On occasion, I consolidate comments I’d attempted to post in response to articles appearing recently on Yahoo News. I share my comments with you here hoping to reach an audience immune from Yahoo’s periodic attempts to block or censor. My posts are written as if I actually were the US President. As is my usual custom, if I open with a quoted item, that’s from the article itself.
I hope you enjoy all 26 of these mini-essays.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
ONE:
Mitt Romney will pick up the phone at 3:05 AM, 5 minutes after he gets his first 3 AM call to action, and ask the LDS president (Romney's pope), "What should I do about this situation? Can you ask for a revelation from God to help me out here?"
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“And this is exactly the kind of commercial which, if made by Obama’s SuperPac, will help sink Romney.”
TWO:
Personally? I think their missile disintegrated with a little help from Uncle Sam's secret weapons. I do worry, though, how Kim is painting himself into a corner. How many times will he be able to bluster and threaten until even his own people stop believing their demi-god?
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"All Kim wants is attention. DON'T GIVE IT TO HIM. Respond with total silence."
THREE:
[RE: US funding of Israel's Iron Dome shield.]
“[appropriate] level of funding from Congress to help expand the system...” The “appropriate level of funding” is zero dollars & zero cents.
“…Obama's budget [is] part of a 10-year, $30 billion U.S. commitment to the Jewish state's security.” The Israelis can take care of themselves, without any help from us.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“If I am elected in 2012, I won’t sign any bill into law giving Israel (or Egypt) one red cent.”
Clark S posted in response: “I think chances are about equal of you getting elected President and Israel not getting one red cent.’
Clark S:
I understand your sentiment. However, it would be more accurate to say: “The chances of me getting elected President are far greater than any chance Israel (and Egypt!) will be cut off from their annual US welfare entitlements.” [That’s supposed to get your dander up, all you red-blooded Americans.]
As for my candidacy: I compare myself to the little boy who saw that the emperor was naked and shouted that out in public, causing the people to finally wake up and start laughing.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Any fool in this country can say he’s running for office, but it takes a wise man to say so, knowing he can’t win while being aware that he has a very real chance of waking up enough people to stop this madness.”
FOUR:
As for all you Second Amendment worshippers out there: It phased itself out of existence. If it had simply said, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” that could stand for all time. However, the Second is the only Amendment that gave a reason for its authority. Once the reason is gone, so is the basis of its authority, and (therefore) the Amendment becomes self-invalidated.
To quote: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
Our security does not in any degree depend on any kind of militia (the word “necessary” not being applicable at all), let alone a “well regulated” one (whatever that means). The original intent of “the security of a free state” provision was that the state be free from the threat of slave revolts – take note that the word “security” was used instead of “independence” (as would be logical in the case of external threats). In this day and age, the Second is irrelevant and should be considered self-stricken from the Constitution.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“If the gun lovers want guns, then let them advocate in favor of an amendment without the Second’s fatal sunset wording.”
Robert S replied: “since when do amendments become self-invalidated?”
@ Robert S:
They become invalidated by force of logic as applied to their actual wording. I’m what Sarah Palin might call, one who gives a commonsense interpretation to the Constitution; no sophistry allowed. More to the point – why didn’t the Founding Fathers simply write, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?”
A Yahoo! User posted: “Supreme court already ruled. You’re wrong.”
@ A Yahoo!User:
The Supreme Court might well have ruled, but that hardly makes me wrong.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I believe in using a plain English approach to understanding the law; anything else is just convolution meant to deny our power of self-governance.”
FIVE:
“…new sanctions would do nothing to help resolve the situation.” Actually, quite the opposite will work wonders to “resolve the situation” – namely, totally ignore North Korea. No more aid, no more UN/US warnings, no more 6-party talks, no more denunciations from the Oval Office or its spokesmen. Obama should order our military officers to not even mention NK or its doings.
Kim Dong Dung obviously relishes attention; the appearance of playing on an equal field with the big boys. Deny him that attention and the resultant increase of stature among his subjects, and he’ll soon be history.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“After a while, all of the slaves of the regime might start wondering, ‘When will the demi god make manna fall from heaven?’”
SIX:
“[Marco Rubio] would provide cover for Romney from the right…” And that’s a good thing?? That might satisfy the Pubber base but the rest of us would react: “We’ve had a belly full of Right Wing enough to last us for quite awhile, thank you very much. Time to move on.” And besides, Rubio isn’t really that bright. Have you checked out his website? The man’s a good-looking moron, and we surely don’t elect those, right?
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"No one's going to care who Money[R] picks as his running mate because no one cares about Money[R]."
SEVEN:
[Title of source article: “Experts say Zimmerman attorney made smart move”]
This sentence appears in the probable cause affidavit: “Zimmerman confronted Martin and a struggle ensued.” If, however, the investigator says, in effect, that he doesn’t know who confronted whom, where’s the probable cause? Shouldn't the whole case be thrown out on that basis alone? Of course it could be argued that even though the investigator said he didn’t “know,” there’s still room to argue that circumstantially there’s “probable cause” to believe that this stalker was up to no good.
As for “smart moves,” I’d like to see the prosecutor prepare a videotape with actors to show several plausible scenarios as to what went down, challenging the defense to do the same. I’m mystified how Zimm was getting his head based while Tray was trying to smother him. And how did Zimm get to his gun if Tray was straddling him?
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“There’s enough time for both sides to come up with smart moves. We’ll see. And I still insist on total opposition to the death penalty in the US, no matter what the crime.”
EIGHT:
“…let the states again consider this issue state by state," State by state? If only a handful of states decided to legalize abortion, women in the other states would have to go to those states if they wanted that option. So, Mitt, how does that contribute to having a UNITED States? Of course, folks in the 1% won’t have to worry, even if abortion were to be outlawed in every state. They’d simply go overseas, which is one nifty way to dodge the intent of the law. Of course Mitt would be OK with that, in the name of defending the rights of the 1%.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“The reason Mitt wants to let the states decide: He doesn’t want to take a stand on having a uniform national standard. That would require [dramatic pause] leadership.”
NINE:
I often wonder why certain people manage to find themselves so much in the public eye. I think of George Will as the Kim Kardashian of the talking heads set: Famous for being famous, omnipresent, and shallow. I know, I know...George fits the description of scholarly intellectual but, truth be told, he's not the sharpest knife in the drawer. There's a difference between being wise and being glib. George is foisted upon us because the Elite find him to be a useful tool.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"I think I'll dub him George 'the Kard' Will."
Mark replied, “Don't belittle knowledge, don't celebrate ignorance. I don't usually agree with Will, but not because what he says and writes isn't' well thought out, well said, or well written.”
Mark,
What you say of Will ("well thought out, well said, ... well written") can be said of any moderately skillful propagandist. My point is: With so many millions of really intelligent (and unsung) people in this country, why is it that only a select few get mass exposure? Face it, we've become too accustomed to being spoon fed by opinion makers (and they're called that for a reason) to really have much perspective left any more.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"My question isn't rhetorical, by the way."
TEN:
We ARE a tribal society. Whoever could possibly doubt that? We stick with what is familiar – we’re programmed that way. And the programming has been very thorough indeed. I fully expect that Jeb Bush will not only run for President someday, but that he’ll win. And he’ll owe much of his success to Obama, who labored so mightily to follow Dubya’s policies in the Middle East. [Side note: I knew Obama would dig us deeper in Afghanistan before his candidacy was 6 months old. So much for the peace candidate.]
As for Romney’s veep pick: Neither Ryan nor Jindal are ready for prime time. As for George “the Kardashian” Will’s thoughts on Ryan debating Biden – that’s when we’ll see just how NOT ready for prime time Ryan really is. If Romney picks someone with too much consistency of principles, he’ll make Romney look as wishy-washy as he really is. Romney’s pickings for veep are about as slim as the GOP’s pickings for Prez. Funny how that works.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Where do they find these people?”
ELEVEN:
[My response to an article with this headline: “Veteran Utah senator appears set to survive Tea Party challenge”]
In a similar article on Hatch, this appeared: “…promoting [Orrin Hatch’s] potential ascension to the chairmanship of the Senate Finance Committee…”
So here we have it: Orrin Hatch is promoting his candidacy based on the prospect that he shall have more power than most other senators, which presumably would put Utah on a greater-than-equal status compared to other states. That’s called the Seniority System. However, that runs afoul of Article V of the US Constitution: “…no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.” [Ah, the Constitution! Who needs it, right?]
If Hatch gets more power by virtue of having been reelected more than his “peers,” those peers would be denied their “equal suffrage in the Senate.” And please don't give me that rap about all states having equal suffrage because they each have two senators. What good does it do to have as many senators as another state if your senators are worth (say) half of what an Orrin Hatch is? To me, "equal suffrage" means all senators should have equal power - you know, as in one-man, one-vote.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Of course, none of the states bothers to withhold its consent for the same reason the unconstitutional filibuster system is tolerated: They are all willing to play under unconstitutional rules, hoping to garner more power for themselves someday or to hold onto it if they’ve already got it.”
TWELVE:
I posted the next item based on an article containing this:"Two brothers accused of beating a black teenager while patrolling an Orthodox Jewish neighborhood are set to go on trial Monday in a case with similarities to the Trayvon Martin shooting. The brothers, who are white and Jewish, have claimed self-defense, saying the teen was holding a nail-studded board."
These two Jewish Nazis were just practicing for when they’ll have to bust heads in illegal West Bank settlements someday. Or maybe they think of their neighborhood as just such a settlement. Whatever else, they can’t be considered Jews, simply because of the commandment to love the stranger. They did not love the stranger; they beat the crap out of him. And they left him without even thinking of calling an ambulance. Maybe it was self-defense (at least in their minds), but that’s no excuse to leave a fallen human being. Way to love the stranger, guys!
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“These guys were way more into the tribal aspect of their identity than the religious. No doubt about it.”
its me replied: "Jewish Nazis"?????? Just when I thought I couldn't read anymore stupid crap in these comments, you come along.”
Come now, Its Me, the term "Jewish Nazis" has been around a long time. It's not all that unusual for persecuted/abused people to become persecutors/abusers. For instance, a lot of child molesters had been molested as children. I've seen Jewish Nazism at work - we all have - and it's not pretty, and it has nothing to do with the pure, beautiful spirit of Judaism.
Think about this: God says of the Jews that they are to be a light among nations. Can anyone really say modern Israel is that light? My message to the Jews: Lose the siege mentality, stand up straight, and be the example your Lord said you should be. The world is waiting. I say this as a Buddhist friend.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"If the shoe fits, wear it."
THIRTEEN:
A couple of things I don’t understand about the [North Korean] military:
Why does every photo of their military brass show these pitifully wimpy looking old men, each with a chestful of medals? Don’t you have to do stuff to earn medals or is there a seniority system at work?
Why does every photo of their rank and file military show them in nice clean unsoiled uniforms? Apparently they don’t know how to get down and dirty.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Kim’s threats aren’t just unbelievable; they’re laughable.”
FOURTEEN:
The Democrats are stuck with Obama? More accurately, they were stuck with the Party of No, and are stuck with Romney. The GOP doesn't really want Money[R], but there wasn't any single alternative whom they wanted more. Unfortunately, that's often how the process of elimination works.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"I doubt Jesus could have done better than Obama, if He had the Party of No to work with. They would have been the first to deny Him."
FIFTEEN:
And why does this photo [of George Zimmerman’s bloodied head] appear so long after the event? And what of Zimmerman's contention that his head was being bashed and that Trayvon was trying to smother him? Say what?
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"I don't see how the cops didn't bring him to a hospital immediately, considering this was a head wound. An on-the-spot quickie paramedic treatment seems downright negligent."
SIXTEEN:
I respond to an article with this headline: “Did Los Angeles Times make right call on photos of dead Afghans?” [with whom US troops were mockingly posing].
“…If even one life is lost as a result of these photos, it is an appalling and thoroughly preventable tragedy.” That’s one, albeit, disingenuous way of looking at it. But there’s a more honest way – one which will actually save US lives.
By showing these pictures, that took a lot away from the spin meisters. So, instead of being tempted to lie about or minimize what these soldiers did, command will be forced to get its [shit] together and come down hard on whomever engages in such behavior. Orders are orders, so if the field troops are ordered to “cease and desist,” they better listen up or face hard time or a discharge. Failure to obey such orders would, in effect, be an instance of disobedient troops putting their comrades at risk.
“Whew! I’m glad no one trotted out the treason card on this one – I always thought that bit about giving aid and comfort to the enemy (as a definition of treason) was (well) unconstitutionally vague.”
SEVENTEEN:
“…the 100th anniversary Sunday of the ‘Day of the Sun’…” Don’t they mean, “the Day of the SON?” That would be a far better description of this inheritable throne.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“The best response to any demands from [North Korea] would be stone cold silence.”
EIGHTEEN:
This point, posted by someone else, got 2193 thumbs-up and 52 thumbs-down: “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”
My counterpoint got 68 ups and 31 downs: “When government fears the people, it turns us against ourselves.”
NINETEEN:
[Article’s title: Photos of U.S. soldiers posing with bodies of Afghan suicide bombers spark military investigation.]
“Gen. John Allen…said the incident ‘represents…soldiers who have acted out of ignorance and unfamiliarity with U.S. Army values.’” General Allen says troops under his command are ignorant and unfamiliar? Well, General, whom do we blame for their lack of training? Does the buck stop with you and you admit this is your fault and…you apologize? Naw, I didn’t think so.
When I was in the service, I became familiar with one of our most profound military values: “If you can get away with it, do it but don’t get caught. And if you get caught, lie like hell.”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“These soldiers, far from being an aberration, were perfect examples of the if-you-can-get-away-with-it value system.”
TWENTY:
The real reason the Secret Service wants to talk to Ted Nougat [aka Ted Nugent] is to get close to his groupies. Looks like Nougat took that journey to the center of the mind a bit too seriously, in which he sang, “You might not come back.”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I’m sure you can work things out with the SS.”
“I’m sure you can work things out with the SS.”
TWENTY-ONE:
More precisely, we pretend to be a constitutional republic. What else can you call a country that ignores its own constitution? Case in point: The Senate, solely on its own authority, has a filibuster rule which is undemocratic and unconstitutional. It denies equal suffrage in the Senate, which is in the Constitution, and it denies the principle of one man, one vote.
Point of interest: People who actually bother read the Constitution to see how new states come into being are amazed to find that West Virginia and Maine were unconstitutionally admitted to the union.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“So, please, we're not really a constitutional republic, and I'm tired of ignorant people who mindlessly parrot that line."
TWENTY-TWO:
Steve,
True, we don’t live in a democracy – certainly not such as practiced in ancient Athens. But when most people say “we live in a democracy,” what they’re trying (albeit imperfectly) to say is, “we live in a country in which the will of the people has significant importance.”
As for your second point - we DON'T live in a “constitutional republic,” since our Constitution has been ignored or interpreted to a point of meaninglessness. For instance, the Executive Branch was never meant to have so much power; the Senate was never intended to violate the basic concept of equal representation (read, the filibuster rule, which is NOT in the Constitution at all); the dominance of a party system not mentioned at all in the Constitution; and the fact that we have two states that gained statehood unconstitutionally – West Virginia and Maine.
About that last: The Constitution says “…no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state…” WVA was carved out of VA; and Maine was once part of Massachusetts.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“So much for the constitutional republic scam.”
“So much for the constitutional republic scam.”
TWENTY-THREE:
It won’t matter who becomes our next president. Whoever that is will have to deal with Congress, which is hopelessly locked into the Two Party Duopoly. How on earth could one independent – even though he be POTUS – hope to overcome those odds? That’s always been my beef with Ron Paul supporters – and even with Ron Paul himself. Ron never sounded Gideon’s trumpet for people to rally behind him and vote all Dem/Pub Congressmen out of office. He himself is hopelessly locked into Two Party thinking.
There is really only one practical approach to dealing with this problem: We have to vote against all incumbents. The only reason Congress is so arrogant is job security. There are so many “safe seats,” with the others being traded back and forth as a means of venting public anger, that independents (read: those not beholden to lobbyists or party bosses) are effectively locked out. It will take a lot of work to change people’s minds, for it’s hard to break out of Brand X vs. Brand Y thinking. But it can be done.
And it’s the only real option we have. If you are uncomfortable with voting against the incumbent (‘I hate the GOP, so why should I vote for a Pubber?’), think of it this way: If the Pubber wins, next time vote against him because then he’ll be the incumbent. In that context, you wouldn’t be voting for a Pubber but against the deck which is so badly stacked against us.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Folks, there really isn’t any other way.”
TWENTY-FOUR:
RE: An article about increased military presence in the Arctic as its ice melts
This sounds like another excuse to further bloat the military budget. However, the money spent there would be better spent trying to figure out how to save our coastal cities which will be underwater if the polar ice melts.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"We spend an awful lot of time finding new enemies to fear."
TWENTY-FIVE:
When I ran against Obama in 2008 (as a completely unknown, independent candidate), I promised to return Guantanamo to the Cubans, if elected. That was in my written contract, which mandated that I forfeit the presidency should I violate any of my 47-promises.
And this is something POTUS can do by himself, without the approval of Congress. Our treaty with Cuba mandates that Guantanamo’s status can only change if both countries agree to that or if the US were to “abandon” Guantanamo. Guess what! As POTUS (and, therefore, as CINC), all I’d have to do is order all the troops home. That would allow Gitmo to revert to occupation by the Cubans. And why not? This same treaty recognizes Cuban sovereignty over that bit of land anyway.
This single gesture would have done much to enhance our prestige south of the border, among those who think we’re only narcissistic imperialists. But, no, you got Obama instead. And looks like you’ve got him for four more years. Cry me a river.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“BTW, that embargo is in violation of international law, and it’s time to stop that too.”
TWENTY-SIX:
[This is in regard to a recent missile test launch by India.]
“‘The nation stands tall today,’ [Indian] Defense Minister A.K. Antony said…” And China is laughing at that statement because it can say, “You won’t stand very tall when we cut off your water supply.” Yup, the source of India’s major rivers happens to be in [dramatic pause] Tibet. What’s India going to do when China diverts those waters to its own increasingly thirsty population? Launch a nuke? Sorry, that won’t work.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“India could really scare China by threatening to launch a 1.5 ton ‘warhead’ containing millions of bedbugs. Eww!”
V from New Delhi decided to get cute by responding: “Rivers in Tibet? (dramatic pause) ROFLMFAO.”
TO: V in New Delhi, India:
This is from India Today’s article from the New Delhi bureau, dated March 2, 2012:
“In November 2010, China began damning the Brahmaputra [ever hear of it?] in Tibet at Zangmu. …Rising water shortage in northern and western China prompted Beijing to draw up a plan to tap the Tibetan rivers in the south. And, diverting water from Tibet directly impacts India.“
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“You can laugh all you want, but policy analysts in DC and your hometown are taking this very seriously.”
V from New Delhi takes another shot:
So where are these rivers(plural)? You are talking of one river the Brahmaputra and the dam is a "run of the river" type dam that won't affect water significantly as China has assured India and that is exactly why India needs credible deterrence, If the Chinese decide not to honour international convention on sharing river waters with downstream countries. I don't know India's strategic targets in China, but I’m sure they wouldn't want to lose their three gorges dam either.
V,
Ah, I can see we’re making some progress. At first, you were “LMFAO,” but now you own up to the Brahmaputra. Frankly, I don’t care which of your body parts you want to laugh off, but at this point, I’m going to insist you do your own research. It’s your country, so your duty bound to read up on how serious this is.
As for Three Gorges, I’m sure the Chinese have already figured that out as an Indian target. Sounds to me like you’re pretty sure India would be willing to drown millions of civilians over the water issue. So I guess you’re taking this more seriously than you’re letting on.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“In any event, should India attack 3 Gorges, Chinese retribution would be terrible.”
RH,
If you take the time to read the following article, I’m sure you’d change your verdict to “…loss of water would be catastrophic to India.” I direct you to Vol. 64, No. 2, Spring/Summer 2011 issue of the Journal of International Affairs published by Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs: “Assessing the Sino-Indian Water Dispute,” by Jonathan Holslag.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“The threats to India, above and beyond water wars considerations, are enormous, being surrounded as it is by hostile states, which China is actively courting.”
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party
“It won’t matter who will become the next US President, since a man-made apocalypse will be unleashed upon the entire world within the next five years.”
