I just can't drop it!

#OWS: The diorama versus the real.

              Signed up for Soc. Sec. Wednesday and since the office was only about three quarters of a mile from Zucotti Park M. and I decided to walk on down and take a look. At this point I’ve only seen the YouTube posts out of Oakland or heard the pro #OWS propaganda on Pacifica, not that that stuff would have a positive effect on me, I’ve been listening to lefty propaganda all my life; I’d sooner fall prey to a fancy camera ad. I know that that’s the diorama, as compelling as the stuffed and posed animals behind glass in the corridors of the Museum of Natural history. For some examples we can go to their greatest supporter The Indypendent, a free newspaper I often find in my local laudromat; I refuse to pay for AdBusters. The first article, titled We Contain Multitudes, introduces a cross section of the #Occupandos with photos and such quotations as these:

Diego Espita, 18 of South Jamaica,

“I used to have a home, girlfriend and job and lost it all.

I’m sick of these wars and people getting laid of.”

Gretchen VanDyck, of NYC,

“I oppose the negative effects of Neo-Liberal Capitalism on everyday life.”

Kanaska Carter, 26, a musician from Newfoundland,

She has relocated to Liberty Park to be part of what she sees as a global transformation. One thing that has surprised Carter is the amount of police brutality.

However she says,

We cannot hate the cops. They’re part of the 99% too. A lot of them are saying,

‘I’d rather be home with my kids right now’

There’s some that try to provoke us,

but if I think if we want to get any where, we have to show them love.”

David Siroonian, 32, of New York City

Is a teacher at the High School of Economics and Finance,

which is located across the street from Liberty Park.

Siroonian visits the park whenever he can,

 including during his free periods from teaching.

              

               We Contain Multitudes, a quote from Whitman’s Song of Myself, is a piece by Francine Prose, president of the PEN American Center and an author of many bestselling works of fiction. She sees people who shouldn’t be in conversation talking to each other, members of every race and class, a biker with tattoos and piercings discussing our problems with a lady in a Hermes scarf. This lightening of a weight, this lessening of a feeling of powerlessness and isolation, something she has never known leaves her drowning in her own tears. Give me a fucking break, the same BS has been used to describe the crowd in every demonstration for the last fifty years. “The crowd contained a wide cross section of the American People, all turned out to show solidarity in the cause of…whatever.” But that’s the diorama, everything surrounded by beauty, under the sky of blue.

              

               The financial district on a workday is a beehive of activity, I can almost hear Gershwin’s Rhapsody in Blue as the background theme to the soundscape of these streets.  As you get below City Hall Park you enter Skyscraper Park-Downtown. Here some of the oldest skyscrapers stand, with Cass Gilbert’s Woolworth Building, once the tallest building in the world, at the gateway. So many of these buildings were built when architects were still trained in the use of the classical orders; columns, entablatures, statuary, and bits and pieces of carving adorn these buildings. But as opposed to the uptown Skyscraper Park with its wide streets, even wider avenues and its glass towers, here the streets are tied to the lanes and trails laid down in the days of New Amsterdam. Even the great fires of 1776 and 1835 didn’t have much effect on that original grid. Walking the streets off Broadway gives the impression of being in a forest of stone where the walls are close by and the carvings manipulate the changing light as the sun moves across the sky.

              

               Then you hit Zucotti, since the buildings are so tall the park would be a welcome open space, and it is in normal times, but these are not normal times. When we were there the police were holding the barricades, moving the crowds and maintaining pressure on the #Occupandos, so the park felt like a time bomb. Ringed by double rows of barricades, the #Occupandos are allowed to come and go as individuals, however any surge will be controlled. The filth is palpable, as it is in any gathering of unwashed humans. Most seemed to be just sitting around doing nothing more than holding signs and looking at the tourists, entering the park for a stroll would have been impossible as the tents are all cheek by jowl. M would have tied a rope around my neck if I had tried to pick my way among the tents and engage in conversation, she tries to keep me out of fights. Most flitted back and forth like birds involved in whatever piece of work held their attention at this point, but there were men, cold eyed and burly, to whom I’m sure the cops have long since given nicknames.

              

               During Depression 2.0 we have seen a new/old type of homeless, young, tattooed, and travelling across the nation with their backpacks and their dogs, these are the people in Zucotti. Back in the 60’s the rents were so low in the ghettos of NYC that it was easy to rent a one bedroom apt. for $75 a month. Open up your place to street people and their begging would feed a multitude; they were called Crash Pads. Then the ghettos burned and the rents went up. In the 80’s any open space was squatted by anyone who took the time to build a shack. Ole’ Adolf Giuliani ended that as part of the Broken Windows anti-crime sweeps, and new housing was built in the empty lots. And now they’re back as #Occupy Whatever, a new generation of losers. But no matter how much they may push, the energy is gone. Oh they make their implied threats but their numbers are small and any violence will backfire on them, and they know it.

              

               It’s been a warm and dry fall, it might even be a warm winter, and I’m sure the #Occupandos are praying for it. New York winters can be brutal, our real homeless are already looking for their bed down areas for the next five months, and they say some #Occupandos have developed a chronic cough. By February the Revolution will be looking for another site for the highest credentialed lumpen proletariat ever to rise against the Oligarchy, and this pathetic bunch will be scattered to the winds. I’m sure Our Dear Mayor is counting on it. Meanwhile the beat goes on.
JimG33

Allen B. West on the lasting effects of the Democrat Plantation.

Col. West gets to the point, again. Maybe that’s why he’s ignored at all the usual places. JimG33

 

Economic Freedom for Black Americans

By Allen B. West from the November 2011 issue of The American Spectator

When will black Americans finally be "free at last"?

The word "freedom" for many black Americans is inextricably linked with the word "slavery." While it has been 148 years since the Emancipation Proclamation, and 47 years since the landmark Civil Rights Act, for many, the words of Martin Luther King in his famous speech still ring true: "The Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity." Many black Americans still find themselves spiritually and economically enslaved on the figurative 21st-century plantation.

Why is that still so? After all, for the last 47 years, our leaders have passed bill after bill ostensibly to free black Americans from the manacles of poverty and provide ever-stronger safety nets for those disadvantaged.

But two very formidable forces have conspired over these last 47 years -- almost the span of my entire life--to shackle the economic freedoms and aspirations of the black community: liberal progressive policies, generally supported by Democrats, and the socialist ideology espoused by prominent blacks such as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

It is always curious to me that black Americans typically vote Democrat, when it was a Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, who issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863 and a Republican from Ohio, Representative James Mitchell Ashley, who brought forth the bill to support an amendment to end slavery throughout the United States.

Nearly 100 years later, when the initial Civil Rights Bill came before the full Senate in 1964, it was a group of 18 Southern Democrats who argued most fervently against its passage.

While the Civil Rights Act passed, finally ending the reprehensible practices of segregation, the liberal progressive policies passed during these last nearly five decades have perhaps done more damage to black Americans' prospects than the racial policies of the past. Unemployment in the black community stands at 16.7 percent, food stamp enrollment is up, and nearly three-quarters of all black children do not live with their biological fathers.

Welfare policies devised by the left to aid single mothers have instead worked perversely to incentivize more young women to have children out of wedlock.

High minimum wages advocated by labor unions-- from whom Democrats receive tremendous financial support -- mean employers are less apt to hire unskilled black youths, or any youths for that matter.

For the left, "spending on education" generally means job protection and preserving benefits for teachers, rather than actually improving education for students in public schools, where black students can build a foundation for economic advancement.

But the effects of these so-called well-intentioned policies, while damaging, are certainly not as toxic as the socialist orientation and noxious rhetoric of "leaders" such as Al Sharpton and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Words do indeed have meaning, and the defeatist and demoralizing screeds of these prominent speakers do not inspire, but instead reinforce the victim mentality, and generate class hatred and jealousy -- further cultivated by our own President Barack Obama.

Since the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People's founding in 1909, socialism has been, unfortunately, deeply ingrained in the black community. In fact, NAACP founder W. E. B. DuBois received the 1959 "Lenin Peace Prize" and formally joined the Communist Party USA two years later.

One of the primary tenets of socialist ideology is the creation of a welfare state, which is precisely what has happened in the black community. It is, in effect, a virtual plantation, where black Americans remain enslaved to damaging economic policies and poisonous attitudes of the rhetorical "overseers" who continue to reinforce exploitive, negative mindsets.

The only way for black Americans -- and all Americans for that matter -- to enjoy the full fruits of economic freedom is by once again embracing the spirit of individualism and self-determination laid out in our Constitution and exemplified by true black leaders such as Frederick Douglass and Booker T. Washington. It is only by abandoning the damaging liberal progressive policies and throwing off the shackles of the victim mentality can black Americans finally be "free at last."

About the Author

Allen B. West is a Republican U.S. representative from Florida.

#Occupy Whatever and the politics of envy and theft.

Through out the history of mankind the question of private property looms large. It begins with the problem of slavery, do I own myself? In the early hydraulic empires the answer was no. You are the property of the god/king. Your labor, and the fruits of it, whether agricultural or some form of corvee, is the property of the ruler. Any surplus was not yours to control, but the sanctions were religious, so argument was impossible.

Even in the earliest polities of what we now call the West this question was central. Slaves were necessary to the economies of the Greek city states, and the Roman Republic and Empire. In Athens only male Athenians could be citizens and have a say in the government, only they could participate in the Demos. Of course this came with certain responsibilities, one of which was service in war. Athenian citizens had to take their place in the Phalanx, Socrates the mason for example, fought at the battle of Delium. On the wall of every Athenian farm house hung the battle dress of the master of the house and his grown sons, his helmet, shield, cuirass, greaves, sword, and spear. The wealthy fought in the cavalry, the poor manned the naval galleys. In classical antiquity there were no slave armies; war was the job of the few free men who existed. The army of the Roman Republic fought in defense of Rome, as against Carthage, but in the main they went out every year to conquer new territory and to gather slaves for the greater glory of Rome. I’m sure this influx of slave labor constantly degraded the position of local skilled and unskilled free labor in the growing republic and probably led to the civil wars that lasted for about half a century resulting in Cesarism and the founding of the Augustan Imperium, but I digress.

The great power of Christianity is that this religion finally placed the worshiper in a direct relation to God, as such it worked as an acid on the Imperial hierarchy, and the slavery inherent  in Roman and Greek polytheism. And so in the West the concept of personal autonomy expanded, as the “Religion of Slaves” spread through the Empire.

So what has this to do with #Occupy Whatever? Everything! I’ll start with a quote from John Locke:

The great and chief end therefore, of Mens [sic] uniting into Commonwealths, and putting themselves under Government, is the Preservation of their Property

               Therefore the property of any man starts with his body and extends to the labor and time that results in his physical goods. No one can take that away from him on a whim, otherwise he is not free, he is a slave.

               The #Occupy movement makes the dangerous assumption that an autonomous person can walk through the world naked with an emerald in each hand. All Anarchist movements work from this assumption, even the violent ones. That’s why they make such good cannon fodder for communists. The segregation of Zucotti Park into the new “races” of Fems, Queers, Trans, and other “minorities” that must be defended shows the continuing collapse of this “Movement”, not its success. As they break into factions we can see the wisdom of Publius in Federalist Ten.

The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man; and we see them everywhere brought into different degrees of activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society. A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation as of practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good. So strong is this propensity of mankind to fall into mutual animosities, that where no substantial occasion presents itself, the most frivolous and fanciful distinctions have been sufficient to kindle their unfriendly passions and excite their most violent conflicts.

               Publius not only speaks to the many causes of faction but to the ones most important to the #Occupiers.

 But the most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property. Those who hold and those who are without property have ever formed distinct interests in society. Those who are creditors, and those who are debtors, fall under a like discrimination. A landed interest, a manufacturing interest, a mercantile interest, a moneyed interest, with many lesser interests, grow up of necessity in civilized nations, and divide them into different classes, actuated by different sentiments and views. The regulation of these various and interfering interests forms the principal task of modern legislation, and involves the spirit of party and faction in the necessary and ordinary operations of the government.

               Thus more than two hundred years ago Publius proposed solutions to the “new” problems that so vex our park dwellers.

The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.

From this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.

               In the NYT of this past Sunday there was a sympathetic article about the #Occupiers, as if there could be any other, in which a few professors, our present day “theoretic politicians”, were consulted on the politics of Anarchy. Of course they could only talk theory rather than history, as no polity abiding by these principles has lasted long enough to produce any history, except for that written in blood.

               Publius goes on to explain how a Constitutional, representative government with its separation of powers will channel and control these desires for a politics of envy and theft. If History was still taught in our universities, maybe this nonsense could be avoided. But isn’t that the point?


JimG33

Rush on Herman's Emmet Till moment

Since the confirmation of Justice Thomas, the Democrat Party, and their intellectual side kicks, have repeatedly tried to upgrade their high tech lynching of what ever uppity negro happens to show up. Since they've been trying to destroy him since he first went national, and made a complete hash of it since Obama's meeting at G. Wills' house back in 2008, nobody knows this tactic better than ElRushbo. He says it much better than I would, and as usual no notes, no teleprompter. JimG33

The Media on Rush and Cain

November 01, 2011

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I don't think a lot of people do, but some underestimate the news media's power.  And if you do underestimate their power, you do so at your own peril.  You watch the Herman Cain witch hunt, two things have happened.  The media today is mad that he's still in there and that he's still smiling.  The media is also mad that the women haven't come forward.  They have been desperate to get these women. Politico has a story out there, which is basically a clarion call in the last paragraph of the story, "Please, please come forward, it's the next thing we need," begging the women to come forward. The women don't want to come forward from what I have been able to glean.  They're mad that Herman Cain is still out there smiling.  They're mad that he has not been disqualified.  They're mad that he is still a viable candidate. 

This was supposed to be over by the end of the day yesterday.  Particularly they are stunned that in their view Herman can go change his story throughout the day -- i.e., be inconsistent -- and still survive this, and they are really ticked at me and others who are defending Herman Cain.  They have assumed that we must really want Herman Cain to be the Republican nominee, otherwise we wouldn't be defending him and they have no clue why he's being defended.  It's not about securing him the nomination, for any of you in the Drive-Bys who care.  It's simply this.  We are not gonna stand by idly and watch you try to take out another one of our own.  You never turn this kind of reporting on people like Barack Obama.  You never turn this kind of reporting around on Bill Clinton.  You never engage in this kind of news coverage, reporting, character assassination of people in the Democrat Party. 

We have no choice.  We have our intelligence guided by experience in these matters.  But there are some even on our side, I've done the usual perusal of conservative media, and there are plenty on our side who think Cain's a boob and he ought to quit, that it's bringing disfavor on the whole field and on the whole party, and there's gotta be something there or Politico wouldn't run with it. Those are the outlets not geared up for the fight, those are the outlets, our own conservative media outlets who don't think there's a fight.  There's just the political game going on.  And once one of our people's tainted, he's finished, 'cause they think the Drive-Bys determine who lives and dies in a political sense. 

And as I watch this witch hunt of Herman Cain I'm reminded once again that whether they can do it or not, the media clearly believe that they can make or destroy any political candidate they choose. They do believe that. They do believe they can make or destroy anybody they choose. Now, they can in one circumstance, and that is if they have been responsible for making that person, then they can destroy that person. If the media has had no role in someone's success, then the odds of the media taking somebody out -- without any evidence, with a bunch of baseless charges -- is practically nil. But if you are the kind of person in entertainment, politics, the field of celebrity, what have you -- if your fame, if your presumed and assumed success owes exclusively to what the media has said about you then you're vulnerable -- they can take you out, like Anthony Weiner.

If you are somebody because the media says you're somebody, not because you really are. If you're Kim Kardashian... If they wanted her they could take her out yesterday and be done with her forever, same thing with Paris Hilton. They don't want to because it's too entertaining, too much fun. Weren't you heartbroken? Seventy-two days! They gave it their all, Kim Kardashian and the substitute basketball player? No, the football player, Reggie Bush. Once he said, "No more," then she found the basketball guy; 72 days, gone. But it was a valiant effort, gave it everything. They had even tried moving. I saw this guy carrying boxes in and out. Well, pictures of it. I wasn't there. (interruption) Where does she come up to on Humphries? (laughing) Well, now, that, if you want to demonstrate that, that could be harassment.

That's much lower on the gesture trajectory than the chin where Kim Kardashian came up to Kris Humphries, the basketball player. Yeah, you might have something there but that's not what Herman Cain did. He went to the chin. So the media: If they make you, they can break you. If they don't make you it's not gonna stop them from trying to break you, but it's gonna be more difficult for them to do so. Now, before the alternative media, there wasn't a question; if they wanted to destroy somebody, it was over. In fact, that's how you made a name for yourself in journalism: Pick out some local level, state level whatever -- pick out somebody -- and destroy 'em. That was a resume enhancement. Especially if they were powerful. They couldn't be Democrat powerful.

You note the treatment Jon Corzine's getting. Jon Corzine is Enron times ten. Jon Corzine, former Senator, former Goldman Sachs CEO, former governor of New Jersey, had his own private financial firm where he basically took money from the firm and put it in his own pocket. It's malfeasance on a near-record level. You know what the Democrats are saying today and the media are saying? "Gee, how could a guy so smart make such a big mistake?" Now, you change his name to "Ken Lay" and Enron, they're gonna drive him to commit suicide. With Corzine, an accredited favorite Democrat, "Gosh, how could such a smart guy make such a mistake?" It wasn't a "mistake." It was a purposeful, willful attempt at breaking the law.

What do you expect from a guy that left New Jersey $8 billion in debt, whatever budget deficit? What do you expect here? At any rate, the media in addition to believing they can take somebody out, they also believe they can make anybody (no matter how unqualified) into a viable candidate -- and we know they can because we see Obama. They took somebody who was not qualified -- he not just unqualified, he was the least qualified. He still is. After three years, he's still the least qualified guy in any room he walks into; but they made him into a viable candidate, even a messiah. You can't doubt that they can do that.

By the same token, if they've made Obama; and if they wanted to take Obama out, they could. They could do it because he is the pure product of the media.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Let's go to the audio sound bites just to... (interruption) What are you carrying? What is that? Oh, good. Stuff just came in, boxes like Christmas. Good, good, good. The Apple stuff? (interruption) Cool. All right.

Let's go to the audio sound bites just to show you the media obsessed with me and defending Herman Cain. You know, the media theme of me and other conservatives defending Herman Cain is that we're racists. We're doing it because we are racist. I kid you not! I don't even understand it. Just like I don't understand that apparently to liberals the chin is a sexual organ. I would love to have that explained or demoed to me, 'cause not even our resident female and sex expert, Bo Snerdley, understands how the chin is a sexual organ. But it is apparently. So from last night and this morning a montage of the media on Herman Cain and me.

WILLIE GEIST: (music) Rush Limbaugh calls the Politico story a quote, "hit job."

MARK HALPERIN: Rush Limbaugh and others out there saying this is an attack on our guy.

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: ...a hit job...

CAROL COSTELLO: Conservatives are coming out in support of him, like Rush Limbaugh.

JOE KLEIN: Rush was in his very high tenor, whiny mode.

SGT. SCHULTZ: Rush Limbaugh is attacking the mainstream media for being racist!

TOURE (NEBLETT): Rush Limbaugh talking about, "We see who the real racists are."

RUSH: That was Toure, the one-name social commentator that appears on NBC now and then. Here's F. Chuck Todd talking with Jamal Simmons on MSNBC this morning.

SIMMONS: I just can't let it pass by that Rush Limbaugh and some of these conservatives are now trying to use race to defend Herman Cain, who is somebody who has so avowedly demeaned the notion of even having race play a part in politics or having anything to do with his candidacy.

TODD: It is interesting. It's sort of like every --

SIMMONS: (chortling)

TODD: You know, these commentariates on the left and right, can we just agree not to play the race card?

SIMMONS: At all! Like, you know, and when you see it played, it is -- it is frustrating.

RUSH: Oh, F. Chuck wants to end playing the case card now! Really? Did I hear that right? F. Chuck's says, "Ah, you know, with the commentariate, it's too easy. We gotta stop playing the race card." That must mean it ain't working for 'em here, or else it means whatever we're doing is effective and they don't like it. And, by the way, just to prove something that I said that's true: Herman Cain has announced this morning that yesterday was his biggest fundraising day ever. Now, you know why? Why do you think that is? Outrage is exactly right. People are fed up with this. It's one-way street! If the media were actually watchdog, if the media were actually going after everybody this way -- if this was standard operating procedure, if they went after anybody who has power or wants power this way -- it would be a different story.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: So Herman Cain announces this morning yesterday was his biggest fundraising day ever. He said this on the Headline News network (which used to be "CNN's Headline News" but it's now just "Headline News." Even Headline News doesn't want to be known as being associated with CNN). He also said that he's not changed his story at all, that he just got the wording right. Now, the media claims that we on the right only like Cain to prove that we aren't racists. That's the theme, that you and I, and anybody else coming to Herman Cain's defense, say, "See? See? See? We're coming to the defense of a black guy, and that means we're not racist like you people always say we are!" That's not what this is about, because we know we're not racists and we're not on a life mission to prove it to anybody.

The real racism in this country exists in the Democrat Party anyway, and it surfaces in an ugly way constantly, frequently, often, as it did during the 2008 presidential campaign. No, this is due strictly to outrage and what is perceived accurately as totally being unfair. "Even if Herman Cain did this," as they say, they still build Bill Clinton up as a hero in the Democrat Party -- and I don't care whatever the worst that's been alleged about Herman Cain is, it doesn't even compare to what we know factually happened with Bill Clinton and a number of women! So the very holier-than-thou reporters on the left who are acting shocked and outraged, "How could this happen in this modern era this kind of blatant sexual harassment?" And trying to destroy Herman Cain? We know that's what they're trying to do.

The very same people put on a hero pedestal William Jefferson Clinton. The lack of fairness is quite obvious. It's nothing more complicated than that. It's actually very simple, and then that leads to outrage. People are willing to defend Herman Cain against the assault on principle because they recognize it for what it is. It's yet another attempt by the State-Controlled Media to determine who our nominee is, to take out our people, pure and simple. We had the sound bite yesterday from October 28th. A Democrat strategerist, Karen Finney (who, I think, at one time was big in the Clinton administration), said, "Republicans are supporting Herman Cain because of his race."

She said, "One of the things about Herman Cain is, I think that he makes the white Republican base of the party feel, 'Okay,' like they're not racist, because they can like this guy. I think he's giving that base a free pass, and I think they like him because they think he's a black man who knows his place. I know that's harsh, but that's how it sure seems to me." She's a member of the Democrat National Committee; and, in fact, that kind of symbolic demonstration -- that kind of show -- is what the Democrats do. So we have another case of projection here. Back to the audio sound bites. This morning on Scarborough's show on MSNBC, Mark Halperin from TIME Magazine is the guest and they discuss all this. Scarborough says, "Do you think Herman Cain's numbers will slightly go up? Why will the numbers go slightly up? What do you think's gonna happen here?"

HALPERIN: What's fueling Herman Cain, what has fueled his rise is an anti-Washington, anti-liberal establishment, uh, rallying around someone. Who the right profile for that sentiment in the party --

BRZEZINSKI: Yeah.

HALPERIN: -- and there's a lot of conservative voices, Rush Limbaugh and others out there saying, "This is an attack on our guy --

BRZEZINSKI: "A hit job!"

HALPERIN: -- because he's rising so much."

RUSH: Well, it's partially because he's rising so much. You know, I'm getting more and more e-mails. It's not even because he's rising so much. I'll tell you what it is. Like I said yesterday -- and please don't doubt me on this. The reason this looks just like Clarence Thomas is because it is; and the reason this looks just like Marco Rubio is because it is; and the reason this looks just like Alberto Gonzalez is because it is. Blacks and Hispanics who rise and achieve to the top their professions as Republicans will not be experimented. They must be taken out. That could only happen in the Democrat Party. Only in the Democrat Party will a black or a minority be allowed, be permitted without fight to appear on the Supreme Court, sit on the Supreme Court, be the attorney general, run to the presidency or what have you.

An achieved independent minority like a Herman Cain or a Clarence Thomas or a Marco Rubio... Just last week the Washington Post tried to destroy Rubio with a multipart hit piece, and they're still at it. Alberto Gonzalez. There's one other Hispanic guy, a brilliant jurist ( I'm having a mental block on who it is) was also nominated by Bush for a prominent position. I'm having a mental block of his name but they took him out, destroyed him. Herman Cain is getting too uppity. The danger is if a black or an Hispanic rises to the top and demonstrates it can happen with conservative principles as the juice: self-reliance, hard work, conservative values, all those things. If you can get there without the Democrat Party putting you there or helping you to get there, you represent the biggest threat the Democrat Party has.

That's why Clarence Thomas had to be taken out: He got where he got without one bit of assistance in the Democrat Party and the left, and as such nothing they could do. They didn't own him when he got there. They didn't control him when he got there. They're not gonna permit Herman Cain to keep this up, and I really don't want you to doubt me on this. This may sound simplistic or maybe not even possible. "The Democrats don't think that way, Rush. Really." They do. The Democrat Party and liberalism is built on a series of lies, and anything that exposes the lies -- particularly exposes them brightly -- has got to be dealt with. So Herman Cain has become the enemy of the moment. Actually this is last night, sound bite five. This is a full sound bite from the TIME Magazine contributor and I guess he works at MSNBC, Toure, about the Republican primary and Herman Cain, and Lawrence O'Donnell, the host of the show said, "Toure, there's just this blender of Republican racial politics has gotten mixed up together. I can't make any sense of it. Guide us through this."

TOURE: Well, one thing I see -- saw Rush Limbaugh talking about we see who the real racists are and Clarence Thomas is using that same sort of bazooka to fire back -- is that when we point out moments of racism or moments of minstrelsy in Herman Cain's, uhhh, example they just fire back and they use the word "racism." That's racist! You're racist, so it becomes this sort of negating tool that we'll just say "racism" wherever we see any racial politics taking place -- we'll say the race card is being played any time somebody points out a moment of racism -- and that just sort of muddles the conversation to where a lot of people are like, "I don't want to be part of this at all."

RUSH: Okay, now, that's Toure on MSNBC, where the motto is, "Resist We Much," and he's a stand-alone commentator. Lawrence O'Donnell says, "Please, break this down for us and explain it to us." Did any of you understand what Toure was saying? What is he saying? What was he saying? Because I know what he was trying to say. What he was trying to say is, "They are stealing our technique. They're stealing our technique, and they're muddying the waters by using our technique. We're the ones who have exclusive right to the race card! We are the ones who get to decide who's racist and who isn't, and when guys like Limbaugh come along and call us racists, why, that just muddies the water and makes everybody want to forget all this and leave.

"We own it! We own who's a racist and who isn't. Limbaugh can't do that. Limbaugh and these others come along and say we're being racist? We own that ploy!" (interruption) Why what? Why what now? Oh, because they haven't taken him out. The reason they're reacting and the reason they getting upset, they really thought that last night it was the end of it! They really thought Herman Cain was gonna be finished by last night. (interruption) Snerdley, you ask me these questions and I have to answer them since you ask them. I'm very uncomfortable answering this but they're still ticked off that I'm a factor. What they're really mad at here is that somebody or a group of people on our side in the media could maybe save whoever it is they go out to destroy.

So they seek in this case Herman Cain. "Okay, we're gonna take Herman Cain out," and we get our dander up and we put a stop to it or slow them down that's gonna make 'em mad, too, pure and simply is. And then if we, in their perverted eyes, steal one of their techniques (i.e., playing the race card or accusing the race card of being played), then they really get ticked off, and that's what Toure was saying here. "Well, they just fire back, and they just use the word 'racism.' That's racist, you're racist." That's right, Toure! For 23 years we've been hearing it. Maybe not from you, but people all over your side of the aisle. For twenty-three years I'm a "racist;" and I'm not, never have been. You guys are. We say it. You don't like it. Yeah. Exactly. They used it on one of their own and we caught it and pointed it out, but that 2008 presidential campaign was rife with racism on the Democrat side.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:  It was Miguel Estrada that I was thinking of, another Hispanic conservative Republican who was destroyed at the very mention of his name being nominated to a high judicial post.  Alberto Gonzales, you name it.  Folks, it's undeniable.  It is what it is.  Now, I got a note from a friend of mine paying attention to all of this and all of this reporting, particularly about sexual harassment and what it is and how it's evolved into a political tool of the left.  He said: This whole thing is complete fabricated BS, Rush.  Let's look at it.  Politico is a leftist site.  Sexual harassment is a leftist BS piece of social engineering that attempts to regulate against the grain of human nature, exactly like feminism.  Feminism attempts to regulate against the grain of human nature, and by extension, so does sexual harassment.  They are inextricably tied together, sexual harassment and feminism, and they are both attempts to change the direction of basic human nature. 

Sexual harassment, most people cannot even explain the parameters of it.  Legal settlements, when it comes to sexual harassment, often have little to do with guilt.  They come with confidentiality provisions that make it impossible for somebody to defend himself without risk of breaching the agreement and reopening the whole prohibitively expensive episode.  So the disgrace here is that our people paid any attention to this at all.  Now, my friend sending me the note says, "I'm not a huge Cain fan, Rush.  The only story here should be how the media treated this nonsense versus the real transgressions, perhaps even crimes of Bill Clinton and John Edwards."  And that is exactly right.  It's a point that we made yesterday.  Clinton and Edwards.  How could they be so silly? How could they be so stupid while we go to every length we can to defend them?  And here you've got nothing in comparison.  Here's Maude Behar on her show, The View.

BEHAR:  Rush Limbaugh, he says this is an unconscionable racially stereotyped attack, okay?  Remember when he called President Obama "Barack the 'Magic Negro'"?  This man is the biggest hypocrite.  Who listens to this guy?

RUSH:  Everybody, Maude, everybody listens to this program.  I did not come up with the name.  This song explains how it all happened. 

(playing of "Barack the 'Magic Negro'") 

RUSH:  You see, Reverend Sharpton couldn't even stick to the lyric line.  He starts protesting.  The group still sings. 

(continued playing of song) 

RUSH: So Maude Behar says that I called President Obama the "Magic Negro."  In fact, ladies and gentlemen, "Magic Negro" has its own Wikipedia entry, and what they say is that African-American filmmaker Spike Lee popularized the term in 2001, and then they say usage of the title "Obama the 'Magic Negro'" by David Ehrenstein, Los Angeles Times column inspired this, so Wikipedia gets it right.

END TRANSCRIPT

Boston Dynamics is Awesome.

I've been coming across videos of the work of Boston Dynamics over the last few years. They're robot builders working for DARPA and have developed some every interesting prototypes. First up is Big Dog, the robot reincarnation of the Army mule.

As with all these toys range will be a problem, not to mention river crossings. Over at Wikipedia they reference the continuing use of mules for transport in Afghanistan, giving the company a metric to work for. I seem to remember that during the Civil War a balance had to be achieved between the need of wagon trains to carry their own forage, balanced against payload. What will be the electronic equivalent? 

I just finished reading the Small Wars Manual that was compiled by the Marines in 1940. Dependence on mules in America's small wars of the twentieth century is given through coverage. I'll return to this subject when I do a book report in future. Here's the Ninth Cavalry, in an engraving from a Fredrick Remington illustration. Today they fly scout helicopters, but during the Indian Wars on the northern plains it was horses and mules.

Next up is their Petman, a biped that's the great grand dad of R. Daneel Olivaw. Another beast of burden now, but soon?

Sitting around the Thanksgiving table in 2000 my Mom marveled that we had come this far, all our lives the year 2000 was a number science fiction writers played with. Well Mom, here we are. JimG33

Roly-Poly ducks the question. Who are the 1%?

The Fat Boy does what he does best, runs away when the questioning gets too hot, or even warm. All I ask is bringing a law suit for unpaid profits on a piece of work you've already made millions on a species of greed? And where is the board that will, in the words of G. B. Shaw call on you to justify your life. Or, for that matter, define and quantify what is, and is not greed?

Ah yes, just as in the days of whaling we shall render the "400" down for their financial blubber. JimG33