Once per week, I consolidate comments I’d posted to recent articles appearing on Yahoo News. I share my views, written as if I actually were the US President. [I’m working on that.] The following were posted between July 11 and today, though appear below in no particular order. As is my usual custom, if I open with a quoted item, that’s from the article itself.
I hope you enjoy all 38 of these mini-essays/comments.
Posted on Yahoo! News
ONE:
[RE: Karzai's brother assassinated, by chief-of-security Sardar who, in turn, was shot dead by security.]
Sardar is the martyr in this story.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"We are fighting forces beyond our reckoning, when you consider what it takes to 'convert' a head of security to the cause."
TWO:
“I have never seen negotiations broadcast so openly. It's not a good sign.”
Oh, no you don’t. I’m tired of smoke-filled rooms. Let’s do transparency more often, eh? Obama better be careful or else he’ll create a monster:
Eric Cantor for President in 2016…or maybe even 2012.
“…imagine how hard it'll be in the middle of an election." Newsflash: We ARE in the middle of an election. Just as we’ve now got a world perpetually at war, we’ve also got never-ending campaigning for office. One way or another, folks, you'll pay for this.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“If it’s OK for Obama to use the Bully Pulpit, it’s okay for Cantor to give an impromptu press conference.”
THREE:
Time to repeal the Second Amendment. This is the only amendment that included its reason-for-being as part of its language: “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.”
Since we no longer have “well regulated militias” (or at least, we no longer have peoples' militias), the “right” of the people to keep and bear arms has lost its rationale. Besides, nobody really believes such a militia is necessary to our security. Those days are long gone. In fact, the “security” referred to, once upon a time, was mostly from slave revolts. Or does anybody out there think We-the-People are virtual slaves?
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“If Johnny wants to go get his gun to fight off the New World Order, the SWAT team will swat him down. Besides, there are better (non-violent!) ways to revolt.”
FOUR:
“But the network… reported receiving a flood of angry calls regarding her anti-war activism of the 1960s and 1970s…”
Jane Fonda should be happy to be the lightning rod for “a flood of angry” callers. People like them live in the past, which is perfectly fine with me. I’m too busy trying to fix the present. So I’m glad they’re preoccupied with ancient history and won’t interrupt my efforts.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“To those callers: ‘We lost Vietnam…time to move on to other battles, don’t you think?’ I said, Don’t you think?”
FIVE:
“…carefully choreographed series of moves …to steer the country out of crisis and save face all round.”
"...carefully choreographed" sounds an awful lot like "let's give the rubes some song and dance."
“Save face?” That’s what this is all about, for it certainly has nothing to do with steering “the country out of crisis.” How is an increase in borrowing of $2.5T coupled with spending cuts of only $1.5T going to save the country? And heaven forbid we start another war, which will require [dramatic pause] an emergency appropriation.
So the GOP is about to embrace its new status – as the party of “symbolic resolutions of disapproval.” Yea, team! Way to go! All talk and no action…YOU CAVED!
“…it would be protected from Senate filibuster…” How’s that? Last time I checked, the filibuster was still firmly in place.
“The Republicans are insisting this debate take place before anything happens…” Sure, why not? Why not have a debate which will be in the same league as “symbolic resolutions of disapproval?”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Ladies and gentlemen, you may mark this day as the beginning of the end. Anything after this will be too little, too late.”
SIX:
The biggest problem facing US voters isn’t big businesses which are deemed too big to fail. It’s the national government, which is too big and unwieldy to control. And worse? We feel we have to – simply must – work within the Two-Party System which, as it turns out, is precisely the problem.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Declare your independence by voting for Independents.”
“Declare your independence by voting for Independents.”
SEVEN:
“Western nations said they also planned to increase the military pressure on Gaddafi's forces…”
That must mean we’ll increase the pressure to better protect civilians. If we wipe out Gaddafi’s military, then they can’t possibly harm any civilians. Gotta love the logic.
Let’s get one thing straight about this diplomatic recognition stuff. Hillary might have made the announcement – gotta throw the dog a crumb, right? But Dip Recog is the sole province of the president. If Obama wanted to grant that status to a Palestinian state, he could. If he wanted to withdraw it from France and then give it back the next day, he could. All of this, without any input from Congress. And nobody has a problem with that?
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“What on earth would we and our puppet allies do if any of the African Union nations decided to send fighters to help Gaddafi? The longer this struggle lasts, the stranger it could get.”
EIGHT:
“…they're going to vote for Barack Obama.”
Let me get this straight. Progressive Change Campaign Committee has 200,000 pledges from people saying they’ll vote for Obama, even if he cuts entitlement programs, but won’t contribute or volunteer to make his reelection happen. Tell me, how hard will they kick themselves if Obama loses because he lacked that withheld support? How much harder will they kick themselves if his Pubber replacement backs even greater cuts?
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“That’s not a very progressive strategy, people. That’s just plain stupid.”
NINE:
The biggest entitlement programs we can cut are the wars we feel we’re “entitled” to engage in for the flimsiest of reasons.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“We go to war because we can. You got a problem with that?”
TEN:
[RE: Poll showing a generic Republican leads Obama in voter preference by 8 points.]
The problem is, it’s not going to be a “generic Republican” who will end up on the ballot. If the Pubbers want to console themselves with this “eight-point lead” business, please…by all means…whatever floats your boat. But remember: People who usually say they’ll vote for "Anybody But" frequently say “ick” when a specific, non-generic candidate (finally) emerges. Obama by a landslide in 2012…unless you vote for me of course.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“If we can’t shake our addiction to Brand X vs. Brand Y thinking, we’ll always be stuck with a Dem/Pub…ick.”
ELEVEN:
[RE: Article about Niko Alm from Austria, who wanted his driver’s license photo taken while he was wearing a pasta strainer on his head. Niko is a member of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.]
What strange manner of “Alm’s” giving is this? At least he’s not wearing a tin foil hat.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Which came first – spaghetti or the Flying Spaghetti Monster that created spaghetti – and therefore created himself?”
TWELVE:
Are Maine and West Virginia really states? Maine was once part of Massachusetts and West Virginia was once part of [dramatic pause] … Virginia! However, Article IV, Section 3 of the Great Con states: “…no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state…” Gee, I wonder if any of those Common Sense Constitutional Conservatives picked up on that one. [Hello, Planet Earth calling Sarah Palin!]
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“As for North Dakota’s status, if the Feds never bothered to enforce this oath-taking provision, that means ND was given a pass. You got a problem with that?”
THIRTEEN:
[The following is my response to Jim, who wrote in response to TWELVE (above), “you misquoted the Constitution - the last part of Article IV, sec 3 says ‘ ...without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.’”]
Jim,
I’ve encountered your objection before – from people who don’t know how semicolons function within a sentence. That “Consent” bit you cited pertains to (and only to) the last part of Art IV, Section 3, which reads: “nor any state be formed by the junction of two or more states, or parts of states, without the consent of the legislatures of the states concerned as well as of the Congress.”
Think about the internal contradiction (if we are to accept your interpretation) of the part you quoted – to recap: “…without the Consent of the LEGISLATURES [note plural form] of the States concerned…” If one state is going to be subdivided into two states, then we can’t be talking about “the STATES concerned,” can we? Especially since the state being subdivided can’t be considered as being more than one state until AFTER admission to the union by Congress.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Face it, we blew it on this one – twice…actually three times, if you count Texas which was given advance permission by Congress to eventually subdivide into a total of 5 states. Again, blatantly unconstitutional.”
FOURTEEN:
[This is my response to Light S, one of many who can’t pass up the chance to end his posts with “lol.” Light S wrote, “ahh yes steve searle will save the U.S...or any one individual for that matter..lol.”]
Light S,
There is only one way to save the US: Vote all Dem/Pubs out of Congress, replacing them with independents. You’re right – no one person can save the US. Just as it was equally true that no one person created the US. That was the collaborative effort of some very remarkable and INDEPENDENT men.
Ever since the [political] Party Animals came to dominate our legislative process, we’ve been heading slowly and steadily toward disaster. So, Light S, instead of wasting your time lol, google my name. You’ll see my blog and my program. Who knows? You might even like what I have to say.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Declare your independence by voting for independents.”
FIFTEEN:
Sarah Palin is quickly becoming yesterday's girl. Aren't trends in fashion terribly cruel?
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Of course, it might help if she actually had something to say."
SIXTEEN:
“The Hasidim are ultra-Orthodox Jews.”
Is there any group that claims to be Super-Duper-Ultra Orthodox?
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Don’t worry, sooner or later it will come to that.”
“Don’t worry, sooner or later it will come to that.”
SEVENTEEN:
“…it is no longer a question of whether Gaddafi will leave power, but when," [Clinton] said.
Let's rework that a bit, shall we? “It was never a question of whether Obama will leave power, but when”
Steve Searle for US President in 2012
“And the sooner, the better.”
EIGHTEEN:
“[Bernanke] said default would drive up interest costs on the $14.3 trillion debt…”
No it wouldn’t and Bernanke knows it. What happens when banana republics default? Their debt is renegotiated – often at lower interest rates (though perhaps stretched over a longer period of time), with much of their debt written off. And that’s exactly what would happen to us.
Do you seriously think our creditors are going to make it harder on themselves to collect from us by jacking up interest rates, which would threaten an economy vital to their other economic interests? That would not work to their long-term advantage. So if we do go into default, Bernanke and Geithner will go to smoke-filled rooms with our creditors to play Let’s Make a Deal. BTW, those negotiations have already started - just in case.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“If Bernanke keeps spreading this bull, nobody’s going to believe him anymore.”
NINETEEN:
[This is my response to MsB, who wrote in response to EIGHTEEN (above): “Where do you live. Generally, those with the poorest credit pay the highest interest rates. That why individuals worry about their credit scores. Tell that hogwash you're spewing to someone who knows nothing about credit.”]
MsB,
Why are you talking about “individuals [who] worry about their credit scores?” Countries and individuals aren’t held to the same standards. Think about it this way: If an individual had access to nuclear weapons and the biggest army in the world, do you think that individual would be terribly worried about his credit rating?
Read The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein for a little perspective on how the big boys play.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“By the way, I told my credit card company I wasn’t going to pay them the $7,700 I owed. They took me to court – and they lost…even though I didn’t even have a lawyer. Go figure.”
TWENTY:
If such a [Balanced Budget] amendment were in place, do you think the Supreme Court would make rulings based on same? Or would they weenie out by saying, “This is a political question which we can’t rule on?”
“Once [amendments] pass Congress, they must be approved by three-quarters of the states.” Uh, huh. Suppose Congress passes an amendment. Then feverishly, behind-the-scenes, the “Party” animals prevent its ratification by getting 13 states to vote no – that’s all it would take to scuttle this thing.
"It certainly will show who's really serious about trying to get spending under control and who isn't," said Sen. Orrin Hatch…[ditto my comment above about “scuttling.”]
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Forget amendments. If you had a Congress full of independents, without any ‘Party’ animals, Congress could pool its collective wisdom when legislating instead of jockeying for party advantage. Just a thought…”
TWENTY-ONE:
"...these Social Security checks may not arrive."
True enough, but the govt could lie and say, "The checks are in the mail." Everybody believes that one, don't they? We should intentionally default now, which will serve to really wake people up to how seriously we're in trouble.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"The other choice: We will unintentionally default later, by which time our leverage will be so poor, we'll truly be at the mercy of our creditors."
"The other choice: We will unintentionally default later, by which time our leverage will be so poor, we'll truly be at the mercy of our creditors."
TWENTY-TWO:
I hope these donors aren't thinking, "If I just throw enough money at Obama, our problems will go away."
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
"Yeah, I'm afraid that's exactly what they're thinking."
"Yeah, I'm afraid that's exactly what they're thinking."
TWENTY-THREE:
Nice try at the civics lesson G Maw, but my main point still remains true (especially in the minds of the electorate): “BO had help from the Pubbers running up that debt [& please don’t just refer to the Dubya years].” Which is true, in spite of your disingenuous claim that, “If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself.” The GOP was complicit during the Obama years even though they weren’t in the majority.
Besides, the public doesn’t care as much about details of the past as much as it cares about, “What are we going to do now?” The Pubbers will lose the moral high ground if they cave in to BO, without winning substantial cuts and no tax increases. My point is, the Obama juggernaut can’t be stopped – especially by the weak Pubber field – unless they force Obama to act unilaterally on this.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“The upshot? Unless the Pubbers show some spine here and now, they might as well kiss their 2012 prospects good-bye.”
TWENTY-FOUR:
QUOTE [Here’s the original article, with my response following immediately]: Senate Republican Mitch McConnell is getting tricky in his debt ceiling strategy. Tuesday afternoon, McConnell proposed a three-stage plan to raise the debt ceiling in the event that President Obama and Congress don't reach an agreement on spending cuts by the August 2 deadline, according to Bloomberg. Referred to as a "last choice option," the plan would permit respective increases of $700 billion, $900 billion and another $900 billion with the approval of one third of Congress, or in other words let Democrats vote for additional borrowing.:UNQUOTE.
“…with the approval of one third of Congress, or in other words let Democrats vote for additional borrowing.”
Not quite. Allowing Congress to approve with one third would happen only if the Pubbers in the House allowed for this option. How does that fool anybody? There are a lot of ways for the GOP to cave in to Obama here, and Tricky Mitch just came up with a doozy.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“We’re running out of tricks and we'll have to pay the piper eventually.”
TWENTY-FIVE:
The Pubbers are desperate to stop Obama from his looming landslide victory in 2012. So they will draw a line in the sand here and allow the default to take place. More precisely, they will force the President’s hand, making him raise the limit without Congressional approval, which he thinks he can do. The GOP knows it’s got a weak field and will be slaughtered in 2012 unless…they do something desperate.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“And this is about as desperate as it gets, folks. Stay tuned.”
“And this is about as desperate as it gets, folks. Stay tuned.”
TWENTY-SIX:
“Obama's campaign had previously announced it planned to raise …at least $750 million for the president's re-election effort.”
Wow, that sure would feed a lot of hungry Americans.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I’m the only candidate making absolutely no effort to raise any campaign cash. I am the candidate of glaring contrasts in a lot of other ways as well.”
TWENTY-SEVEN:
“Republicans have balked at raising the debt limit without steep spending cuts…” If the GOP doesn’t take a Custer’s-Last-Stand approach to this, we’ll never get more than token spending cuts.
“… while Democrats say new tax revenues need to be part of any deal.” Doesn’t make sense to me – if the Dems are willing to cut on the one hand, why the need to raise revenue on the other?
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Neither side is talking about saving money by pulling out of the Middle East (including $$$ for Israel). Guess they’re on the same page on that one, eh?”
TWENTY-EIGHT:
[My response to a Marine sending a YouTube video to ask Mila Kunis to be his date for the Marine Corp ball.]
What a strange way for a brave warrior to ask for a date: He’s wearing shades (show the lady your eyes, dude), heavily armored (symbolic, perhaps, of being shy around women), clunking around so it’s hard to hear him, speaking rapid-fire in a military fashion: “Take a second. Think about it. Get back to me.” [Say, what?!] I’m sure the good sergeant and Mila will have a wonderful time, but I’m amazed he approached her so clumsily.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“What am I saying? How dare I criticize his approached – it worked, didn’t it? Maybe I could take lessons from him as I present myself to the voters in the upcoming election.”
TWENTY-NINE:
The United States will act unilaterally "to go after those threats," Panetta, the former CIA chief and lawmaker, said.
Hmm…I wonder if Panetta was thinking this as he was saying that: “Solely by virtue of my authority – Obama not needing to be consulted – I will order my personal army to go after the arms traffickers.”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“If anyone out there thinks Obama’s really in change…well, they’d be closer to the truth to guess Panetta’s the Man. Details, details!”
THIRTY:
Will Smith,
Did you say, “Gaddafi is gone?” Last time I heard, he was still hanging in there – unless you know something the rest of the world doesn’t. Lots of people snub their noses at us. So what? We’re big; we’re bad; we can take it. Haven't you heard of "turning the other cheek?"
Besides, where did you get the idea we gave him foreign aid? We never gave him a dime. Gaddafi amassed a fortune, but so did a lot of other dictators – most of whom had direct US backing. He had oil, we bought it – both of us profited by this – end of story.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“You’re just mad because Gaddafi chose to be independent of the US. That’s not a good enough reason to violate our constitution and go to war against him.”
THIRTY-ONE:
All Obama has to do is give the GOP everything they want. He’ll walk away with a win-win. He can wait till virtually the last minute, and then dramatically throw up his hands saying, “I will make the cuts Cantor wants, though it’s going to be a disaster for millions of Americans.” Which it will be. Obama will still get reelected in a landslide, with those “millions” beefing up his totals. And fiscal conservative Cantor and his ilk will still fail to pass Tea Party muster because they voted to increase the debt limit.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“No matter how this pans out, Obama will come out smelling like a rose. I’d call that a win-win, hands down.”
THIRTY-TWO:
“However, Obama told the Russian president the U.S. would only back the negotiations if…”
Then what’s to negotiate? I always thought ideal negotiations brought no preconditions to the table, and were based on “conditions on the ground” – to use an overworked term.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Since it would have been so easy to take Gaddafi out – and this wasn’t done – I can only conclude Obama wanted a prolonged war from Day One.”
THIRTY-THREE:
California can’t subdivide – that would be unconstitutional: Art IV, Section 3 states, “… no new states shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other state…”
I know, I know…you’ll ask, “What about West Virginia and Maine? They were once part of existing states.” Just because the Constitution was violated in the past doesn’t justify future violations. We can’t void statehood for WVa and ME because too much time has elapsed. But any US citizen would have standing in court to oppose splitting CA.
[p.s. Did you know TX was granted permission in advance, when it joined the union, to split into four more states? Also unconstitutional. Oh well, who cares about the Great Con anyway?]
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I call it the Great Con since it denies, in perpetuity, any possibility for it to be replaced.”
THIRTY-FOUR:
I heard a rumor that both sides are conducting secret polls, asking this one question: “If the debt ceiling isn’t raised and the US goes into default, who would you blame: The Democrats or the Republicans?”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“That’s what this current brinksmanship is really all about – the blame game.”
THIRTY-FIVE:
[RE: Debt ceiling increase negotiations]
"I am prepared to take on significant heat from my party to get something done," Obama said.
Of course, he doesn’t have to worry about getting renominated – or reelected, for that matter (sorry Bachmann et al).
Once a deal is hashed out in that smoke-filled backroom (has BO quit smoking yet?), will Congress be given an omnibus bill to pass? Will this be another 1,000+ pages? Will lawmakers be told, “Pass this and then you’ll find out what’s in it?” Between now and the Aug. 2 deadline, will there be enough time for our reps to debate and weigh this bill’s particulars? Or will party whips tell them, “Pass this or we’ll bust your kneecaps.”
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“If we had independents in Congress, we wouldn’t have to worry about our reps trying to make their party look good.”
THIRTY-SIX:
“… we don't manage our affairs in three-month increments," [Obama] said.
We don’t? Are you kidding? Our entire corporate structure is based on that model. Short term gain is highly prized, even at the expense of longer-range sensibilities. And this is based entirely on the quarterly system. Last time I checked, one quarter = three months.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“I’m surprised the room didn’t burst out laughing when the President said this.”
THIRTY-SEVEN:
“…people across the U.S. who had followed the case with rapt attention.”
None of those people were on the jury, so how “rapt” could that attention have been. Too many who watch too much reality TV and want to play arm chair quarterback. I can’t believe how many blood-thirsty people are posting on Yahoo cheering for someone to give Casey what (they think) she has coming to her. Their blood lust would embarrass a vampire, who at least has the excuse, "I have to kill to live."
Most of Casey’s detractors aren’t of the liberal persuasion, I dare say. But then, neither were the members of her jury. What gives? If, per chance, Casey meets an early end, how many “hallelujahs” and “Praise the Lords” will we hear? And how odd would that be, considering what these same people think of suicide bombers who yell out, before they blow themselves up, “Allahu Akbar?” Talk about phony religion!
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Whatever happened to ‘Things happen according to God’s plan” and ‘Judge not lest ye be judged’?”
THIRTY-EIGHT:
“The state Republican Party [in Wisconsin] orchestrated the placement of the fake Democrats on Tuesday's ballot…”
Fair enough. So the GOP will understand when Democratic voters ask for GOP ballots in the presidential primary, right? Since Obama will be unchallenged for the nomination, why waste all those Dem votes? I say they should intentionally vote for the weakest GOP candidate (Santorum? Getrich?) to assure Obama an even bigger landslide than he would have had otherwise.
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
“Turnabout’s fair play.”
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Steven Searle for US President in 2012
Founder of The Independent Contractors’ Party
“Declare your independence by voting for Independents.”
No comments:
Post a Comment