I’m sitting there in conservative Eastern Washington, watching local news the last year and some months back, seeing how some rural districts were circumventing the big “day of action” walkout for students on gun control measures, in one way and another.  I was particularly fascinated by this hard headed macho-inflected principal who — at the hour of the National Walk Out (surely encouraged by various urban school districts in liberal climes) — held an assembly — a “Salute to First Responders”.  Video footage of school gym with men in uniforms decked on the stage.  I don’t know if it’s impolitic to point it out — and I do this while wanting to give a good deal of manuevering room for failures in split decisions of no-win scenarios such as Parkland may represent — but the First Responders there botched their job — so much so that the local gun advocates surrounding Parkland in opposition to the anti-gun activism that sprung up will deflect from guns to this botched job — so, if part of the school assembly’s subtext was “These kids and their misguided activism need to stay in school” (and honor their superiors) — what were they honoring for whose political aim?

The next flush of inspiration saw that astro-turf grassroots hybrid — just as “March for your Lives” — on behalf of their second Amendment Rights.  A scattering of coverage for students’ school day protests — completely absent from the liberal blog news feed in the “shut out of the Overton Window because to cover it is to promote it” view — until some leaked discovery showed it was partially or largely organized by (gasp) adult political advocacy groups.  As a matter of principal, the hard headed principal would have been obliged to shut this one down too — with what school assembly, I don’t know.  (Maybe rerun the “Salute to First Responders”?)

I suppose the “Climate Activists” can’t have a counter-demonstration.  (Maybe I “I want my Plastic Straws!” demonstration?)  Assemblies — who knows?

I… think… the “5 Year Anniversary” magazine commemorating or… something (?) the fifth year anniversary of Robin Williams’s suicide has gone through its impulse buy slot at the grocery store… to be bumped in by —

Well, we do have the 25th anniversary “Friends” magazine up.  Nostalgia.  Some people are nostalgic for a favorite comfy sitcom (that … what?  Stopped airing new episodes a decade ago?  In May in a couple years, will there be a 15th anniversary of Friends cancellation?  And would it be the same magazine, same “leaf through” material… with the slightly different title?)

Is 5 years too soon, or can we have a 2 year anniversary magazine for something?  (There’s the Obama commemoration magazines — just for someone sighing past magazine covers about Trump — identical I suppose to those released just after he left office… and put out by the same outfits that released the “McCain Commemoration” magazines…)

Is… the anniversary of the Death of the Twinkee magazine coming to us, or did they replenish a renewal too soon for this one?

In other notes, The National Inquirer has a new suspect for who killed Kennedy.  Though I don’t think it’s John but Bobby.  The killer’s apparently not Ted Cruz’s dad this time out.

I think it was David French, the Republican who was urged by various neo-con figures of anti-Trump vintage (Bill Kristol comes to mind) to run for President in 2016, who chimed in with an op ed wondering “why are the democrats” in the debates “running against the successes” of the last two Democratic presidents?  And as they try to settle into some meaning on health care and immigration, you land on the one big controversy… The Crime Bill of the Clinton first term.

Easy enough for David French, given that it was essentially a Republican “get tough on crime” bill… with some measures like “Midnight Basketball” that the Republicans running for Congress in 1994 run on mercilessly.  (That itself a program promoted under Bush I’s “Thousand Points of Light”.)

What I found interesting was his admission that “but now tweakings can be made to let some people out of prison”… a nod against mass incarceration… an admission of gray.

Now turn to this Charles Blow op ed and we have this statement…

It was the way he advocated for the 1994 crime bill, a bill that contributed to America’s surging mass incarceration, which disproportionately affected black and brown people in this country.

The bill did some good, but the harm it did cannot be overlooked or understated. Rather than fully owning up to to the disastrous aspects of the bill, Biden has over the years bragged about it and defended it.

I suppose I shouldn’t dip into the argument as “an admission”, because it is a problem with political argument that nuance gets obliterated — make an argument for the other side of the argument and you end up losing the argument by some “Even you say”, a bad tendency in politics I wish there were a way to obliterate

— and clearly Charles Blow is against the bill and its effects whereas French is (I suppose) for the bill …

… but with those caveats.  Which is just a little… interesting(?).

I.  From “Everything Trump Touches Dies”, the Republican strategist anti Trump pundit figure surveys about and finds…

Of course, in the Trump era, no conspiracy is complete without an appearance by Roger Stone. Clad sometimes in a black T-shirt and beret, Stone frequently appears on Infowars, looking like a member of the Gray Panthers’ Viagra Liberation Front and sounding as if he’s mainlining Red Bull, steroids, and the ghostly ectoplasm of Lyndon LaRouche.

1.  So Rick Wilson connects Roger Stone to his appearances with Alex Jones, and not the Lyndon Larouche movement — never mind we have Roger Stone when asked about Larouche giving the “railroaded by Bush” line.
2.  Larouche resides as disconnected insult.
3.  Wilson appears to suggest Larouche as dead in a book published August 2018.

II.  Is there any evidence of such a thing having happened?
To bring about the necessary policy discussion on the collapsing British system, their fascist proposals on display at Jackson Hole, and most importantly the policy measures needed to bring about a classical New Paradigm, the international LaRouche Movement will hold Days of Action on university campuses in the first part of September, both across the United States and in close to a dozen countries internationally. This initiating deployment will be, in the words of Zepp-LaRouche, “an appeal to the youth of the world to transform the human species, by making sure that the human species becomes a space-faring species, and that there are principles which mean that this Green fascist stuff is completely wrong.”

Hm…  Not getting much news action on this front, but apparently the “College Tour” circuit was back on.   Was it?  I don’t see any college newspaper clippings on it, or social media reportages.  While there were a scattering through Obama, this was last a product in the Bush Administration years — where they sought recruitment by railing against Cheney and offered to double the square — that last one prompting students to believe that they were Beatnik collectives.  Much has changed since that time… first of all, it’s not student aged talking to student aged — we’d be getting to the point where the Larouchies are aged at competing as counterprogramming education to their professors.

Not sure what they’d be going for in the current age of Trump.  Perhaps, they’ll be seeking a “viral moment” — the Internet’s conservative side is full of the stealings and ripping off of the heads of MAGA hats.  The dilemma is that there’s not much a backing of college Republicans ready to zoom in on unceremonious Larouche table overturns.

In the current era, how do they respond to “Lyndon Larouche?  Isn’t he dead?”  (Breitbart appears to be the only media outlet of major note — for good or ill — that reports his birth still — for good or ill.)

III.  “Blog Talk Radio” … I’m not going to listen to any much — beyond the opening “Soldiers” song — but I guess given the link to the “sign the petition”… if  Trump gets us to the Moon, he’ll win California?

IV.  We figure out the true purpose of the CEC.

Even if the cash ban is introduced, which seems likely, the debate has provided the CEC with invaluable publicity for fundraising, which is one of its core skills. Last year it declared an income of $1.8 million, a huge sum for a party with no MPs.

Also seen with the CEC, a love of petitions.  And… and…

They need to stay active as possible in response to the big question posed…

Will the organisation of his Australian followers, the Citizens Electoral Council (CEC) – whose political influence has been in decline for some time – survive his demise?

Did it … survive his life?

The CEC has stood candidates in successive federal elections for nearly two decades, during which time it has been consistently and spectacularly unsuccessful. In 2004, the party ran candidates in 95 seats nationally and polled last in 80 of them. It received 42,349 votes, representing 0.36% of the total. It has fared little differently since then, except that it has fielded steadily fewer candidates. In the most recent federal election in May, the CEC only stood candidates for two lower house seats, who garnered a mere 2,834 votes nationally (0.02%).

As climate change comes back into focus as an issue, we’ll see smatterings of their other work:

The book was written by Lorenzo Carrasco, a Mexican immigrant to Brazil, and published in 2001 by the Washington-based Executive Intelligence Review, which was founded by the controversial U.S. conspiracy theorist and climate denier Lyndon H. LaRouche Jr.

While Green Mafia might seem inconsequential — reserved to the chat groups of conspiracy theorists — it may have left its mark on Brazilian far-right and conservative theories of environmentalism at the time.

And… UH OH.  Where’s the other Schiller Institute heading on environmental issues?

V.   The Washington Post is truly haunted by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
So claims the Larouche Movement.  Why?  Because they published an obituary of Albert V. Bryan, Jr. — which noted that he was the judge during the trial that brought Larouche to prison.  It’s not the main thrust of the focus of his career — that comes after noting him as running a “Rocket Docket”.  Indeed, in the comments section for the Washington Post article, the main focus point comes in debating the merits of his approach.  No one seems to care about the prosecution of Larouche.

(The Boston Globe, for whatever reason, not haunted?…)

V.  Three Republicans “of note” have thrown their hats into the ring for the Republican Primary race against Donald Trump.  I’m not one to judge what a “win” means for their efforts to exert some definition of Republicanism against that pronounced by Donald Trump, but due to the nature of these things… Larouche’s name will come up as a measuring stick of some kind…

Because Donald Trump is Donald Trump, people seem to have assumed that the normal laws of politics don’t apply. But if you had been handed a sheet with the president’s name crossed out and just the various polling numbers on it, then you would have expected at least one serious candidate—by which I mean “not Lyndon LaRouche”—to challenge the sitting president this cycle.

A few points of interest on Larouche as a precedent.  In either 1996 or 2000 (don’t know which), Larouche won a delegate thereabouts — delegates refused to the convention rules.  Toss in the mix the participants in the Democratic nomination fight of 2012 against Obama, and we have what you see with rules governing the three Republicans running.  Not quite the precedent set with states that alloted delegates and shut down the primary against Pat Buchanan in 1992, (South Carolina notably with Sanford in 2020), but in dealing with Larouche, we’re dealing with footnotes.

But, if the Republicans running want to use Larouche as a precedent…

In 1992 the California Secretary of State excluded Lyndon LaRouche from the Democratic presidential primary ballot. LaRouche sued in state court and won. In response to the court decision, the Secretary of State promulgated new standards: she will place anyone on the primary ballot who either campaigns in California, or who has appeared on the ballot in at least twenty other states, or who appeared in fifteen states and contested at least five caucuses.

VI.  The Washington Times focuses on the coming electoral meanderings of the Larouche Movement…

“I don’t know what we’ll do in the future, but we will probably get into some independent expenditures,” she said. “We’re looking at the whole picture, especially in the Midwest. That’s our homeland; that’s traditionally been our stomping ground.”
It’s not clear how much stomping LaRouche did in the Midwest or other regions.

They failed to sell the Senate bid of … um… hm… I know they’re running someone for Senate, but I forgot who.  It would be nice if when a news media asks them about their current electoral plans, they would … maybe… promote who they say they’re running.

The PAC took in $2.1 million last year, but virtually all of it went to administrative costs and a donation to the LaRouche Policy Institute.

“When you see them transferring big amounts of money to entities that are basically another arm of themselves, it really doesn’t give you any clue what the money is being spent on,” said Andrew Mayersohn, a PAC analyst at the Center for Responsive Politics.

The little sums, on the other hand, show that they spent a couple bucks at McDonalds and Starbucks and the like…

While noting that everything is legal and abides by Federal Election Commission regulations, Mr. Mayersohn, who identified the PAC in question without being told, said, “I’m not aware of any other PAC that operates that way.”

That’s because… THEY’RE REBELS.  They play by their own rules of reality.  And the Larouchie running in 2020 can only hope to equal past successes… still the stuff of notes on looming elections such as…

John Cornyn’s last election was against a billionaire who just squeaked by a “Larouche Democrat” through a run off primary.

VII.  Say what?

VIII.  So, we got William Jones for China selling “the BRI”.  Also in the Global Times.  And here’s Ghana news bite.

A letter to the editor from Doug Mallouk taking in the “neo-Malthusian” motives of the El Paso shooter.
Also, more Trump support and British bashing from Doug Mallouk.

IX.  c=256, baby!

50 years ago, on July 20, 1969, America landed Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin on the moon, a victory for all mankind. America intends to return to the moon, and woman and a man, in five years.  Join us for an evening celebrating these historic milestones and the beginning of a new era! Reception to follow.
Free Concert: Mozart’s Solemn Vespers and Songs about the Moon from around the World. Presented by the Virginia Schiller Institute Community Chorus.

X.  Guilt by association of idea.

More recently, the idea of such a bank was promoted by Lyndon LaRouche. He was a self-trained economist who ran for president eight times, once, as the New York Times noted in his obituary, from a prison cell. LaRouche died earlier this year at age 96.
Angela Vullo of Virginia, a member of the pro-bank coalition, told the council that “misinformation” linking the group to the LaRouche organization is false. Stuart Rosenblatt, another member of the coalition, declined to comment before the meeting on any LaRouche connections.

XI.  At the Left forum… factnet post factnet forum

but it is the former where he explicitly outs “LaRouchies” for work they did as CIA lackeys in weakening the socialist movements of the 70s. His brief remarks on the matter commence at around 1:28:10 through 1:28:40.

The comment “I think I prefer President Trump to President Bush” is a good way to annoy anyone and everyone, for reasons not quite able to put one’s finger on.  Part of the reaction may be presentism — an affect both rational and irrational in equal measure — as, well… yesterday is over, and why relitigite the Hoover Administration?  Part of the reaction is it implies something — anything at all — positive, even by comparison’s sake.

(We’ll see if the limited isolationalist military posturing blows up in smokes, as with Trump and his Fox News habit and his base voters, it always feels like it has the potential to any minute.   I see liberal blogosphereland giddy about a Rand Paul / Mitt Romney split, or Hannity / Carlson … but I’m thinking I miss the damnable chantings of the handful of Friday protesters marching as they did during Obama years “US Out of Afghanistan.  Can We Do It?  Yes We Can” — these days mostly seemingly focused on the Mexican border (with the standby of the guy with the Israel / Palestine sign), because…

I ponder whether or not if one to wear a “Biden for President” button, you’d get a similar effect.  It’s notable that as I sit here, I see no uprising of support for any candidate — save a couple of people coming out of a “Yang” event, and I doubt Yang’s getting even Kucinich level traction hereabouts.  (Though maybe he is?)  No one’s plopping down on anyone… though my guess is no one hereabouts would be plopping down on Biden.  Not a MAGA hat, sure, but just kind of irritating nonetheless.

Robby Soave’s Panic Attack includes the provocative (?) suggestion…

Whatever legitimate grievances the GamerGaters had were more than cancelled out by their obnoxious and abusive behavior, but they found a powerful 

And, then, as you see here, we go into a history of Milo Y’s swerving from mocking and belittling gamers on twitter to his role “uncovering the pc group conspiracy” …

A hedging — the initial issues at stake for “gamergate” blurred as irrelevant to discussing Milo Y as opportunistic, and the second act as trolling and cyber-bullying / stalking.  Michael Malice slides away from denouncements completely, and goes on all in…

The story of Gamergate has been told ad infinitum.  As briefly as possible, it started with allegations from her boyfriend that…

As a whole, Michael Malice’s book — The New Right: A Journey to the Fringe of American Politics — is pleasingly contradictory on assessing the left and right movements of American politics at large.  (The top marginal tax rate of the Eisenhower administration would be balked at by a President Bernie Sanders; a swift government take over of the steel industry by Truman as well; the oh-so-middle-of the-road Eisenhower immigration policy known then as “Operation Wetback” was suggested by Candidate Trump and bristled at; don’t make me laugh on LGBT rights…)  In this section,it’s maddening.  On one hand, the “Progressives” win utterly — on the other hand, they don’t know what they’re up against in choosing to fight these trolls…

Can both sides end up getting what they want from the issue and denouement?  One, some representation and variety and critical space, the other… grievances and trolling action?

We get to a good job with explaining it in terms of “entry-ism” — you’re a dude who likes pretending to blow things up in “first person shoot” mode — and if there has to be a female hero doing the action, make the boobs big and wearing a chain mail bikini.  Naturally, as women enter, they might be interested in something… else.  (And spurring into the mainstream of the subculture attacks on the Princess of Super Mario or the gender dynamics of Zelda.)  It all upsets the small subculture they have created for themselves.

Oddly, the retrograde gamers who p end up wanting Roger Ebert to be right when he once insisted, to seas of scorn, that video games are defacto can’t be art.  Not that they want that… though Malice does end up suggesting that in following with how a fat drag queen became the model for the the sea villain in Disney’s Little Mermaid or madames and prostitutes of the nineteenth century popularized the fashion color red… these the despised outcasts form the cutting edge of the next mainstream bourgois culture…

Anyway, it’s all as against any commentary I’ll generally get… oh, you know… the second toxic behavior not really undermining so much as affirming the gist of the story.