Looking over the coverage of the new controversy over a negative allusion to “Tea Party Protests” being in Captain America…

… the focal point from your “newsbusters” and such seem to hit around wondering why Captain America isn’t fighting the Nazis anymore?

One striking point.

In issue No. 602 of Captain America, “Two Americas, Part One,” the title hero and The Falcon, a black superhero from New York City, stumble upon a protest rally in Boise, Idaho. They see scores of protesters carrying signs that say “Stop the Socialists!” and “Tea Bag The Libs Before They Tea Bag YOU!”

Captain America says the protest appears to be an “anti-tax thing,” and The Falcon jokes that he likely would not be welcomed into the crowd of “angry white folks.” […]

He also disputed the insinuation that the growing movement lacks diversity.

“The Tea Party movement has been very reflective of broad concerns of all Americans,” Johns said. “Membership is across ethnic, religious and even political lines.”

Let’s… um… be real.  Running over to this recent image of a Tea Party demonstration, I don’t see one single black person!

I’m mildly annoyed by the controversy that focuses on the “Tea BagThe Libs before they Tea Bag You” sign when maybe the “No Govt In My Medicare” sign makes them look worse for wear.  Anyway, I’m pretty sure the “Tea Bag the Libs” sign is an act of agent provacateuring, and not an actual protester.  That’s part of the story, right?

The look at the “Local Color” of Boise, Idaho being featured is the more interesting bit of commentary.

But, Captain America has falling, and is calling for your help.  Then again, that one suffers from the same anti-patriotitism — anti-American Exceptionalism –, and would get the same aggrivation.

I’m just waiting for Captain America to meet up with his new arch nemesis: Orly Taitz.

Recall this moment during the 2008 Republican Primary campaign.   Ron Paul met up with Rudy Giuliani at the Republican primary debate.  Both had the better of each other, and received their plaudits from their constituencies.

Skipping forward to his progeny, the Kentucky Senate candidate Rand Paul, who we fairly ascertain as capitalizing on Ron Paul’s following — and the first campaign ad he’s putting out there.

U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul has aired the first television ads of the 2010 election cycle with a 30-second spot that touts his position on national defense.

“I think prisoners of war, enemy combatants and terrorists captured on the battle field should be tried in military court and not brought to the U.S.,” Paul, a Bowling Green ophthalmologist says in the commercial. “I do not believe they should be tried in civilian court.”

David Adams, Paul’s campaign manager, said the ad is running on the Fox News Channel on cable television systems throughout the state.

That’s the type of talk that will get you that much desired Sarah Palin endorsement, the Fox News employee who was interviewed on Fox News (?) and said that Obama can save his presidency by bombing Iran.  Also the type of talk which will firmly establish Rand Paul as a Tool of the Police and Security State, hard to see where .

Once upon a time, a whole mass of peoples threw up Guy Fawkes paraphernalia on the fifth of November (Remember, Remember, the fifth of November) for promotion of Ron Paul — mixing up British and American history items for a Guy Fawkes “Tea Party”.  And last week the thing came to its full circle to it’s basic RNC fund-raising tool.

In a previous time, about a year ago, it was interesting to take note of the Ron Paul acolytes taking on various candidates on the localest of levels in precints in Idaho, and up to the Senate races in Connecticut and Kentucky.  Things have changed.  Ron Paul is now getting three “Tea Party” primary candidates. Curious criticisms, “ineffective”, after the raising acolytes Paul has received as of late — see, for instance, or.

The Ron Paul Revolution is dead.  Bury it, stick a fork in it, give it its last rites.

If you consider that Madison Avenue buys our hopes and dreams at a low price and sells them back to us at an inflated price…

… or, I guess, the Superbowl ads tell us about our culture’s psyche, perhaps.

We like to hit to the ground older women.  Betty White goes down.  That college football star’s mom goes down.
Men can’t find their pants.  Also we’re desperate for various consumer products to compensate for a deflated sense of self.
The Green Police are coming.  Also, building houses out of beer cans somehow makes sense in an environmental sustainable way.
We will make babies into adults, and have teddy bears partying down in Vegas.

All righty then.

Focus on the Family released that humdrum ad, sticking close to CBS network guidelines.  The odd focus by some conservative commentary and polical cartoonists misses the point of the ire.  Shocked by this display of Focus on the Family vaguely alluding to an anti-abortion advocacy — what after seeing the latest tedious godaddy ad that invites everyone to their website for what they seem to suggest will be some soft core porn displays.  Actually the controversy of issue advocacy stems from past nays– a year or two ago the Church of Christ offered up an ad promoting their “inclusiveness” suggesting that they accept the gays.  This year, the comparison gets to be the gay dating site which was shot down…

… though weirdly enough, the allusion to the gays came in to that ad.
So it’s Meghan Fox wondering if sending a photograph of herself and a lot of her skin — in a bubble bath — over the Inter tubes would cause any effect.  I suppose I should mention that if you google image “Meghan Fox”, you will find more risque images than that offered with this ad.  Forgetting that, and supposing for a moment a spanking new image of Meghan Fox will — say– distract a heterosexual guy holding a ladder for someone, and cause a great crash…

… Why does this cause a commotion between the gay couple?  Is this another male fantasy, akin to the idea that all women have great Lesbian desires (see, clips from the Meghan Fox movie “Jennifer’s Body”) — that all gay men are secretly heterosexual?  If so, what does that bring us? — the former fantasy at least brings us something.

In short, the Superbowl ads show that we are a sad, sick culture, and the male demographic age 18 through … 45, let’s say … is lost somewhere.

Maybe the Letterman – Leno ad shows us something about our desire for Reconciliation.  But even that is a false message — looking through the comments section in the media pieces about that ad, I see references to “Now if only the Democrats and Republicans were paying attention” — an incoherent sentiment never really rewarded which tends to get parties rolled.

The Simpsons had a topical enough ad.  Too bad I can’t really remember what the ad was for.

And congratulations to the team that won the game.  My interest in sports is waning — not quite where I was at the age of, oh say 12, but…

It is that time of year when I see a number of odd self-congratulatory pieces about not watching The Big Game.

Most people on the globe aren’t watching the Big Game.  It doesn’t really make you special.  Nor, really, is there that much pressure on the watching of the Big Game.

Mike Dice is leading an effort to get people not to watch the Big Game.  Instead, he wants everyone to read his reading list of Bilderburg Group books and watch Alex Jones films on the Internet.

I don’t think his effort is going to get too far.  Even people who want to read Bilderburg Group books and watch Alex Jones films on the internet would be doing so sometime or other.

I was not going to watch the Superbowl, until I learned that the league was going to mix things up a bit.  This year, they’re going to randomly shift around the teams, just to get it back to the Backyard Playground Basics of football.  So it will be a match-up between the Caints and the Solts.  My money was on the Caints — Peyton Manning plays for the Caints and he’s awesome — until I learned that this will be a “Skins” versus “Shirts” game, and that the Solts will be running around with all the protected uniform while the Caints won’t be wearing anything above their waist.  I expect the Caints to have a long list of injuries before the first quarter is up.

From comments section of a page I link below.
Isn’t LaRouche dead yet? — Posted by You Look Like I Need A Drink!
And yet.  Here I am again.  Indefatiguable.  Looking at the Pechenuks, the Howie Gs.  Sorting through the margin.  Searching for meaning where there just might be no meaning.

Item the First.  Some chaos in Illinois.  The Democratic Gubernatorial candidate finds himself with an unwelcome lieutenant gubernatorial candidate.

This, I think, is a serious flaw in the Illinois electoral system.  Fluke and unwelcome nominations happen all the time in these United States — i’s just that they’re disregarded relatively easily, even if they screw up one or the other party’s plans.  I can point to two examples in 2008 of state wide nominations for the US Senate.  Perennial hobby candidate Bob Kelleher won the Republican Senate nomination in Montana, meaning the fifteenth time was the charm after a bi-annual placing on the ballot as Democrat and Green.  To believe his selection was not a fluke is to believe Montana Republicans cottoned to his platform of socialized health care, a European parliamentary system, and banning Abortion.  In reality, his nomination was basically about the same as the 1986 Illinois Democratic nominations of two nutcase Larouchies for State Treasurer and Lieutenant Governor — the two state legislators vying for the nomination (and popping up on the NRSC website) had low name recognition, and to the extent that they were known had high disapprovals within a low impact election — Kelleher, meanwhile, had developed an unconcious name familiarity from his frequent appearance on the ballot (the “Smooth names” of 1986’s Illinois duo).  The Republicans weren’t investing anything into anyone’s win, and Kelleher never made an appearance on the NRSC website.
Meanwhile, in South Carolina a man who just attached himself to the letter “D” and was keen on Ron Paul was nominated the Democrats’ candidate for the US Senate.  This race was somewhat interesting to note, because he showed up in the polls within 8 and 9 points — he of a $300 warchest against Lindsey Graham‘s entrenched millions.  He ended with a fairly predictable 15 percent margin, and I am one to believe no amount of money would have changed that result.

Meanwhile, Illinois has set up a system where a man who ekes through in a crowded field off has to run with the legitimate pol.  Perhaps this is divine retribution due to the corrupt nature of said “legitimate pol”s — the indicted  George Ryan, the indicted Governor Rod Blagojevich.

So, the reprise of 1986.

Former U.S. Sen. Adlai Stevenson — who formed a third party to run for governor in 1986 rather than share the same ticket as two disciples of Lyndon H. LaRouche — said Gov. Quinn faces the same political reality in dealing with running mate Scott Lee Cohen.

“It would be very difficult for Pat Quinn, in good conscience, to run for governor with this fellow tied to him as if they’re joined at the hip,” Stevenson told the Sun-Times today.

“One answer is to do what I did, namely to resign the nomination and run as an independent with a different lieutenant governor candidate,” he said. “Of course, they can try to talk [Cohen] out of it, but I’m skeptical as to whether that would work.”

Stevenson, who won the Democratic gubernatorial primary in 1986, formed the Solidarity Party rather than run with a LaRouche-backed lieutenant governor candidate, Mark Fairchild.

Stevenson wound up losing the general election to Republican Gov. James Thompson, who got 1.65 million votes to the 1.25 million that went to Stevenson and his Solidarity Party candidacy. Another 208,830 votes were cast for the Democratic governor’s slot that Stevenson vacated.

Of course, Adlai Stevenson III went on to lose that race.  (And really — isn’t there something about considering here “Adlai Stevenson III” somehow show the problem and indictment of how large numbers of someones might roll past the establishment picks and settle for the protest candidate they’ve never heard of?)  But, I guess Stevenson lost with integrity instead of losing with a cult.

Let’s now turn to Gerald Pechenuk’s alternative universe of events — and I would like to know on what planet does he spend his days?

Just think.  One departure was missed in parallel universes of how Larouche might have been brought to power, but for the exacting influence of Paul Simon and his British legions!  (But.  Wait.  Didn’t he have oh so much influence in the Clinton administration?)  OR… To rebut on the main thrust of his suggestion, turn to the Stevenson comment story.

Item the Second.

I may as well mention there that I was going to pull out David Duke’s two Republican nominations in Louisiana in the early 1990s as an example for Item the First, but upon consideration, I have to conclude that sadly those weren’t really “flukes”.  The electorate that selected Duke knew roughly what they were doing.

Meanwhile, the Tea Party Convention started with this throw-back to the days of Jim Crow.

Item the Third.  Digging through the comments relating to Henry Gasparian , the 70+ year old who slapped some Larouche members upset at their Hitler signs…

… I’m mostly unimpressed.  But it’s worth pointing at for Pechenuk, who seems to think Larouche is making strides with the youth (You might actually have to read some of Mr. Larouche and actually think, for a change, and then SEE what world leaders, including people in the US, SEE in Larouche, and SEE what the young people SEE in LaRouche, because your old SORE ASS smart aleck bullshit don’t count for a nickel, any more…..), the comments and poll at the Stranger.  Beyond that generic mention, I throw out this comment.

Basically, but not entirely.  I’ve seen that sentiment expressed in that way, have posted it before.  There’s slightly more, of course — wade through the anti-semitism ( “Hey!  Isn’t Jeffry Steinberg Jewish?”) — and I’d be remiss if I didn’t go ahead and link to  Dennis King linking to “earnest one” on his brother’s — Jonathan Tennenbaum – culpability in covering up on the death of Jeremiah Duggan.

Down a ways, I see the more partisan hackery and shallow mention of “inconvenient truth to the ‘Leftists’!  Larouche is a DEM!”  Bleh.  I suppose I should mention I sliced off the last sentence of the “marketing scam” comment to evade the stink bomb throwing.
[(Good luck to these people.  They’re wasting their time.]
It appears from this LPAC release that the Larouche org is poised to make hay, for internal consumption, a rallying arouallying with the Republican Party to defeat “Obama Corruption”…. see the final paragraph, which quotes the RNC.

Item the Fourth.  The Seattle Times article comments include a couple of youtube videos — one of the SNL skit and the other a 1980 anti-environmentalist ad.    LINKS here  and here.  I high-light a few interesting and bemusing comments.  And you can play along at home with the game “Larouche Zombie, actively anti-Larouche, or amused passively anti-Larouche?)

plasticman1973  LOL, it’s funny and it sounds outrageous for those who don’t know the facts. I like the queen preparing the heroine though. Kissinger a homo? lol.

azezel2311  He does like to ramble. Scary thing is we seem to be on the same mindset. Minus the british empire. The brits could actually drive positive change if they wanted to. You just have to give them something new to go after. Something that they would have to build others up for in order to stand on them and get there…. Have we found that planet that is half gold and half diamond yet?

kappy0405 yup – kissinger and david rockefeller are just a few of the people who speak OPENLY about pop reduction. Leave it to SNL to ignore facts and cater to the Fox News/CNN mindset. :rolleyes:
Oh well, people ARE finally are waking up. 😉 (… And it only took 24 years…)

kanalje  this is amazing in a weird way. It’s like they are doing his bidding with this parody. It is not unlike the parody style of larouchies.
unityrover  Come for the Larouche, stay for the DANZA!!!

Trapster99 Well, I believed in all the lies said about Larouch, until I did a little research and found this great man’s mind.
He is a modern day Ben Franklin.
Want to solve most of America’s problems, right now?
Build 100 brand new, state of the art, high temprature Pebble Bed nuclear reactors (2 in each state).
That will employ 2 million people directly and indirectly. It will solve a host of environmental problems and it will make energy cheep across the land.
3 Mi Island was sabotaged.

terpis Hard to figure why a slick ad like that didn’t do the trick.

ITEM THE FIFTH.  Call me crazy, but I tend to think Obama will likely win a second term.  If you’re wondering about the qualifiers, it’s because I’m not setting such a prediction in stone.  Also his party will suffer significant losses in the mid-term elections.  That is the norm, the electorate that voted in the candidate falls back as somehow the magic pixie dust doesn’t alleviate all that ails them, and the electorate that voted against them steps forward and entrenches themselves.  There are things the in-party can do to shrink their losses, and things they can do to increase their losses — the Democrats appear to have gone the latter route.  I could go on and explain some things about the purely politikal plusses and minuses of Republican positioning, but this is losing focus.

Now, I’m reading through this sort of predictable and cyclical mess from LPAC and associates to… what? End the Obama Presidency somehow or other?  A few asides tossed in, and I thought I saw a floating of the “British may axe him” thing.

I caught ol Rush Limbaugh muttering about Hillary Clinton shifting up a run against this oh-so-wholly broken Obama Administration.  It’s an item mostly pulled out his arsh, but it’s a meme that I  see floated about every so often.   Being make-believe Clintonistas, I expect to see LPAC releases to that effect sooner or later, based on supposed insider information.

But it also occurs to me, recalling the 2008 nominating fight, fully behind Clinton was the Larouche organization.  The nominating battle fell to this stasis where every single state contest result was easily forecasted right through the end.  And it was there that LPAC commented on the results of Oregon and Wast Virginia, incongruently (go down the batch of Larouche PUMA material in the comments section here).

Despite the desperate assertions and wishful thinking of the pundits, as well as of the Obama campaign, that the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination is all but over, voters in both Kentucky and Oregon turned out to vote in large numbers on May 20, delivering another landslide victory for Hillary Clinton in Kentucky. In Oregon, although Barack Obama won (as expected), he did so with a far narrower gap between himself and Mrs. Clinton than had been projected.

Steam-rolling ahead, I guess, somewhere beyond Hillary’s talking points.  This made no sense — the totals were roughly what was expected.
This wraps back around to the 2010 mid-term elections, which Larouche Inc is gearing up with as part of a “mass strike”, because their post-election release won’t differ much whether the Democrats lose 2 Senate Seats and 2 House Seats, or lose 10 Senate Seats and 50 House seats.

 Incidentally, as I see Larouche drop a pile on Obama’s NASA mission plans — I guess in concert with the election campaign of Keesha Rogers– I note that Buzz Aldrin has his back.

Also, they’re scouting out for Gold Bugs here.

Kent Conrad, Democratic Senator of North Dakota: Deficit Hawk, Pork Hound.

See also, Kit Bond, Republican Senator of Missouri.

Or maybe Bond isn’t.  But there always exists that thing, the bi-partisan Deficit Hawk Pork Hound Caucus.

Bond’s hold was meant to apply pressure on the government to approve a proposed federal office building in downtown Kansas City, Mo. In the end, Bond voted for Johnson’s nomination.

As for the politics of “The Holds” — I suppose you can say that Bond had his rather paroachial and tedious reasons.  The obnoxious politics of the moment brings us one final beating of the hold and/or filibuster of a conventional appointee in the form of a 60 to 40 Labor nominee.

So Richard Shelby announces the new holding of everyone.  And he is a member of the bi-partisan deficit hawk pork hound cacus.  Yes, yes, it’s not too hard to look back to the Bush administration and see him bluster about the Hold ups of a bunch fewer Bush appointees.  Up and Down Vote, and all that.

The one thing I can say is that there is a satisfactory item of small d democracy in Harry Reid’s throw over to Obama to push up a mass of recess appointments.  As you may or may not recall, Bush recess appointed a few holds.  And therein it is worthwhile to point the name of one of the major figures the Democrats were holding up: John Bolton for the U.N. — whose history is one of not believing in the U.N.  Compare that with the Labor nominee just held up and I suppose we see the ideological fissures of the matter.
So it was there that the 51 to 49 Democratic Senate held very brief Christmas break Senate sessions presided over by Jim Webb, Freshman duty from nearest state.

That’s where this item of small d democracy comes in.  The Republican Party can’t break the recess appointees, because they are in the Senate minority.  Never mind the Village Voice headline after Brown’s victory and the ensuing free for all of news sources stating the Democrats lost the majority.  (This headline was only slightly tongue in cheek as a parody, as some news sites actually did say the majority was lost.)