Thursday, May 24, 2012

Yahoo News Periodic Updates, May 24, 2012

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 34 of these mini-essays.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


ONE:

Romney doesn’t have to knock himself out to gain the active, energized volunteerism of Christian conservatives. All he has to do is count on the Almighty to whisper in their ears as they pray, “Listen up, chump. If you don’t light a fire under your butt for Mitt, I’ll go all Old Testament on you – angry God and all.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Yesiree, Bob. God will tell his flock what to do, so what’s to worry about?”



TWO:

“Trayvon Martin was shot through the heart at close range.” If that’s true and if Tray was on top of Zimm when that happened, why wasn’t Zimm sprayed with a fountain of Tray’s blood? Both sides would do well to present their version of events as rendered by computer animators.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Or maybe one side wouldn’t do as well…”



THREE:

“…market unrest fuelled by the euro zone debt crisis could last another year or two.” This is what politicians peddle to the rubes who vote for them. This is the beginning of the end, ladies and gentlemen, for Greece will go its separate way and, moreover, will make serious noises about not repaying a dime of its bailout money.

Of course, there will be an unpublicized summit. The Greeks will tell the Germans:

Give us some serious help in terms of investing in our economy and building German factories here. We can’t stabilize our economy without your outside help, and we refuse to die a slow death waiting for some kind of miracle. If you won’t help us, we’ll publicly disavow our indebtedness. Then you’ll find how just how “strong” the euro is after the ripple effect knocks down Spain and Italy.

As for us? We’ll go into hyper-austerity mode, allowing our poorer citizens to live in government buildings and declaring low ceilings on rent. Somehow, we’ll make it. But you won’t – at least, not in the style to which you’ve become accustomed. Think about it.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Such a Greek threat – stated or implied – sounds like major league leveraging to me.”



FOUR:

Extinction [of Japan to occur] in 1,000 years? We (as in “all of us”) won’t have anywhere near that long at the rate we’re going. My best guess: Civilized life as we know it will cease to exist within five years. And the apocalypse will be induced by the Elite.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“This really is a war of the .001 of 1% against everybody else. They surely look at it that way.”



FIVE:

What a scam. We don’t intend to leave Afghanistan any time soon. If Obama wins, that buys our occupation force four more years.  After that? You think the Pubbers, if elected, will leave? If Obama loses, Romney will keep our forces in place “indefinitely” – another way of saying, “depending on the situation on the ground, as ascertained by our generals.”

When I ran against Obama and McCain as a totally unknown independent, I put this in my written contract:  “Within 90 days of my inauguration, all U.S. military forces will be completely withdrawn from Iraq and Afghanistan, regardless of the ‘situation on the ground.’ This withdrawal also applies to any covert operatives currently operating in Iran.”

I’m proud of the fact that I am the only candidate for US President, in the entire history of this country, to have offered a written, enforceable contract to the voters, which contained my campaign promises.  Were I to violate any of those promises, I’d forfeit my office (and that, too, is in my current contract).

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“And we’re still in Afghanistan – how’s that for change you can believe in?”



SIX:

Article: EU carries out first strikes on Somali pirates [“against pirate targets on shore.”]

“The EU is the main donor to the Somali transitional government.” “Main donor,” you say? We’re not talking “donor” status here; we’re talking “investor” status. An EU drowning in debt with a sluggish economy is desperate for a way out. Africa is that way out.

Look forward to an increased “presence” and future “operations” there. All in the name of stabilizing Africa against threats such as Joseph Kony. It won’t take long before the EU and US transition from subtle measures to a bald-face land and resources grab. And all under the stewardship of a black US president. How ironic!

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I wish Africa would rise with one united voice and order all foreigners out.”



SEVEN:

I had a dream. Obama was standing in Madison Square Garden speaking [about his support for same-sex marriage] in front of thousands of ministers, who at first listened politely. But then one stood up and shouted, “Leviticus!” Another shouted, “Abomination.” Then a third, “Obamination.” That one caught on, and soon all were chanting, “Obamination! Obamination!”

Personally? I think God doesn’t care one way or the other. This whole Leviticus stuff was very much a man-made invention which probably goes back as far as Abraham himself.

I AM an angry God…

I AM a jealous God…

I AM…Abraham!

Any questions?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Let’s take a vote: It’s all Abraham’s fault.”



EIGHT:

[My response to an article on the Senate blocking a vote that would have extended the current low 3.4 % interest rate on Stafford student loans.]


If Obama wanted to “go nuclear” because the GOP blocked this vote, he could instruct the Justice Department to bring the Senate to court for the unconstitutional filibuster. And, yes, it is unconstitutional, being a big, fat, pink elephant in the living room nobody talks about.

The filibuster is unconstitutional because it violates the Seventeenth Amendment: “…each Senator shall have one vote.” That means that each senator’s vote must be equal in weight to any other senator’s vote; allowing for minority cliques to block votes denies this equality. And that segues to the larger concept of “one man, one vote.” Obama could really energize his base by tackling this archaic, undemocratic device.

Say, do you suppose the Tea Party would support an attack on the filibuster? Naw, I didn’t think so.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Tea Party is very selective in what it considers constitutional.”



NINE:

Obama’s “coming out” on gay marriage will prove to be a political masterstroke. For one thing, he has the benefit of supporting a position that could not become a national reality short of a constitutional amendment. And that’s not going to happen.

“…the [US Supreme Court] justices in 2003 struck down state anti-sodomy laws as an improper intrusion on private activity.” What about striking down laws (or even state constitutional amendments) that seek to be an “improper intrusion on the ability of private parties to form their own [marital] contracts?

A House divided against itself cannot stand. You cannot have half of the states opposing gay marriage and the other half in support. Sooner or later, one way or another, we’re going to have to have national consistency on this issue.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“There was a time, as late as 1965, in which most states had anti-miscegenation laws on their books. That changed, as will the anti-gay marriage laws.”



TEN:

Also in this speech, Money[R] said, “The best advice I know is to give those worldly things your best but never your all…” Hmm…maybe he should have said, “The best advice I know is to give your best to God, though of course He did put us on this earth to enjoy its bounty. Therefore, there’s nothing evil in material pursuits.”

Personally? I believe we should each give our best efforts to live up to our own moral imperatives – whether or not that involves “God.” In case it doesn’t, I’m sure He wouldn’t mind. In fact, He’ll get angriest at those who pretend to act in His name.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Long ago, it must have occurred to Mitt that his religion is in error; but he’s trying his personal best to be moral anyway.”



ELEVEN:

The GOP will knock itself out trying to beat up the President over something he can’t enact [a law allowing gay marriage]. And that will make people forget the other, far more important stuff: How he snookered us deeper in Afghanistan, ObamaCare, a stubborn economy, no major legislative achievements, and legislative gridlock.

He’ll also gain by (finally!) looking decisive – like a man of principle unafraid of taking a chance. That will help to overcome a sense that he’s aloof and wishy-washy. If I were Romney, I would absolutely not make this an issue. If he does, he’ll find out what a Tar Baby he’s tangled with. I'm referring, of course, to the issue, not to Obama.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Memo to Romney: Think large, not petty.”



TWELVE:

Of course the GOP is uncomfortable about Obama’s support of same-sex marriage. A lot of them are opposed to, not only the end result of Obama’s “evolving” position, but to evolution in general.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Birds of a feather…lose elections together.”



THIRTEEN:

Air Force 1 is the president’s private jet, in a virtual kind of way. As for soldiers “fighting on my behalf,” that’s exactly right. Every war we’ve been in during my 60 years on this planet has been a One Man War. If Obama wanted to pull us out of Iraq and Afghanistan immediately upon his inauguration, he could have done so without Congressional approval. As soon as he was sworn in, those wars were his.

In fact, we would not have invaded Iraq were it not for the desire of one man to do so – Dubya Bush. The way we conduct ourselves, war is the sole prerogative of our One Man Branch. And, please, don’t give me any jive about “checks and balances.”

“We…live in a country where presidents don't conduct themselves like kings…” And why shouldn’t they conduct themselves as kings? They’ve always had a kingly aspect attached to their offices. I mean, we’re supposed to have three co-equal branches of government, but no one thinks it odd that the Executive Branch is a One Man Branch. And no one seems to mind that the presidency has only gained power (at the expense of us and the Congress), especially since WWII.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
We love our king, but only as long as we don’t have to call him Your Majesty or bow to him; although all the other trappings are there.”


FOURTEEN:

“…[Obama] hasn't kept his promise to close the military prison at Guantanamo Bay…” Hah! That’s a good one. Back in 2007, I was a completely unknown third party candidate running against Obama & McCain. According to my innovative written contract:  “Within 90 days of my inauguration, I will order all US personnel out of all facilities located at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. This will allow Cuba to reoccupy that land, as is its sovereign right.”

My promise about Gitmo was in writing – along with dozens of others which (each of which had I not fulfilled) would have caused me to forfeit the presidency. (sigh) But lamestream media was far more interested in glorifying rock star Obama than me – the only presidential candidate in US history with a written, enforceable electoral contract.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“How’s that rock star Obama thing working for you now?”



FIFTEEN:

[Here are two of my responses to a poster who challenged me on FOURTEEN (above).]


Hey Baby Spittle,

According to our treaty with the Cuban government, there are two ways for Gitmo to revert to Cuban occupation: 1) If both governments agree, 2) if the US abandons Gitmo. As CINC, all I would have to do is order all the personnel home (which I can do without Congressional approval)  – thereby abandoning Gitmo. There’s no need to “fund gitmo’s closing” – we simply leave.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I can always count on at least one ignoramus to show off his stupidity – thanks for stepping up to the plate on this one, Baby.”



Baby Spit,

It doesn’t matter what Congress wants when it comes to moving the troops. The prez is the CINC. If he wants to totally withdraw from Gitmo, he can do so while abandoning all of our infrastructure there.  That might be where Congress has an arguable point about funding to enable systematic and orderly withdrawal, including decommissioning or removing the infrastructure. I would bypass Congress on that point, simply ordering all personnel to leave.

Now, if Congress were to object, I would say, “Fine, then fund for an orderly and systematic withdrawal. If you don’t want to do that, then I can claim to have the mandate of the American people on my side since they elected me based on my contractual promise to (among other things) abandon Gitmo.” Baby Spit, try to think outside the box a little bit instead of mindlessly quoting conventional wisdom.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Oh, BTW, you might want a different handle than ‘Baby Spit’ – kind of hard to take you seriously with that. Just saying.”



SIXTEEN:

“Lynn also rejected the suggestion that Romney has repressed the memory [of forcefully cutting off that kid's hair when they were both in high school].” But that’s exactly what happened – Romney did suppress. He had to because that incident was a contradiction to what he, years later, came to believe in – that he was a virtuous exemplar of his faith.

Makes me wonder what else he’s suppressed – for instance, his own logically-created arguments against the plausibility of the faith of his fathers? Men who suppress too much run the risk of exploding. Are you ready for that possibility?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Romney admits – much as did Robert McNamara – an affinity for numbers. Men who suffer crises of faith often go there.”



SEVENTEEN:

"We still have very, very strong things that we can accomplish by continuing this [the Ron Paul for President] campaign..."

“Very, very,” indeed! Like what?

“…influencing the nominating process…”

How?

“…those delegates are obliged only for the first round of voting.”

But there will only be one round of voting, so what’s the point?

“Romney has what is very likely to be an insurmountable delegate lead…” and “we’re very, very unlikely to be able to block [Romney’s] nomination.”

“Very likely?” “Very, very unlikely?” What, exactly, are Paul’s people counting on? Surely Mitt’s people won’t be too happy that Paul isn’t yielding gracefully, so there will be no reward from them.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I think of Ron Paul as the Crypt Keeper overseeing the demise of the GOP. That’s why he’s hanging on. He gets to have the last laugh.”


EIGHTEEN:

This is just further proof the states don’t have much if any sovereignty left any more. Nevada’s case is even worse – with the feds controlling a whopping 87%. Tell me, how can a state claim sovereignty (or self-respect – same thing, I guess) if someone else controls the majority of its land?

Even controlling more than 10% is too much.
The Fourteenth Amendment started the ball rolling by denying states the right to determine who is or is not a state citizen. Brewer was wrong to veto this. By signing into law, she could have made a statement.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“When state sovereignty started to crumble, so did ours as individuals. But I suppose you already suspected as much.”


NINETEEN:

[This is my response to a particularly silly poster.]

Money[R] on marriage: One man and several women, as soon as I’m elected and can overturn the unconstitutional anti-polygamy laws.

BTW, this is an issue, not so much of gay marriage, as it is of the right of sovereign citizens to form binding contracts with each other.  As for your foolishness about “one woman and one horse [etc],” in order for contracts (including martial ones) to be binding, there has to be mutual consent. Last time I checked, we haven’t been able to talk to the animals. Unless you’ve been places the rest of us can only dream about.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Mr. Ed?”



TWENTY:

Memo to [potential Mitt Romney running mate] Jindal,

You said, “This job's too important for on the job training.” You could have said that with far more impact during the last election. That election, by the way, forever removed from the national discourse any thought that experience matters. It didn’t matter to Hillary, Obama, or for that matter McCain who was so consumed by his alcoholic thinking, even his modest claims regarding experience became irrelevant.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Much as Romney would like to make this claim, he can’t: ‘What I did for Bain, I can do for the entire country.’”


TWENTY-ONE:

News Flash: In a bold and truly un-GOP move, Mitt Romney vowed to start by cutting the annual defense appropriation in half. Speaking before the Board of Directors of Lockheed Martin, Romney announced, “Gentlemen, it’s time for you to diversify. The party’s over.”

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“This is the pink elephant in the living room no one is talking about: We have way more ‘defense’ than we need, but not quite enough to conquer the world.”



TWENTY-TWO:

[This is my response to an article entitled: “Federal debt threatens what it means to be an American”]

Either Money[R] doesn’t get it or he’s lying. Being in debt is precisely what it “means to be an American.” This country was built on debt. You got a problem with that?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“May God please save the United States or at least give US a decent burial.”



TWENTY-THREE:

Ricketts? I thought that was a bone disease. Oh, wait…that’s spelled with only one “t.” But still, that disease personifies such a spineless individual. He’s been trying to finagle state Democratic chieftains to authorize a public payment to rehab his pet property, Wrigley Field (home of da Cubs). But he has no problem with blatantly supporting the opposition. That's a Pubber for you, drunk with power and a sense of entitlement.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“And I’ll bet he doesn’t appreciate the irony of this.”



TWENTY-FOUR:

[RE: Article: “Ultra-Orthodox [Jewish group] plan huge NYC meeting on Net risks” in New York Mets’ stadium”]


 “…social media undermining ‘our ability to pray uninterruptedly....’” Doesn’t taking time out to attend a mass feel-good-because-I’m-Orthodox rally “[undermine] our ability to pray uninterruptedly?” Do they pray “uninterruptedly” while having sex with their wives? I don’t think God put us on this earth to “pray uninterruptedly,” but instead to enjoy His blessings. Not even Adam “pray[ed] uninterruptedly.” Unless there’s something about the word “uninterruptedly” I don’t understand.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“The Orthodox are about as far from God as you can get.”



TWENTY-FIVE:

[Here, I reply to three posters who took exception to what I wrote immediately above.]

@ Jeff,

No, they are not “just people,” for these are not just any people, but people who think they’re closer to God than anyone else. Truth is, it takes a certain amount of arrogance to call oneself “ultra-orthodox.” Imagine the brawling that ensues when such creatures bump into the “super-duper ultra-orthodox.”

@ Yoyoyo,

Their God is real enough, but what they really worship is their particular eccentric traditions, their learned rabbis (cults form around such charismatics), and their Jewishness. Clinging to tribal identify is about the surest way to stray from God’s will. For God’s will is that we integrate as a human community instead of finding ways to isolate ourselves into bands of exclusive, woman-hating weirdos.

@ Jeff,

Believing or not believing in God may well be (as you claim) “no one else’s business.” But if someone claims to have a belief in God so profound it renders the beliefs of others as irrelevant (why else to you think they call themselves “ultra-orthodox?), then I have a right to call such a man a liar.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Besides, I think their mothers dress them funny.”



TWENTY-SIX:

Take a good look at Ken Bennett’s photo above. There are a lot of guys locked up in nut houses who look that deranged. Of course, many of those guys (also!) don’t know the difference between right and wrong. For instance, how appropriate is it that Bennett, as Arizona’s secretary of state, can be in a position to deny Obama a place on the ballot, while also being one of Money[R]’s campaign co-chairmen? Sounds like a conflict of interest to me.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Money[R] should take a principled stand here and kick all such people out of his campaign. But somehow, I don’t think he’ll do that.”



TWENTY-SEVEN:

“Those steps include Bennett proving that he legitimately needs confirmation…” Bennett could claim “I hold this truth to be self-evident.” And he could therefore accept Hawaii’s answer as a denial of his request. From there, he could keep Obama’s name off the ballot. Sounds like this thing could go to court. That is, unless Obama doesn’t care to have his name on Arizona’s ballot.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“The Hawaiian answer is lame and opens doors – they could have done much better.”

[UPDATE (5/24/12): Hawaii recently decided to comply with Arizona’s request in this matter after all. Fascinating how quickly this matter was put to rest.]



TWENTY-EIGHT:

[One poster disagreed with my urging all US voters to vote against all incumbents all of the time, by saying this: “LOL, for every incumbant we boot, the establishment has 2-5 more puppets to replace them with. You need to learn how things work.”]


My response:

Instead of laughing out loud, try thinking. The “establishment” isn’t a monolith but consists of several power-sharing centers. Each of these centers needs the assurance that it will always have at least a competitive share of the pie. And that’s where our predictability as voters comes in. If we were less predictable, then the two power centers we call Democrats and Republicans couldn’t rely on reelection to their reasonable minimum share of legislative seats.

So if, for instance, you really hate Democrats, vote for one anyway if the incumbent is a Pubber you'd prefer as the lesser of two evils. Next election, (again) vote against the incumbent whoever he might be. Of course, for this to work enough people would have to participate with exactly this goal in mind – to destabilize the system by denying them our predictability. As things stand now, incumbents have a built-in and unfair advantage in their reelection efforts. Take that away, and things start to get a lot more interesting.

One thing all of them hate is the idea of losing their own reelection, which would bring into doubt the very viability of the so-called professional politician. And that's exactly what we need to get rid of.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“We would need only a determined minority to make this work. Think about it.”



TWENTY-NINE:

[I tried to post this to Yahoo News twice, but was censored. I assume that to mean corporate US media want to promote this woman as the next Tea Party messiah.]

There’s nothing new in what Mia Love is – she’s simply an opportunist. Another Herman Cain, another Sarah Palin. And she will be exploited by the Tea Party or whatever GOP/Mormon forces back her. Oh, I don’t deny her accomplishments (I’m sure she was a very good flight attendant), but I also don’t trust her promoters.

At this point, there’s simply not enough known about her. But one very important thing is known: The fact that she’s a Mormon, and that’s a deal killer. I will come right out and say: No person of at least average intelligence who really thinks about the Mormon narrative could embrace that faith. It’s patriarchal, it’s materialistic, it’s hierarchal, it’s clannishly exclusive, and it’s just plain false. Oh sure, there are a lot of nice Mormons out there. But that doesn’t mean their faith is valid.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Mia Love is just another willing tool waiting to be used. Maybe she’ll make as much on the lecture circuit as Palin – with the right [wing] agent.”



THIRTY:

“Israel was one of the few countries that maintained strong ties with South Africa's apartheid government…” Somehow, I’m not surprised. And this, from a nation which God had deemed should be a “light unto all nations?” Israel still stands, but Judaism within its borders is dead.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“In that sense, Israel’s enemies have already won.”



THIRTY-ONE:

“An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law.” Hmm…sounds like Owens didn’t think this out very carefully before making this statement. There is no such thing as “eternal” law, since we can only talk about laws since the Creation. Before the Creation, there was only God and therefore only Perfection existed. In that case, there was no need for Law, since laws are made to govern and there was no one around to govern.

Besides that, could a human law be rooted in eternal law but not natural law or vice versa? Could those two law types be occasionally exclusive?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Maybe Owens should stick to God’s work instead of distracting himself as a union (of priests’ in a pressure group) organizer.”



THIRTY-TWO:

It doesn’t matter if “most” would currently call high school escapades off-limits. If a Super Pac decides to focus on such hijinks, and saturates the airwaves accordingly, then “most” will end up changing their minds about what is off-limits. That’s how effectively advertising works on We-the-Sheeple.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Like anybody believes Romney doesn't remember cutting off that kid’s hair.”



THIRTY-THREE:

[Concerning Pakistan sentencing one of their citizens to a life sentence for treason for helping the CIA kill Osama bin Laden.]

Let’s put the shoe on the other foot. How would we like it if a US citizen provided information that resulted in aircraft from a foreign power illegally and clandestinely entering our airspace to conduct a military operation?

It’s just plain silly to say, “By considering this treason it makes it clear that Pakistan was knowingly harboring Bin Laden.” This statement is illogical, given the sense of my first paragraph. And yet, this got 199 thumbs-up versus 3 down.

All nations have laws against treason, which each defines in its own way.  In our case, even though the crime of treason is constitutionally defined, it’s unconstitutionally vague.  Especially the part about giving aid and comfort to the enemy. A citizen denouncing US involvement in a war could be considered giving comfort to the enemy. An extreme example: A US soldier giving medical assistance to a wounded enemy soldier.

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“It’s time to replace our constitution.”



THIRTY-FOUR:

I’m not convinced Romney’s all that smart, even though he made all that money. I suspect he might have had some help from a Mormon web of influence. As a religious organization, they seem unduly interested in and good at acquiring wealth. Time Magazine even ran a cover story about that in their Aug. 4, 1997 issue. I wonder if Time will update us or has that story been squelched?

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Or maybe Money[R] is a savant – good at making money but sorely lacking in other aspects.”


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steven Searle for US President in 2012
Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party

“I’m still betting Obama, who will generously spare Israel from participating, will order an attack against Iran’s nuclear installations to take place around Labor Day. Mark your calendars.”

Contact me at bpa_cinc@yahoo.com

No comments:

Post a Comment