Archive for February, 2011

The Federalist Party never got a chance to put the “Every generation of partisan has the need to revamp their reverred president” rule into effect

Monday, February 28th, 2011

That Republican leaders sought to encourage a feeling of popular participation in the affairs of the party and to keep alive popular enthusiasm for the party was well demonstrated by the frequency of party celebrations held throughout the country.  Many of the Republican celebrations which accompanied the inauguration of Jefferson on March 4, 1801, were well-planned, elaborate demonstrations which featured parades, dinners, orations, balls, and other festivities.  These celebrations were repeated in many places in March of each year throughout Jefferson’s administration.  “The 4th of March forms an epoch in the political history of the United States, which ought always to awaken the purest sensations of the American Patriot,” declared a Richmond Republican meeting in announcing “the celebration of that day, which restored to us the genuine principles of ’76, and removed the alarms which had clouded the fairest prospects of American Liberty and Independence.”  Reporting the Republican celebration in New Haven in March 1803, Abraham Bishop enthusiastically pointed out that “the procession extended in close columns through two sides of the public square and consisted of 1108 men.  The whole company far exceeded that on commencements and elections.” […]

In addition to the March 4th Celebrations, there were also the July 4th festivities which came to be separately observed by the two parties in many places.  A July 4th celebration planned and controlled by Republicans meant, as explained by Levi Lincoln, “a republican orator, republican prayers, republican music, republican toasts, and republican songs.”  Special celebrations were also held, the most elaborate and extensive being the celebration of the acquisition of Louisiana.  From Washington, Federalist Congressman Manasseh Cutler reported in January 1804:  “There is a Jubilee proclaimed here by the Democrats. … There is to be such a feast, it is said, as was never known in America, an account of taking possession of Louisiana.  There is to be diners — suppers — balls — assemblies, dances, and I know not what. … The Jubilee is to begin here — but they expect it will run, like wildfire, to every dark and benighted corner of America.”  And spread it did.  Republican newspapers called for a national festival, and Republicans in many parts of the country organized celebrations.  So tremendous was the Philadephia celebration that it must have dominated the life of the city for days, even weeks, before the May 12 Festival.

Federalists replied to the Republican celebrations by observing Washington’s birthday, just before the March 4th festivals, and in other ways calling attention to the first President.  The Worcester Massachusetts Spy, obviously trying to counteract recent Republican demonstrations, devoted most of the issue of March 7, 1804, to publishing Washington’s farewell address. […]

First of all, the Republicans who had successfully turned out John Adams in 1900 campaigned against Adams as long as they could keep alive the memories of the unpopular measures of the administration. […]  Although the Republicans were anxious to keep the name of John Adams associated with the Federalists, they were unwilling to allow the Federalists to claim President Washington.  Federalists made repeated efforts to keep Washington’s name before the public in connection with their party.  They conspicuously celebrated Washington’s birthday.  Federalist party tickets were labelled the “Washington Ticket”, the “Washington and Anti-Embargo Ticket”, and “Washington and Adams Nominations.” […] Republicans in Vermont reacted to Federalist use of Washington’s name by designating their ticket the “Washington and Jefferson Ticket” and referring to the Federalist slate as the “Adams and Hamilton Ticket.”

— Noble E Cunningham, Jr.  The Jefferson Republicans in Power:  Party Operations 1801-1809, yr 1963

………………………………………..

What strikes me from this passage (or series of passages, I guess) is we see the earliest example of the theory of Political Party Over-heroship: The Federalist Party reached back to Washington because that’s who they’ve got as the Republican Party today reach back to Reagan because that’s who they’ve got — subsequent politicians have to be dealt with and nodded to pro forma but not too obsequitiously.  Meantime, the opposing party claims the mantle, as much as they can get away with, of the other party’s last hero and claims that “Today’s Federalist Party is not the Party of Washington” or “Today’s Republican Party is not the Party of Reagan” (Good lord, this has to be the most narrowly selected for political purposes thrown up for  for Reagan , though I suppose the same could be said for Reagan in charging the Soviets with breaking this Precious Right… also then again Reagan did the same with Roosevelt with his “Today’s Democratic Party is not the Party of Roosevelt” bravados).

Also, tendencies to see through partisan lenses “the real America”, blocking out the other faction from the picture, the totality of the “republican experience”, and etc.

Countdown — the top 5 Larouche News Stories of the past week and a half

Sunday, February 27th, 2011

Maybe you disagree with my choices of stories?  Ah well.  Maybe next time, I’ll have your pet story up.  (I don’t know what else shifts in the blogo and news sphere.)  Also, this is something of a “count up” — 1 to 5 instead of 5 to 1.

STORY NUMBER ONE
WIKIPEDIA DELETES ANOTHER OF THOSE AMERICAN SYSTEM NON-PROFIT VOLUNTEERS
:  The biggest news story of the past couple of weeks — or week and a half depending on when I get around to post this — is, of course… world exclusive here, unless HK and Cla69 were ranting about it at wikipedia review — THE SOCK PUPPET Angel Flight account has been deleted.

By pushing this as the BIGGEST LAROUCHE NEWS STORY OF THE MOMENT, I am getting a head start on my theory of post Larouche death organizational shiftings — which is that a substantial portion will become unhinged off of the need to be tethered down by the weight of “Larouche” and float into the sphere of the Conspiracy Advocacy ala Tarpley, and that which remains fighting for the 1000 Year Legacy of the name Larouche will be devoting about 75 percent of its resources to editing wikipedia articles.  (There’s still room in the remaining 25 percent to the post office tour, and etc.)

Cla68 is amazingly obtuse on the matter of “Angel’s Flight”, and seems strikingly interested in getting information back to the Larouche organization:  Will, you and SV have said that this company where the edits supposedly originated (and no evidence of it has yet been presented) is “small”. Could you tell me how many people work there? If you don’t know, then how can you be so sure that HK was the person running the account? I can’t be sure based on “behavioral” evidence, because you have refused to share your evidence with me. What was the reason for that? Cla68 (talk) 23:46, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Your Larouche team clings mightily to their stray “validator” sources of succor:
@Cla, you have been concerned there was no POV pushing from Angel’s flight (Af). I saw some. Here is the LaRouche position something from Executive Intelligence Review (a LaRouche publication): “Obama’s so-called health-care reform, modelled as it is on both the Nazi T4 and the British NICE model, is riddled with procedures which will permit the cutting of care, from the comparative effectiveness studies to the Accountable Care Organizations. But the chief measure, as Office of Management and Budget chief Peter Orszag is at pains to stress, is the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), previously known as the Independent Medicare Advisory Board (IMAB), and popularly known as “death panels.”[4] Af came to death panel and would support text that overstated things (to LaRouche’s benefit). Here’s me calling Af’s POV out. Af was trying to link the IPAB (and NICE) to the word death panel by overstating-sources & giving undue weight, in my opinion. They took a mini-break then returned by adding back some OK content, but also some content (off-topic and Gratzer) that had already been decided against, fyi. Jesanj (talk) 17:34, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Jesanj, please don’t call something a “LaRouche position” which is discussed more widely by many more http://healthcarereform.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=001528 participants than just LaRouche. 81.210.206.223 (talk) 18:22, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

That’s interesting, Angel’s flight pointed out that source too. Jesanj (talk) 20:15, 18 February 2011

Anyway… From this lofty building in Los Angeles  — which, as described by Angel’s Flight is a non-profit from which he volunteers, the future of the Larouche faction of the Larouche organization marches into the future.

For what it is worth:
Current estimates show this company has an annual revenue of $500,000 to $1 million and employs a staff of approximately 1 to 4. Companies like American System Publications usually offer: Sweethaven Publishing Services, Web Publishing Services, American Publishers Service, Von Holtzbrinck Publishing Services and Educators Publishing Services.

But that’s less interesting than these anecdotes about how annoying their phone calls can be.

I do like Slim Virgin’s almost suggestion to, more or less, cut the sources down to Washington Post and the New York Times — currently the Larouchies at wikipedia are edging in meetings with World Leaders  — as they shift through sources on who they met in Latin America, it lead to this comment:

Come on, Will, push! Push that POV! How close together are the contractions? Pachuco cadaver (talk) 15:43, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Which leaves us to Delia Peabody wanting to expand the “international coverage” of Larouche’s “2007-2008 forecast” and the Kesha Rogers victory.  (Why not the role of the Vault to overthrow Rachel Brown’s victory?)  The funniest line from the crypto-Larouchies, picked up by the vanished straight-up Larouchies, is the request to “down-play 70s era critics”.  I suppose we can skip that King’s book was published in the next decade, but this is by way of nipping away the NY Times articles that spring from the org’s first foray into any mainstream attention — oh, Chris White Affair.
I guess things all depend on where you place that “Overton Window”.  (heh heh on library offerings.)   This person’s request is interesting.  While he focuses on  a lot of “former” LaRouchies or many of the Democratic Party bigshots who were student radicals, the article focus suggests an element of where the one dimensional paradigm falls apart for your two peas in a pod.  Is that an allusion to this Tarpley… who, um — more press than his former cult?  Peddler of conspiracies or conspiracy theories?  (For the latter: Remember this?)

I’ll preface this piece by saying I support, and am wildly entertained by, all forms of political participation. Except terrorism, which I hate. There is a place in America for Lyndon Larouche, an anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist whose Larouche Movement is driven by pots-and-pans-banging college students on the backs of flatbed trucks.
I’m sure there a few Fabianists out there who are patiently waiting for scientists to create a serum that will hasten the arrival of a socialist utopia.
I’m pretty sure they hate being aligned onto this segment of the spectrum, which goes against the grain of some conspiracies they’ve found over the years:

The Corporation”, attempted coup by wealthy Free Market Laissez-Faire industrialists’ “American Liberty League”, beginnings of what’d later be called “Libertarian Party” and Libertarianism, (ie Ron Paul, Bob Barr and Lyndon Larouche)

This one might be better, though.

I can see why though. It reads like Lyndon Larouche who once bought half an hour of TV time to run for president and rambled incoherently about Classical politicians and philosophers. Posted February 17, 2011 at 12:48:58 PM
… even th0ugh it hints at the Larouchies’ problems in “skewing” wikipedia articles to the “latest”.

Y’know, about this next article:  I don’t trust a pop culture study that cites “Dope Inc” and Texe Marr. Also, this strikes me as the type of person that should be identified next to Larouche — the right genre.  If not these people.

In other wikipedia news… this.

… Come to think of it, the reference to “former Larouchies” might be referencing this guy.

STORY NUMBER TWOLOS ANGELES CROSSWORD PUZZLE MASTER SNUBS THOUSAND YEAR GENIUS IN FAVOR OF HOCKEY GREAT
The second biggest story to ROCK the Larouche Movement over the past week and a half or two weeks, depending on when I post this — Lyndon Larouche was snubbed by the LA Times crossword puzzle-master Peter Wentz.

58A: ’70s-’80s NHLer known as “Lucky Pierre” (LAROUCHE). I’m not a hockey fan, but this one was easy enough to get from the crossing entries. I can understand why Peter & Rich wanted to avoid a reference to Lyndon Larouche and his Band of Merry Men.

I kept plugging away and finished most of it, but had no idea who Larouche was – so I Googled Lucky Pierre – that was a big mistake! Cheers to all – and enjoy the rest of your weekend.
Reports are coming in that some are saying that the Larouche organization reacted with fury upon seeing that their 1,000 Year Genius was snubed for a mere Hockey Great.  The movement came close to protesting in front of the LA Times headquarters with images of the crossword puzzle masters with Hitler mustaches, or so say some from unspecified reports, and slogans about Nazi Crossword Puzzles coming from out of the British Empire.  These plans were discarded upon viewing a highlight reel of Pierre Larouche’s career, and observing that he was a damned great Hockey player.

Meantime, is Hollywood snubbing Larouche at Oscar Time?

“The King’s Speech” – Something tells me that the royal family is secretly funding all of these sympathetic portrayals of the current royal line to cover up their collusion in controlling the world drug trade. Maybe that something is a Lyndon Larouche pamphlet.

And is The Mentalist written by covert Larouchian agents?

STORY NUMBER THREEDISSENSION ROCKS ORG

Dissension in the ranks of the Lyndon Larouche Movement, as reported by Harley Schlanger.

LaRouche has insisted, repeatedly, over the objections of many Democrats – and even members of his own organization – that the Hitler mustache on Obama is a truthful representation, and that nothing short of Obama’s removal from office is necessary, if our nation is to survive.

All right, I recognize this as a routine set up — to get the movementarians to doubt their own doubt.  But let’s take it as a straight forward statement anyways.  It’s always good to see the org broadcast the idea that their people are autonomous, and there is an element of “debating society” within the movement where tendencies do acrue but are respected.  But how does this manifest itself?  Are there any examples from the front lines in the Post Office Campaign — can I see a news filler item or blog post with someone behind an Obama Hitler shrugging, “Yeah.  It’s maybe a bit of an exaggeration.  Not literally meant.  He’s more like Calvin Coolidge or Grover Cleveland in terms of policies, but those don’t quite have the explosive power of Hitler.”  (This does smack in line with a comment once seen which did get a donation — to a remark about agreeing with such and such an issue but finding Larouche a despicable character, a Card-table operator responded with “Don’t worry.  He’s going to be dead in a few years anyways.”)  Are there op-ed dissents published anywhere in Larouche publications giving the minority opinion?  Was there an airing of opinion and heated exchange in the corridors of power before the Line was firmly dropped in stone, and if so wouldn’t the trump card go “We’ve called everyone else Hitler!”?

STORY NUMBER FOUR  “ALL YOUR PROTESTS ARE BELONG TO US”

Upon learning that they were in, in effect, fronting for the Larouche organization, the protesters in Libya en masse threw up their hands and went home muttering, “I guess we can live with Qaddafi for a while longer.”

Oh yeah – and the LaRouche shitheads were there too.
The good news is that the Hitler signs this time are yours.  And the “other side” will find every last one of them and publish them on their blogs.  The  Tea Party, which I guess in the Larouche purview of things is a different wing of the domestic slice of the Mass Strike — the one protesting Democratic Adminstrations instead of Republican Administrations — is in a bit of a flutter, charging hypocrisy and this item of familiarity

The same media that went into desk-pounding rage about LaRouche-wacko signs putting a Hitler moustache on Obama calmly refused to discuss signs where Gov. Walker was compared to Mubarak and Adolf Hitler.

Also see.  The Larouchies weren’t able to corner this market — they recognize the new bi-partisan zietgiest and moved in with Rand Paul, but really in terms of executive power we’re in whack-a-mole territory with the governors — it could easily have been Chris Christie as opposed to Walker.
Having the Obama Hitler still around, they are apparently still tracking about the Tea Party contingent of the protestsI guess they can ditch it if they want and flee to the other side, or find the true Leftists of “two party duopoly” belief.   Incidentally:

They know who LaRouche is and believe he is a leftist, and any LaRouchies showing up at Tea Party rallies are just trying to make them look bad. I wish I was kidding about this.
Incorrect.  They’re leading a Mass Strike!

One thing you can give the “Left”, however you wish to define it, is there will be a slice of it giving the protests an international purview.  It’s a bit of chutzpah to claim the Middle East protests as the same, or even part of the same, as the Mid West protests — but Vive La Solidarity.  America’s protesters are more likely to link the two than Egypt’s, though we’ll end up seeing all the signs from the Mid-east by way of commondreams.com or similar website.

So… the Larouche’s “Mass Strike” paradigm.  Let’s see, there’s IcelandEgyptWisconsinOhioLibya.

They were, of course, sparked by the protests that have been happening in front of various suburban post offices.  See the Mass Strike Vanguard here.
Rejected here.  (“Paper thin?”)

This sounds appropriatePlus of course the oddballs: I saw some benighted soul toting around what appeared to be Larouche propaganda, and another in full Seattle Supersonics basketball regalia, complete with giant flag.

STORY NUMBER FIVE:  ILLUMINATING DISCUSSION ABOUT JEREMIAH DUGGAN BREAKS OUT OF THE MUCK OF FACTNET

I’m pretty laissez faire in my attitude toward factnet postings.  If it veers into an item of easily passed over juvenilia, I’m fine — it’ll right itself in time and some items of interest concerning the cult — frivulous or serious — will exert themselves.  The result is that I’m mostly puzzled by the Charles Schulz Peanuts reference — my questioning veering toward when, say, Dennis Speed joined decades ago, did he think his organization was going to spend time in its published output explaining Peanuts routines?

Somehow, emerging out of rubble of a particular arena of pointless, what might be the most substantial discussion regarding Jeremiah Duggan emerged.  Try entries number, oh 6306 and go on to maybe 6365.  Surely things flinter in and out before those numbers, though.

Also seen on factnet, some new fragmentary pieces on the founding of the LYM — which I can’t easily find, but describe the effects of the separation of the LYM from the Baby Boomers and end up (whether they realize it or not) suggesting the attractions of the heaped praise the LYMers received in Cadre School for a time against manning the Post Office tour.  Also of interest is this — it might be the first Larouchian response I’ve seen to Conyers’s disavowal of his standing in front of a Larouche podium.   Myattempt to put their lobbying where it was in the full context of the 2004 Election protestations is here.

Here’s a quick study of ShakespeareWhy Star Trek is not a cult.  Also, moderately interesting about some other organization — 75 percent of its resources dedicated to editing wikipedia articles?

Overheard Phone Conversations

Sunday, February 27th, 2011

“Remember when I met a hooker and didn’t realize she was a hooker?  … No, no, no.  That was a stripper! … I’m talking about at the Waterfront. … Yeah!  That was it!  Really tall.”

The Mideast and the Midwest and Protests … compare and contrast

Thursday, February 24th, 2011

A few dozen rotesters are chanting Pioneer Square.  I’m wondering what their cause is, so I take a closer look.  They’re Libyans marching aginst Qaddafi, joining the massive protests in Libya.

For a second I thought they might have been showing Solidarity with breathens in Wisconsin.  As per usual, as the Left does, “solidarity” has been drawn between the various protests in the Mid-East and the Public Employees Union protests in the Midwest.  We see signs saying “Wisconsin = Egypt”.  If you say so — I like the Mother Jones q and a on events in Wisconsin — “Q:  Is Wisconsin the same as Egypt?  A:  No.”  (And there’s a link to a story explaining the key differences, as if they aren’t glaring.)

If it is the “Bizarro Tea Party” — like the Tea Prty is the Bizarro War Protests — I will say that the prank call of “Koch” to the Governor was a lot more productive and useful and successful than the Brietbart actor/activist/pimp wannabe’s attempted phone thinging with Senator Landrieu.

I will say that one neat thing about the events in the Middle East, even if it ends up being only “1848 Europe all over again” (ie: a somewhat disappointing end) — is to see different nationalities come out as we move onto different nations.  It’s a little like the World Cup Soccer Title game showing at Pioneer Square, which was packed this summer with Spaniards.

I only wish that the Midwest march produces a similar effect.  I want everyone from Wisconsin that lives here in Portland to be marching at Pioneer Square.  When we move on to Ohio, everyone from Ohio needs to come out.  Etc. Etc.

[…]

So.  Memos like this flowing out of the Obama Administration right now?

the willamette week box boff again

Tuesday, February 22nd, 2011

There’s one more day, or maybe just a handful of more hours, to see the Willamette Week mock – New York Post cover, parody “Sum of Sam” regarding Mayor Sam Adams — in the boxes around the city.

I point this out not so much because of the article / interview, but because looking around, it appears someone has penned in a funny blocked tooth for Sam Adams.  This itself wouldn’t be interesting, except that there are multiple examples of blocked Sam Adams tooths — it appears to be every one within the blocks I walked around yesterday.

Suggesting someone did it multiple times.  One makes sense.  Every one …
… That seems to be too much Effort for too little reward.  Unless, I guess, there’s a type of person, and enough of them, that it adds up quickly.

…………………

Update:  My mistake.  It’s just an unflattering photograph the ww put up.

Presidents Day, and the contradictions of assessment

Monday, February 21st, 2011

I have gone round and round with Arthur too many times that I don’t want to do so again, but I can point to a small item of irony, if you are inclined to do as I do and pluck Grant next to Arthur for my pointless Presidents Day exercise.  As we know, Garfield’s assassin — a Charles J. Guiteau — announced triumphantly upon the shooting, “I am a Stalwart, and Arthur is now President!”  Hence, the political possibilities of Arthur were limited down to not acting as a Stalwart would.

The Republican Party had formed with its two wings — the Radical Republicans, upholders of civil rights for the Freedman and desiring a Reconstruction that would overturn the Southern Aristocracy that had been upholding the Slavery tradition — and a conservative wing, seeking conciliation with the old Slave states in reforming the Union.  The two wings evolved as Radical leaders Sumner and Stevens passed from the political scene into “Stalwarts” and “Half Breeds”.  Grant’s newly rising Historical reputation rests on his having been the last President to take seriously the rights of the Freedmen, fighting the KKK and Red Shirts — a good part of his negative legacy of corruption with regard to the Southern states rests on the fact that Blacks voting was described in many corners as Corruption — at any rate, the post-Reconstruction governments proved no less corrupt than the “Carpet-baggers” they overturned.  Grant gave up the ghost of Civil Rights around the seventh year of his presidency, at which point the two wings of the party eased into simply two armies of office seekers.

Four years later, Grant lost his attempted third term nomination, and to appease Stalwart leader Roscoe Conkling, the Republicans and nominee Garfiled handed the Stalwart machine creation of a post master Chester Arthur the vice-president slot.  When Garfield was shot, Arthur was rather hemmed in, and threw Conkling under the bus, and signed civil service reform to make the Stalwart / Half-Breed fight more irrelevant.  Thus ended this particular Republican Party factionalization…

… Almost.  It continued in the South, where the two factions evolved into the “Black and Tan” faction and the “Lily White” factions — the names telling the crux of who they each were.   Republican nominees bought the factions up as needed, and gave them post-master jobs — eventually President Herbert Hoover would more or less settle the matter by siding with and building up the Lily White factions — though the party remained “on the order of an esoteric masonic lodge and not so much a political party”.

So, the lesson of plucking Grant and Arthur is somewhat at odds with each other.  One was supposedly corrupt, but what is corruption — the other the Reformer cleaning up the corruption that was synonmous with Grant.

I would pluck out, perhaps, Mckinley for this exercise — argue that everything Roosevelt did was started by McKinley, but that Mckinley wasn’t a boisterous asshole about it.  (He has a champion in Kevin Phillips.)  Again, more contradictions in what I was arguing.

Okay.  Presidents Day.  I’m guessing, stick a gun at a random person and ask them to name them.   They’ll get through the Founding Fathers of Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe — skip to Jackson — won’t get anyone until Lincoln — skip to Roosevelt and Wilson — skip to Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Jonnson, and now we’re on good footing to get on through Obama –even if perhaps Ford or Carter slip their mind.

I was going to do in my exercise a vicious attack on Eisenhower, but I’m guessing you can write it yourself.

But I’m looking over books at Powells.  Two things catch my eye.  Used.  A two volume book on Grover Cleveland.  Leather – bound.  Fancy looking.  75 bucks.  I’m guessing for the bounding.  Is there a market for this?  Then, apparently in the same series, a two volume account of William Howard Taft.  Go figure!  There’s hope for Arthur yet!

Let us now commemorate President’s Day

Saturday, February 19th, 2011

I apparently made a “politically incorrect” statement, or threw a skunk into the middle of a room.
“President’s Day.  We used to have Washington’s Birthday and Lincoln’s Birthday.  Why do we have only one now?”
So I say, “To make way for MLK Day.”
And so it goes.  “I’m not going to touch that one.”

It is my understanding.  There were two Holidays.  We weren’t going to get a third one, and besides which that was a convenient rationalization to avoid agreeing to MLK Day.  So they consolidated Washington and Lincoln.

Which is good.  It makes the day a celebration of, as yet, 43 people of varying competence and historical import, and not just one supposed Great Leader.  It is what separates America from North Korea, which just had a week long celebration devoted to the Birthday of Kim Jong Il.

So how should we commemorate President’s Day?  I think by bashing and tearing down the Presidents with high reputations and virtually enshrining some Presidents with middling or low, or better still considered non-entities, onto Mount Rushmore.  Mind you, this is an exercise in Contrarianism.  It doesn’t have to be wholly believed, or even terribly consistent.

Thomas Jefferson.  A damned Philospher King whose vision was anachronistic from day one, who “sought to turn the whole world into an 18th century Virginia” and thus has beecome “a kind of free-floating icon who hovers over the American political scene much like one of those dirigibles cruising above the Super Bowl”.  His love of violent metahors and rhetoric should really be looked over by a psychiatrist.  His greatest Presidential accomplishment — the Louisiana Purchase — was achieved by violating his political ideology, and would have been done by his Federalist Predecessor without the hand wringing.  Historians praising his greatness just look the other way at his second term, where his refusal to build up a military and thus subsequent Economic Embargo against Britain plunged the nation into its first Depression and set up the War of 1812.

Theodore Roosevelt.  To read the works of his Intellectual Champion and influence, Herbert Croly, is to make Glenn Becks out of us all in chomping at a supposed “Fascism” of “Progressivism”, with a presumption of government’s role in shaping the citizenry and not much the other way around.  As it were, Roosevelt was not much a champion of great Progressive Ideals until about the seventh year of his presidency.  His actions in the Brownsville Affair set the stage for his Third Party run where he explicity called for a “White Man”‘s Campaign.  And the stage he set for his fourth presidential campaign was the worst of the lot, and had he not passed away he would have ended up back in the presidency,  where he threw away any negative or critical stances against “Big Business” and the Trusts.

John Kennedy.  His assassination allowed his partisans to read into him all kinds of crazy ideas — for instance, the idea that the man who came into office by lying about and stoking fears about a “Missile Gap” with the Soviets was all set to pick a fight with the Military Industrial Complex and avoid Vietnam.  He waved in an era of Presidential Image Mking such that polls showed Americans regarded him as a Great Family Man — which may or may not be the case, but whose numbers would have tipped had his endless games of Touch Football not been so publicized and his endless Philandering been publicized.  His death allowed him to escape the Judgements against the “Imperial Presidency” and against the Federal Government’s Surveliance State that would greet Johnson and Nixon, that judgement in turn allowing Kennedy’s admirers to shave Johnson’s accomplishments back onto Kennedy.

John Tyler.  His Presidential Legacy comes in staring down Henry Clay and assuming defiantly ALL responsibilities and privileges associated with the title of “Presidency of the United States” — which was an open question upon the death of William Henry Harrison.  That he spent his three years and 11 months in a political isolation with an abondoned party is a moot point — he set the precedent that ensured a proper sense of political order and without his actions, America would have suffered fears of dissolution upon any other President’s deaths.

Zachary Taylor.  The Founders of our nation gravitated toward the position of slavery as a “Necessary Evil” which would be done away with in due course.  The invention of the Cotton Gin pushed new rationalizations for the position that Slavery was a positive good, and needed to be protected and extended at all costs.  (The pernicous effects of this political stance was how John Quincy Adams ended up an Abolitionist on the House floor — protesting the “Gag Rule” which restricted First Amendment Rights).  Taylor, from his role as a Souther President, sought Expansion without regard to the extension of Slavery, and thus represented the last chance at that “slow death of Slavery” — before Fillmore, Pierce, and Buchanan came in to march us on to Civil War.  Taylor was thus a martyr to the cause of Union, the last hope to avoid Civil War, and is thus saluted.

I’ll pull five more out my butt for the next entry.

Celebrating Dear Leader’s Birthday in Style

Thursday, February 17th, 2011

You may or may not have noticed, and you may or may not be celebrating…

Actually you’re almost certainly not celebrating…

But it’s Kim Jong Il’s Birthday.  It happened on the 16th, but there’s a weeklong celebration on the website of the Korean Central News Agency of the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea.  Here are some highlights:

Floral baskets were given by representatives from the Communist Party of China, the family of Zhou Wei and daughter of Zhou Baozhong who is related to the anti-Japanese revolutionary struggle in China, the King of Combodia, Syrian Defense Minister, the diplomatic corps and the economic and commercial councilors corps, Japanese personages, Korean resident in Russia, and Gifts came in from the State Academic Igor Moiseyev Dance Company of Russia.

Greetings were offered by cuadorian Committee for Supporting Korea’s Independent and Peaceful Reunification and the general manager of the United Gulf Construction Co. W.L.L. of Kuwait,

Foreign broadcasts and press write ups praising Dear Leader came from  La Prosperite of Democratic Congo, Cambodian newspaper Pracheachon, The Apsara TV and Radio Broadcasting of Cambodia, The New Nigerian, Ethiopian newspaper Daily Monitor, a Nepalese newspaper, a Pakistani magazine, and Bangladeshi newspapers.

Internet postings came from The U.S. Group for the Study of Songun Politics, The Korean Friendship Association headquartered in Spain. The International Alliance of Societies for the Study of the Juche Idea and Songun Policy in East European and Central Asian Regions, and The British Association for the Study of Songun Policy.

Films about Kim Jong Il, “Arms of Korea” and “We Will Follow You to the End of the Earth”, were shown in France and Thailand, and elsewhere.

Seminars and lectures were held in France and the Congo, Finland, Mexico, Democratic Congo and Indonesia, and from the Central Standing Committee of the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan.

The Central Committee of the Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist) came out with statements praising Dear Leader.

Exhibits were launched Moscow, and Brazil, and Guinea, .  Meetings were held in Romania, Paektu.  Figure skaters of Russia, France and the Czech Republic came. 

In North Korea, “The Brilliant History of Great Leadership” was shown in the People’s Palace of Culture, Ice Sculpture festival started in Samjiyon County.
Not to mention The 15th Kimjongilia Festival, where displayed in the festival are potted Kimjongilias presented by armed forces organs, ministries, national institutions, the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan, diplomatic missions of different countries and missions of international organizations here, organizations for friendship and solidarity with the DPRK, more than 80 units in all, soldiers, people from all walks of life, school youth and children, overseas Koreans and foreigners, a number of changes in the distribution of decorative lights and lighting to add to the festivity, and utmost sincerity is being shown by all units and participants to display Kimjongilias, the most beautiful, immortal flowers.

Get everyone off the Endangered Species at once!

Wednesday, February 16th, 2011

I have been noticing a pattern whenever I look up to see what Congress-critter of Doc Hastings is advocating and advancing.  I suppose some of this is justifiable, and even goes with the job description of what he heads up in Congress — ie: someone actually interested in conservation will be balancing sea lions with salmon.  But it’s still kind of funny.

Doc Hastings Item: House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings says killing sea lions is sometimes the only option for managers trying to protect salmon and steelhead at Bonneville Dam.

Doc Hastings Item:  Some members of Congress say there are too many gray wolves in the United States. […]
In the House, the bill has been referred to the Natural Resources Committee, headed by Washington state Republican Rep. Doc Hastings. Although he’s not a co-sponsor of the legislation, Hastings backs the idea.

Doc Hastings Item:  The Barbi twins have been champions of the wild horse cause — in July, they targeted Rep. Doc Hastings, (R-Wash.) for his opposition to the “Restore Our American Mustangs Act,” 
[…]
which would” go spend $700 million for homes and welfare for wild horses,” said Ranking Member Doc Hastings.
(Still has “wefare”?)

Doc Hastings Item:  Upton Sinclair once said, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” […]
Hastings says that the national ocean policy is “an irrational zoning process” that “will harm the economy and cost jobs.” It will, he claims, “place ‘off-limits’ signs on huge portions of our oceans and coasts, seriously curtailing… all types of energy development.” To date the largest marine protected area ‘off-limits’ to extractive uses is in the remote Northwest Hawaiian Islands and was created by an executive order issued under President George W. Bush in 2006.

Well, the sooner the horses, gray wolves, sea lions, and whatever else is in the ocean die out, the sooner they can be drilled.