. Yet I am still uncertain as to whether my personal code should be enacted into law.

Yet many other people have felt strongly about and certain enough of their own codes to do so. but they have also done so throughout history concerning the ingestion of certain plants and animals, chemicals, both natural and unnatural, as well as liquids, even images, tunes, and words.

To me, the character of the people who would breed and train dogs to fight and kill each other, and take great pleasure from the actual combat, disturbs me more than the activity itself. But the same also applies to so many other activities, many of which are illegal, some of which are not.

Most people handle drugs, alcohol, and promiscuity without endangering others, some do not. It is primarily an indicator of character that is tested by their ability to compartmentalize and comport themselves morally and with reason. The greek ethos, "moderation in all things" comes to mind.

A society's character is illustrated by how they deal with the small percentage of those who cannot handle themselves, and more laws, police, courts, and prisons, strikes me as symptoms of far too much piety, desire to control, and frugality on society's part.

If I am asked, indeed commanded, to accept other's practices that I consider abhorrent, as well as refrain from those that I consider to be appropriately within the realm of my personal choice that have been made illegal by majority rule against my preferences, do I not then have the right to insist that everone else do so as well?

Where to draw the lines is truly difficult and everchanging, but erring on the side of permissiveness and widely distributed, limited power, has more benefits and fewer consequences, than trying to control so much of people's behavior via the legal codes and the lethal force which ultimately provides it's authority.

Power over individual's range of choices, once in the hands of a State, via the legal codes, is an invitation to perpetually increasing abuse and a recipe for inevitable self-destruction. Just as no individual can be expected, for very long, to wield such power morally and with reason, no group of hundreds, thousands, or millions can either. It is the accumulation of Power itself that, like Hate, eventually corrupts and destroys the container it is carried in.

Thus the commanding rationale for as few laws as possible, enforced as fairly as practible, within as limited a scope of State prerogative as was necessary to guarantee free and fair commerce, property rights, and the integrity of the nation's borders.

Once upon a time Americans were all Rebels and then Confederates who had an opportunity to get these checks and balances right, but the twin Revolutions of 1789 in Paris and Philadelphia, destroyed it.

stephenhsmith
24July2007

Useful Poison

2007-07-15T16:30:00.000-07:00

in nearly 40 years i have learned
that "hate DOES destroy the container it is carried in"
but also that:

drinking the poison of resentment
in small, but consistent doses
eventually immunizes the recipient
from the harmful effects of psychosis

rendering them uniquely abled
to decipher the intent of the masters
revealing their treachery to all
so that they can then shoot the right bastards

stephenhsmith
13July2007

"IF THAT IS TRUE"...

2007-07-10T12:53:00.000-07:00

"IF THAT IS TRUE..." ... now, even more than ever before,
in this age of ubiquitous, competitive, corporate, profit-motivated MEDIA,
replete with it's distortions, slants, and incompetencies,
those four words should become the first thing you say to yourself
whenever you hear/see/read a new "news" story.

or have you not ever wondered why they're called "stories"?

the only way to combat a particular medium's purposeful omissions
is to search multiple channels, papers, magazines, websites, etc.
from many different places, ideologies, and personnel.

the fundamental exception

2007-07-09T14:29:00.000-07:00

all the words on every parchment
ever voted on and signed with a pen
aren't worth the paper they're written on
and arguably, never have been

solemnities penned for the ages
about "good" and "right" and "fairness"
were but hollow prevarifications
to dupe those who lack an awareness

of the fundamental rule of governance
covered over by that stuff, "history"
that stealing can never be legal*
*except, of course, when it's made to be

stephenhsmith
9July2007

A Most Disturbing Question

2007-07-09T12:35:00.000-07:00

or perhaps it's likely answer is what truly disturbs.

either way it does make one thank the gods for inefficient/incompetent governance.

from Peggy Drexler

Let's be honest, if this war had been as tidy and bloodless as advertised, would anyone still be concerned about the fact that we attacked a failing country that was no threat to us on the pretext of WMD that our leaders knew full well didn't exist?

Cannot Withstand

2007-07-05T09:42:00.000-07:00

Life has a most curious way
of winding, creating the day
when one's compelled to face
on demand,
an internal mutiny

It's as much as to say
how we each must pay
for no one's life's conduct
can withstand
a close scrutiny

stephenhsmith
1July2007

A Short List

2007-07-03T05:50:00.000-07:00

Off the top of my head, a short list of things President Bush has done this year to help Hillary get elected. (which I believe is on purpose)

1. Asking for $500 Million in contributions for his Library (sucks up $ that may otherwise go to GOP candidates)
2. Asserting that "Korea is the model" for US presence in Iraq.
3. Asserting his 'hope' that Iraq becomes like Israel, a 'functioning democracy that deals with terrorism'.
4. Pushing a backroom/stovepipe deal on his pet domestic item, Immigration.
5. Refusing to ask AG Gonzales to resign.
6. A second stem cell research funding Veto.
7. Commuting Irving Libby's sentence
8. Just being himself. : )

The Long Shadow of Rome

2007-06-21T14:31:00.000-07:00

the Romans taught the Brits a new way
of organized killing for profit and to pray
over a millenia later in the new world
the same rotten banner was unfurled
and we're still enduring the effects to this day

exported on the tips of their spars
the guns and swords leave the scars
of the mercantile class
with their book and military brass
now painted with stripes and with stars

stephenhsmith 21Jun2007

When They Win You Lose

2007-06-15T16:35:00.000-07:00

in the Washington of the Reds and the Blues
leaving little from which you can choose
when "both sides claim victory" in the news
you can bet it's the people who will lose

Politics-Cockfighting Parallels

2007-06-14T14:15:00.000-07:00

The more I think about it, the more curious the parallels become between Politics and Cockfighting.

Both are bloodsports in which a lot of money and pride of ownership is at stake. Both practices are often contrary to the law and correctly viewed by those with a developed ethical code as morally dubious at best.

Both involve combatants that are essentially worthless in any other capacity, especially after their utility is expended, (except for legend/legacy purposes) and neither can stand the sight of another of their kind. (especially one more colourful or muscular)

All of which compels me to assert that perhaps the proper way for any citizen to view a Politician is the same way one should view a GameCock. Find one that is particularly adept at fighting the battles you want fought. (a long history of breeding and success is useful but not necessarily determinative)

But for goodness sake do not become emotionally attached to them. For, sooner or later, they are bound to disappoint, and there will always be another one take it's place. And certainly take great care in investing in one, financially or emotionally, because if you get caught, or buy the wrong one, the monetary and social-standing consequences can be everlasting.

And lastly, keep a sharp eye on them, lest their wattles begin to grow back.

stephenhsmith
14Jun2007

Start With The Mirror

2007-06-12T12:02:00.000-07:00

the promises, treaties, and principles broken
and the millions of lives they've impacted
how can you blame them for doing such things
when it's you who's so easily distracted?

the seeking of power reveals them corrupt
'tis their goal to rule many with few
how much historical record do you need
to learn that the "problem" is YOU ?

did you too get fooled by the dream and idea
of electing them to seek common good ?
then count yourself one among many
but please learn, you misunderstood

such a thing is not in the nature of man
'tis the opposite that's true, and how
asserting the most outrageous of things
and getting away with what we allow

so many before haven't recognized this
and that's why there's suffering still
left unabated, there will be only ruins
let alone a "shining city on a hill"

say "i'm just one person, what can i do?"
you can learn, stand up, even pray
at least tell yourself "i do not consent"
that's the one thing you can do today

and perhaps in the coming tomorrows
if enough others follow your lead
the world will get just a little bit better
and fewer will then have to bleed

stephenhsmith 12Jun2007

On Jefferson Versus Hamilton

2007-06-11T10:23:00.000-07:00

the means, the ends
the intentions, and bends
manifests unintended and sought
of figures praised and scolded
after the tragedies unfolded
from roads that were taken, and those not.

stephenhsmith 11jun07

the founding fathers look better sans myth
or the varnish of time-worn out fictions
the resulting arrays from their most studied lives
yield nothing but perpetual contradictions

which begs one to ask the most simple questions
have the generations been purposely blinded?
must the complex and strange be reduced to a lie
and distilled for the mass simple-minded?

stephenhsmith 12Jun2007

muleboy303 dictionary

2007-05-19T11:03:00.000-07:00

clopt - choreographed like oswald's prison transfer

lohnot - look over here, not over there

3 Key SHS Predictions

2007-05-15T08:29:00.000-07:00

1. Hillary will be the 44th President of the United States.

2. Iran will become a Nuclear Power (weapons) w/o being attacked.

3. at least 4 major, fully-funded POTUS candidates on 2008 ballot.

===============================================

1. a done deal, "groomed for the slot", HRC will continue 90% of the Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush policies. (including most of the "unitary executive", "war on terror", and Presidential records secrecy)

2. an Iran with Nuclear Weapons will provide the U.S. Government with the rationale to keep a large quantity of troops in Iraq for decades, as well as provide U.S. "Missile Shield" makers with new lucrative markets.

3. HRC will be elected in 2008 with a lower percentage of votes than Nixon in '68, Bill Clinton in '92, or quite possibly Lincoln in 1860 (39.9%) due to the presence of at least 4, possibly 5, major, fully-funded, candidates on the ballot in every state.

small steps

2007-05-14T07:33:00.000-07:00

in harsh retrospection
the consequences profound
of each little mistake
and the potential it drowned
how the path once deviated
can ne'er again be found
so keep your steps small
making every one count
question all learning
no matter how true it sount
balancing doubt against faith
in the equalist amount

stephenhsmith 11may07

Meet the new WASP, same as the old...

2007-05-12T06:26:00.000-07:00

"Meet the new WASP, same as the old WASP" - shs Apr07

It is my belief that Hillary Rodham Clinton and Bill Richardson will be sworn in as P/VPOTUS on January 20, 2009. My preference would be for Ron Paul and/or Jim Webb, but Americans rarely listen to me, and besides it would take legions of like-minded bureaucrats to make any substantive difference in U.S. policy.

The "Powers that Be/Disciples of Rothchild and Rhodes" will continue to prevail in the highest levels of U.S. Government for at least another 4 years. (Although the idea of Hillary Rodham 'Gorbachev' presiding over the relatively bloodless dissolution of the United States as the 44th and last POTUS does appeal)

But with such a fantasy still remote (though tantalizingly seeming more possible everyday) it is time to turn toward more realistic expectations. To which I've composed a list of excesses/criminalities of the G.W.Bush Administration that I assert will NOT be remedied during the first two years of the Hillary Administration and a Democratic Party controlled HoR and Senate.

Patriot Act repeal
Military Commissions Act repeal
Dept of Homeland Security dismantled
FISA Court Authority restored
VA Healthcare fully funded
Electronic-Voting paper backup required
Congressional War Powers authority restored
Presidential Signing Statements eliminated by statute
Military Forces fully-equipped/trained restored
Elimination of "stop loss" orders
Restoration on NatlGuard deployment rules
Restoration of state Governor's control of NatlGuard
Restoration of U.S. legal fidelity to Geneva Accords
Restoration of Congressional oversight of Executive Branch
A "True" Balanced Budget
Iraq War brought into Budget
Limiting Presidential 'Executive Order' power by statute
Less than 80,000 U.S. troops deployed in Iraq

Which means that in the summer of 2010, as the American people face another round of Congressional elections, the issues before them will be almost exactly the same as they are today. Indeed I expect them to be worse, for any catastrophic events in the Economy, Foreign Relations, even Weather, will only serve to make the list more difficult to reverse, especially for a new POTUS who is a woman, who presumably will work to overcompensate for any suspicions of "weakness".

Add in the ever-possible event of another large-scale attack by Al Quaeda, which will become more probable as time passes, and especially if U.S. military units begin to be withdrawn from Afghanistan and Iraq, and the political calculus for a sea-change reversal of current U.S. policies becomes nearly impossible to imagine.

Thus, the only reason that could compel the complete withdrawal of American military forces from the Middle East in the next three years would be for a significant threat of civil-unrest and economic disruption within the U.S. (of a scale at least 10 times greater than that of 1968-1970 or 1930-1932)

It is going to be a "long war" indeed, unless the country folds/dissolves. (which may well have been the 'Powers/Rothchild's' plan all along)

stephenhsmith
11may2007

shs quotes 2007

2007-04-25T08:46:00.000-07:00

"i try very hard to calculate my writings and utterances so that the sanctimonious will view me as a bastard and that true bastards will regard me as a "snitch". this effort is made much easier by the fact that most bastards feign sanctimony" shs 25april2007

"in the context of how fundamentally stupid Americans are on average, combined with easy access to multiple tools for mass-killing, it is not "news" when a few times each year someone succumbs to the temptation. what is news is that it doesn't happen ten times each day" shs 22april2007

"i cannot recall" the details but "nothing improper" was done
in any event, you can't fire me 'cause i work for the fortunate son
i serve at the President's pleasure and he seems rather pleased with my work
though elections may have consequences it's my job to be a jerk
so if you must call me incompetent and that i'm in over my head
there's not a damn thing you can do about it when i say to you 'drop dead'

summation of AG Gonzales testimony shs 22april2007

"the only thing the American people are seriously interested in is 'making MONEY'. the rule of law, justice, christian ethics applied to capitalism do not even register on the scale in comparison" shs 11april2007

"everybody needs someone to look down upon in order to make them feel better about themselves... homophobes need homosexuals, sexists need the opposing sex, racists need minority races, etc... for me, it's "politicians" (and the pundits that support and enable them)
shs 2april2007

"with each new technology comes the promise of health improving applications and the specter of health reducing uses. why is it that humans consistently overuse new technology's health-reducing capabilities instead of the opposite?" shs mar07

"the most ancient human dysfunctional impulse is how to control other people's behaviour" shs mar07

"when most of the stress in your life comes from the fact that other people don't act the way you want them to, the problem is yours" shs 23mar2007

"the louder they scream 'it's about nothing' the more you can be sure something's there" shs32607

"the sublimely ironic beauty of "Existence" is that it is both supremely special and utterly insignificant at the same time" shs 11mar2007

"people want to believe in GOD, as is written in some old book, because they are so desperate in their hope that some truth is more powerful than lies. the vainest, most destructive waste of effort in human history." shs 9mar2007

Hill, Bama, Mitt got nothin' on the IDF

2007-04-04T10:15:00.000-07:00

Months and months of raising a dozen or two Million Dollars compared to one night in New York (New Tel Aviv?) ...

"The Friends of the Israel Defense Forces raised a record $18 million at its annual gala dinner held last week in New York City.

Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz addressed more than 1,300 attendees and remarked on the key security challenges facing Israel."

Jerusalem Post

the truth is...

2007-04-03T10:39:00.001-07:00

... Americans believe what they want to believe because questioning things may result in having to make a difficult choice.

Tom Tomorrow Today

2007-03-12T09:46:00.000-07:00

This one is just too good not to post. Or...

"Everything I ever needed to know about Politics, I learned in Kindergarten"?

Domino Theory

2007-02-23T11:23:00.000-08:00

DOMINO THEORY

In July 2003, less than six weeks after "Mission Accomplished", W's approval ratings had climbed to near 75%, regime change in Iraq had been effected with less than 300 casualties, and the still nascent "insurgency" was claiming the life of 1 allied soldier per day, when Joe Wilson's op-ed regarding the "16 words" appeared in the New York Times.

The White House initially allowed that some of the pre-war 'intelligence' was less than fully true, but the public was still patient and many confident that WMD's would be found, although questions were beginning to arise. To which the WH began to 'push-back' via the VP Cheney's office and Irving Libby's contacts with 'friendly' reporters.

Why?
1. to counteract Wilson and scare other potential 'whistleblowers'?
2. to thwart by delay the birth of a major threat to W's re-election?
3. to fight back against a perceived attack by the CIA on Administration policy?
4. to blind the CIA's Iran/nuclear weapons research?
5. all of the above?

Quite possibly so, though they may well have not realized the unintended consequences of their 'campaign' at the time. But with the arrogance accrued by such success, W, Cheney, Libby, et al. probably overestimated their ability to 'control the message'.

But what if something else was already planned?
Something that might be severely and immediately threatened by public questioning of their veracity and motives for the invasion of Iraq?Something that was a part of the plan even before the invasion of Iraq?

ATTACKING/REGIME CHANGE IN IRAN

If so, those plans, and the 'cakewalk' were dealt a severe blow in the first two hours of the plan for Iraq, because the assassination of Saddam Hussein failed. But, to the WH there was still plenty of time before the 2004 elections, to begin the de-stabilization effort against Iran, including air-assaults, if the American public supported it.

"If the American public supported it" is the key.

Due to the questions raised by Wilson, the WH's 'push-back' efforts, the media's publicity of it, the continuing failure to find the WMD's (which they knew did not exist), and the CIA's request for an FBI investigation, Bush's approval rating plummeted from 75% to 50% within four months. During which the "insurgency" in Iraq doubled it's capacity to kill the now occupying U.S. forces.

The failure of the WH's 'push-back' effort did not preclude W from being re-elected (barely) due to Libby's "sticking his neck out" by request of the Pres., and lying to the FBI and Grand Jury in 2003 and 2004 respectively. But along with the refusal to entertain offers by Iran to negotiate in 2003, the flip-flop, lie, 'going back on their word' etc. on the pre-war U.S. pledge to dismantle the anti-Iranian militia MEK based in northern Iraq, and the WH neocons continuing antagonizing rhetoric, U.S. policy did succeed in effecting regime-change in Iran. But not of the kind they had intended.

In August of 2005, the Iranian people surprisingly and overwhelmingly elected as President of Iran the candidate with the most anti-western rhetoric, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Presuming that the Bush Administration fully intended, before 17 Mar 2003, to follow it's successes in Afghanistan and (presumably) Iraq with a full-scale diplomatic, public relations and, if necessary, military effort for 'regime change' in Iran, to be conducted and concluded before the 2004 election, would seem to answer many questions.

It would explain:

1. the 'cakewalk' and 'greeted as liberators' assertions
2. the 'light-footprint' military force deployed
3. the "failure" to plan for the post-saddam administration
4. the "failure" to plan for the "insurgency"
5. the persistent 'state-of-denial' of the growing problems in iraq (post-'mission accomplished')
6. the failure to plan for future military force requirements
7. the dramatic WH response to Wilson's NYT op-ed questioning pre-war intelligence
8. the dismantling of the iraqi army
9. the rush to employ "non-traditional" methods of intelligence gathering
10. the deliberate "blinding" of u.s. intel gathering efforts on iran's nuclear program
11. the failure to equip u.s. military forces with body-armour and upgraded humvees
12. the low-balling of overall cost estimates
13. the refusal to consider tax increases or reductions in tax cuts
14. the reluctance to advocate any form of national sacrifice

The "planners" literally did not expect to have to fight in Iraq, because their entire plan (from Iraq to Iran) was predicated upon their arrogant confidence in the ability of high-tech weaponry to assassinate Saddam Hussein with the first shot. Whereby Saddam's death would be trumpeted and U.S. forces would walk into Iraq uncontested, having only minimal sporadic resistance. "Shock and Awe" was plan B.

So, literally in this case, a "war plan" did not survive the first five minutes of combat.

And every action of the Bush Admin. that followed "the end of military operations" was an "adjustment", with the goal of achieving the previously desired end, in Iran. A goal that Vice-President Cheney and the same neocons that promoted the Iraq War hold onto to this very day.

But between the summer of 2003 and today, many things have come to pass.

Approval ratings have dropped from 75% to below 30% in some polls.

Scores of "intelligence failures" revealed.

The u.s. casualty toll is now over 25,000.

Hundreds of billions of dollars expended.

Sectarian strife inside Iraq escalated to 'civil war' proportions.

Untold scores of thousands of dead Iraqis.

Waste, fraud, and graft on an unprecedented scale.

Atrocities by u.s. forces, in the field and in p.o.w. camps, revealed by the thousands, irrevocably damaging u.s. reputations worldwide.

On top of which, a federal criminal investigation now threatens the 'political viability' of the "plans" prime promoter, VP Cheney.

All of which would lead one to hope that the "mistake" of 2003 is now well on it's way to slowly being resolved, and perhaps corrected. But when one remembers how a rabid animal acts when cornered, and then combines that with the record of the Bush Administration for "steely resolve", secrecy, and determination, well methinks there may be a few more surprises before this story ends. Especially in the face of a pending economic recession and with two more years on the clock.

stephenhsmith
23feb2007

Hillary's Sister (Geffen) Souljah

2007-02-23T07:54:00.000-08:00

David Geffen is a tool.

In recent days he has been doing double duty. His first task was to raise money and the spotlight on Senator Obama in the very days where Hollywood's attention turns toward the Oscars and Al Gore, thus eclipsing him and furthering the connection in middle-Americans' minds between Obama/Hollywood.

Geffen's second task was to get Hillary out of the ring whilst she was being brutally hammered by the Left over her refusal to admit to a mistake in her 2002 Iraq War vote, with an additional bonus.

The bonus is most clever and very reminiscent of 1992's Sister Souljah moment. The Clinton's know that regular people are not enthralled by Democratic candidates that are passionately and publicly connected to Hollywood big-mouth, know-it-alls, telling "the people" how they should live.

This week's "spat" is but another well calculated and executed "innoculation" for the coming "triangulation" in the 2008 campaign. It's damn smart. It's all an act.

But then we are talking about Hollywood and Politics, and both are provincial capitols in the land of 'make-believe'.

UPDATE: When asked if 'Obambi' can stand up to "Clinton Inc.," Geffen replied: "I hope so, because that machine is going to be very unpleasant and unattractive and effective." - Maureen Dowd 21Feb2007

Geffen, via Dowd, is not criticizing the Clintons with these words, he is warning off potential contestants. Warnings that Feingold, Bayh, and Warner have already heeded. (and now Vilsack?)

But will Gore?

THAT is THE Question!

stephenhsmith
23 Feb 2007

SHS quotes

2007-02-21T06:20:00.000-08:00

2006
.
"i guess you could say that i have a "Christian" mentality about the future of the United States. for I do believe that nations have souls, and that the U.S.' past sins are so great and so numerous, that the only way they can be even partially redeemed is by it's crucifixition and reconstitution in multiple forms, as was the Soviet Union"
shs 22nov2006
-------------------------
"History has shown that i am a lousy judge of character, but also that i am an excellent scout of political talent. I believe the two may be related"
shs 22nov2006
-------------------------
"here are some things i believe but cannot prove right now, but time will" shs 17nov06
-------------------------
"don't we all believe in things we cannot prove?" shs 11-12-06
-------------------------
"i don't really think of myself as very smart, just less stupid than most people, certainly less encumbered and compromised, and therefore more honest" shs 8 nov 2006
-------------------------
"it is most disturbing that so many now toy with the atom, dna, and space travel, the newest tools of mankind's quest for useful knowledge, when so few have yet to master the oldest tool, the basic skills of language" shs 7nov2006
-------------------------
"why is it that the faults people work so hard to deny about themselves, they find completely unforgivable in their children?" shs 3nov2006
-------------------------
"slow learners still learn, which puts them far ahead of most folks after a short while" shs 2nov2006
-------------------------
"the hardest lesson i've never fully learned is that sub-perfect is acceptable. it is sub-par that is not" shs 25oct2006
-------------------------
"if you say you LOVE someone and then say (or even think to yourself) that they OWE you something, then you DO NOT really love them at all" ... shs 21oct2006
--------------------------
"i've now lived long enough to have learned that almost everybody needs someone to loathe. along with other delusions, it makes people feel better about themselves, to feel superior to someone else. i developed this common malady early in life, but rather than fight it, i chose to expand it to include everybody. and thus, by loathing everyone, i loathe each individual less. of course, i make exceptions here and there, but hell, it's my delusion." shs 22oct2006
--------------------------
"When you build an Ark, you have a vested interest in RAIN"
shs 11oct2006
---------------------------
You reap what you sow..."especially when you thought you were sowing something else"
shs 15oct2006
---------------------------
Political Calculations
Confused by the competing claims of political campaigns?
Here is a quick and dirty tool to help.
"Believe the worst things that each side says about the other and you'll have the most accurate description of the whole"
shs 19sept2006
----------------------------
The Vital Ingredient
"The vital ingredient to living a life based on the love of learning, is being constantly open to the idea that everything you have already learned, is wrong"
shs 5sept2006
----------------------------
If this country were a Dog, I'd shoot it" - shs 1996
As time and tide has changed the culture of the U.S., and not much for the better, this quote must be 'updated'. As few Americans remember how their ancestors dealt with rabid dogs in the last, 'foaming at the mouth - crazed out of their mind' stage.So the update is more wordy and far less poetic, but at least it is more self-explanatory...
"If this country were a Dog, and I were a Veterinarian, I'd have to recommend that it be 'put down' "
shs 6Sept2006
----------------------------------
2005
sowing the seed
of hubris and greed
a reckoning will soon be at hand

the 'advanced' will clash
with a 'primitive' crash
for the air, the water, the land

with an increasing pace
to inadequate space
oh the things from which
we'll have to choose

a battle to the death
o'er who will have breath
and the victor will have no soul to lose
shs 7.26.05
.
2004
.
2003
.
2002
.
2001
.
2000
.
1999
.
"The most important decision you may ever make is how to waste your time"
shs 9.9.99----------------------"What would I regard as the ultimate sin?
If the fool that I am were bigger than the fool that I've been"
shs april 1999
-----------------------
"if you truly want an atmosphere of honest and open debate, then be prepared to accept two things:
One: as a consequence, nothing will ever be completely settled,
Two: eventually you will be exposed to an argument that forces you to consider changing your well thought out mind.
It is painful but beneficial. Learn to enjoy it.
shs 4.24.99
------------------------------
1998
.
1997
.
everyone of us is an idiot
everyone of us is smart
every one of us is evil
every one of us has a heart
in the many ways we show it
it is hard to tell them apart
shs march 1997
------------------
"Bill Clinton lied again on his tax forms...
listed himself as 'head of household' "
shs april 1997
------------------------------
REBOOT by shs 1.23.97
when the body is rebelling
and the mind cannot maintain
to discern a certain latitude
from longitude refrainseek not the familiar inner core
shut down all stimuli
give hesitating pause to life
or else prepare to die
for when the storm has lifted
and the senses re-aligned
don't rush to re-ignite the fire
gently start your mindlearn the common middleness
and from passion's ends abstain
for there's much unearthly blissfulness
between happiness and pain
.
1996
.
"how to be a man of few words.... say only what you 100% mean"
shs 7-3-96
------------------------
"winning without honor is not winning"
shs 8/15/96
-------------------------
About the Author
Though still a young man, the author has already incorporated into his psyche many of the failings common to men in their later years. The author's failures to exploit his talents of musical composition, fairway negotiation, and ballistics, have firmly placed him in the familiar position of having to make the best of the balance of his life aspiring to exploit the lowest, easiest rung on the ladder of accomplishment, by writing.
Thus a failure at guitar, golf, and assassination, he is left only the pen and the blank page.
The reader will do well to remember that the author regards his words as inspired by painful resignation. Seeking some modicum of harmony with his enviroment, the author dutifully summons the little energy he has left, to move his pen, to create something of value to others, in the hope that somehow he may spare those who are similarly constituted, from repeating his mistakes.
shs 8-12-96
1995
.
" the anti-christ will most certainly have a law degree"
shs 3-13-95
--------------------------------------
THE INDEPENDENT COUNSEL by shs 3-3-95
The Independent Counsel
went up Whitewater's spout
Shredding & Lies
Locked the Counsel out
Then the Hubbell's son
unblocked the counsel's way
and the Independent Counsel's
still on the job today ...
-----------------------------------
"OUR LIVES ARE SIMULTANEOUSLY BOTH ONE LONG INTIMATE CONVERSATION WITH OURSELVES, AND A PERPETUAL SEARCH FOR MIRRORS IN WHICH WE CAN SEE WHAT WE TRULY LOOK LIKE"... SHS 2-13-95
-----------------------------------
"keeping a list is necessary, because even the most talented fraud-hounds get fooled sooner or later.. Mencken voted for Roosevelt in '32.
shs 1995
-----------------------------------
.
1994
.
"we didn't do anything wrong, we won't do it again, and besides everybody does it anyway"... the clinton administration mantra.
shs 8-2-94
---------------------------------
"what did the president know and when did she tell her staff to cover it up?"
shs 3-94
---------------------------------
hilly rodham went to town
a ridin' on a phony
said that she did nothing wrong
the people said "baloney"hilly rodham shred it up
hubby is too randy
hilly rodham hypocrite
you "made" a hundred grandy
shs March 31, 1994
-----------------------------------
" We are doomed to live in tyranny, because the value of liberty takes too long to explain."
shs april 1994
----------------------------------
.
1993
.
"I WOULD RATHER VOTE FOR WHAT I WANT AND NOT GET IT... THAN VOTE FOR WHAT I DON'T WANT AND GET LOTS OF IT."
shs 1993
-----------------------------
.
1992
.
1991
.
1990
.
SHS 12-5-90 "There is a never-ending supply of people who are determined to use the power of the government to relieve people of money that they supposedly don't deserve and use it to satisfy the needs of victims of society's innumerable injustices."
.
1989
.
1988
.
"We're going to regret this"
shs election night Nov. 1988
-----------------------------------