The Circular Firing Squad

"All the Trickle down theory produces in the course of time is a bunch of peons"

"Don't pee on my leg and tell me that it's raining"

-Judge Judy

"Do you remember the story about the dog with the bone in its mouth that saw its reflection in the pond, and so charged at his own reflection?"

You know that someone asked Lyndon Johnson why he had so political enemies that were in his administration and his response was classic. He said, “You see, I’d rather have all my Enemies inside the tent pissing out, then outside the tent pissing in”. It’s too bad people like Bill Halliday never learned that lesson. It's an old adage that you never want to make an enemy out of a powerful person. I don't even think its kosher to make an enemy out of a formerly neutral if not positive person for no reason at all other than pride. In his time I imagine he’s offended the gay community, whom “liberal churches” used to court. He has alienated the Hollywood community by saying “there is a conspiracy in all these modern films to mock Christianity and Christians”, and he certainly offended fans of Gulf War I by comparing St. Peter to Saddam Hussein. He alienated people with AIDS by his highly warped sermon on John 5 and of course he has an ongoing war with the rest of the denomination, which makes me wonder if he’s still around. Even when I were there were roomers circulating that the denomination was going to “de certify” our Church.

Mitt Romney has unleashed an arsenal by referring to Gingrich as someone who would bring "Zaniness to the White House. Zaniness is fine for a political campaign and you see hosts on the radio, but- - - ". Romney said we need "sobriety". That's the second time I've heard that particular word about Gingrich's lacking. Mitt Romney also said that if Newt holds himself to standards he sets for others that he should give back all the money he got from Freddy Mack as a lobbyist or whatever. He said that in Saturday's debate. But Newt Gingrich is the guy who made a fatal mistake in my opinion the other day when he said that “All Mitt Romney has done is to bankrupt corporation after corporation and ship US jobs overseas”. Hey- - - that’s OUR line. Newt saying that is kind of a betrayal of the fellowship of crooks he hangs out with. I have wondered if Rush Limbaugh ever did a program attacking Jack Abramoff for attacking his fellow political crooks on Sixty Minutes that night. We know that Rush attacked Herman Cain on a racial issue on one occasion. Rush has even attacked slightly moderate people such as John Boehner and Newt Gingrich even when they didn’t toe the line. And after Rush reprimanded them they got in line. Now Mitt Romney is striking back by saying in his adds that he plans to offer steady, firm leadership, “By a man with the right temperament to lead a nation” alluding to Newt’s ongoing foot in mouth disease. Of course Newt has pretty much blown the Hispanic vote by his “English only” statements, and alienated the Islamic community in any number of ways. If I were an Islamic myself I might ask “Oh? And since when was not the Arab community in the US culturally conservative?” Every one of that persuasion I’ve met has been a very traditional, law abiding American. Back to Romney again- - he said that the Iraq War was a failure, because he wasn’t President when it ended. I wonder how veterans returning feel about that statement? Now we hear that people in Iowa may be re-thinking the whole Newt Gingrich hysteria. It’s just a roomer at this point but just maybe they may come full circle and end up back where they started giving Michelle Bachman a victory on primary day, just maybe.

I was listening to the radio the other day and got in the middle of a story relating how a bunch of prisoners were herded in mass into a secluded place and either forced to kneel or assume other more uncomfortable positions and not allowed to move, for six or seven hours at a time, and were denied food, water, or even a restroom break. And they weren’t allowed to make any phone calls at all but held incommunicado for days. No, this wasn’t in some foreign country such as Syria, but it is what the LAPD subjected the people they arrested in the Occupy movement to. It turns out that that one man’s story we related as to his mistreatment, was a writer for “Family Guy”. That little factoid might be ruled irrelivent by a trial judge but as a juror sitting on a police abuse case, that little detail might be considered of some relivence to me, even though it shouldn’t be. It kind of flies in the face of Mayor Viragosa saying how proud of the LAPD he was for the peaceful resolution of the whole Occupy controversy. If one were into starting roomers one might think that President Obama is choosing this opportunity to “trangulate” an issue by giving thumbs up to all these arrests just to keep the protests out of the news, since as I have indicated, all these protests ill serve the “main stream” message he has tried so hard to portray. In his mind alienating those on the left is the least of his worried because- - after all, where are they going to go? But now we hear that President Obama indeed took proactive measures to keep the “Preventitive Detention” passages IN that Arms bill. That is the Congress wanted the laungage removed and stick in an amendment to invalidate most of it. But the President stepped in and said “I want that portion of the bill removed” so that the parts about turning the United States into a militarized zone, remained in full force. Someone has said that if the President signs this bill, he will be in violation of the Constitution, and will indeed have committed an impeachable offence. If was this Black caller who said this, and I fully agree. It’s just like throwing the Constitution into the waste basket. Which kind of makes me wonder which way the President has his head screwed on these days. It’s still not late for people like me to vote for Ron Paul in the primary- - and I just might if I see more of this behavior from him.

It’s funny how certain conservatives have such a loathing for anything that might be called “liberal” or “compassionate” that they will attack things you wouldn’t imagine they would. Rush Limbaugh used to have that “bless the beasts and children” song up and mock it. Rush has a legendary dislike of children. Early on he mocked some kid flying solo in a balloon as a “balloon for Peace” or something. Now Rush Limbaugh is attacking some charity fund or something for disadvantaged children. He’s now attacking the character of any children or disadvantaged who would take advantage of this program. Was it Limbaugh or was it Gingrich who said "All these children are are a bunch of waifs and serfs and - - - " (somehow not worth redeeming) Judy a few weeks back spoke in disparaging terms “Oh all the liberals just want equality for everybody and then we’ll all be happy and everything will be fine” in sarcastic tones. I’m still scratching my head to figure out how President Obama’s Kansas speech last week could possibly be constrewed as a “Marxist manifesto”. But now a caller comes on the air and challenges Thom Hartman head on, on this whole subject. But the thing is, when you’re in a battle of whits- - some people are unarmed! Thom Hartman was engaging in one of his frequent pastimes of citing the benefits to society as a whole, the way a sociologist would do, in comparing nations and individual states, where the disparity between high and low income was relatively small, verses what sort of societal problems are encountered in high income disparity states where there is a great gulf between rich and poor. Various states such as Mississippi and Louisiana have a high income disparity what with their grand Southern Mansions and also ramshackle shacks where the poor don’t have running water. In such states, and certain countries, and I imagine places like South Africa head the list- - where income disparity is high, you have the highest suicide and murder rates, and the highest rapes and marital instability, as well as mental illness, drug addiction, and other evils. For such states and nations the crime rate and particularly the violence rate is quite high. Whereas in places like Holland and Norway and Denmark, and states such as Wisconsin and Utah and Vermont- - these states have relatively low income disparity and their societies are much more stable. Anyhow the caller on his high horse was saying “Well Thom, you just don’t know all the ramifications and costs of putting into existence the things you say. Let me tell you you think it would be a panacea but it wouldn’t be. Everything has its price, and we just have no research on the matter anyhow”. Well of course, that’s not true. Because in the late forties, fifties, sixties, and early seventies in this country we had precisely that. We had higher worker wages, and also higher tax rates for the rich and we had more stable economies and not bubble economies we have when the Republicans assume power. The upside to instituting more equality is amazing. Nobody said it was a “Panacia”. But if you want lower rates on all those society ills, we actually know what to do, and what has been proven to work in the past. I know the industrious are praised in the abstract, but when it actually comes down to getting their invention marketed, who will help them? I know what Adam Smith said about “The invisible hand” and all and in many cases - - free market forces can be an amazingly equitable and fair system of distribution of scarce resources. But you know and I know that even Adam Smith said we need the equivalent of yard markers and referees and goal posts, to keep the game honest. We don’t have these now. All the guard rails have been removed. And the President has been hesitant as least, to try and get back the economic safeguards we had prior to 1998.