ITEM NUMBER ONE: Larouchie proves King-Maker in Texas
Just call Craig Holtzclaw the most powerful Larouche Member in American Politics.
On Saturday, Houston lawyer Shawn Thierry effectively won a state House seat by a vote of 13-11, with the deciding vote cast by a card-carrying organizer with the Lyndon LaRouche PAC, a fringe group whose politics are all over the map.
They print out cards?
There were supposed to be 27 chairs at Saturday’s vote. A few days earlier, one chair, another acolyte of Lyndon LaRouche, was stripped of his position after party officials determined he resides outside of the district he was representing. Lee Carter was thought to have a slim majority of the remaining 26 chairs.
But when the campaigns turned up to the center, personal crises had kept two of Lee Carter’s chairs from turning up. With 24 chairs remaining, things got off to a shaky start, presaging difficulties to come: When the chairs attempted to elect one of their own to preside over the meeting, the two candidates both got 12 votes, precipitating a literal coin flip. […]
But what is it Holtzclaw believes, exactly? “I am a LaRouche Democrat,” he said, as in yet another acolyte of the infamous semi-cult leader who thinks Obama is Hitler, has argued that the Queen of England controls the global drug trade, and who wants to colonize space. Ah.
Holtzclaw said he had voted for the candidates who communicated to him that they were willing to take elements of the LaRouche platform to Austin, namely, telling all those tea-party Texas Republicans that we need “big government investment in infrastructure.” That’s what LaRouche calls “the science of physical economy.”
Blackmon and Thierry, he said, had seemed to embrace that line more than Lee Carter. And that’s why she lost, in part.
We await to see if there was some “corrupt bargain” as that which was historically alleged to take place when Henry Clay swung Presidential the election of 1824 the way for John Quincy Adams.
ITEM NUMBER TWO: Australia Votes…
In the system that brought a member of the “Motoring Enthusiasts Party” into parliament… the Citizens electoral council remains … right at the bottom
Jeff Davy — Citizens Electoral Council — 159 votes.
We now wait to see how the four candidates do in the Northern territories.
Hm… The fertile soils of Kingaroy which gave us Sir Joh also gave life to the Citizens Electoral Council which, in the 2010 federal campaign, issued a press release insisting that Prince Philip collaborated with former Nazi officer Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands to establish the World Wildlife Fund specifically to reduce global population.
More than 2000 Queenslanders voted for the CEC in the 2013 federal ballot and it was their democratic right to do so. It is also a democratic right to politely pose the question: “What on earth were they thinking?’’
And yet … is there method in this madness? Perhaps the behaviour of modern political parties is such that the electorate’s only rational response can be irrationality.
The first preference vote count to Sunday put Labor’s Damian Wood in third position with 12,160 votes, followed by The Greens’ Carol Vernon on 5,756, Christian Democratic Party candidate Wayne Lawrence on 3085, independent John Arkan had 2979 votes and Michael Gough from Citizens Electoral Council on 616.
ITEM NUMBER THREE: Tarpley and Spengler weigh in
“Accuracy in the Media” and Cliff Kincaid take on Webster Tarpley at the LeftForum… And here, it is interesting to note the direction Webster Tarpley has taken with this presidential election. It shadows pretty well some typical Bernie Sanders supporters as they slump over to nudging Hillary Clinton support against Donald Trump… though, losing a bit too much anti-Hillary grounding.
Not far from where Guerrero stood in the slim bars of shade next to the Visitor Center were two signs, both of which compared Trump to a Nazi. These signs were held by members of the Tax Wall Street Party, which formed two and a half years ago and has run candidates both in New York state and in California.
Washington, D.C.-based historian and author Webster Tarpley, wearing a shirt and tie, explained that the inflammatory nature of the signs was necessary to promote his party’s goals — and goal No. 1 is to stop Donald Trump.
“The basic idea is if you’re going to fight Trump, you have to tell the truth about him,” Tarpley said — including about his potential psychiatric problems. “Trump says he suffers from a mild form of Obsessive- compulsive disorder. That would imply he’s seen a psychiatrist. We need to see his medical records, as well as his tax returns.”
Tarpley mentioned Trump’s onetime biographer, Tony Schwartz, who has lately been speaking out about Trump’s personality issues, as well as Justin Frank, author of Bush on the Couch.
“It’s an ethical dilemma because we don’t like to psychoanalyze someone from a distance. But this is the politics of life and death and needs to be confronted.”
Tarpley has taken his dim view of Trump to Jewish groups, including the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), some of whose members questioned Tarpley’s analogizing Trump with Nazism.
“At AIPAC, people said the Holocaust is sui generis. Fine, but you have to get the lessons from the death and suffering. Of course you don’t want to throw ‘Nazi’ around, but this is an emergency.”
Meantime, David Goldman, aka “Spengler” is backing Donald Trump. (Spengler received some interesting bit of citation from Webster Tarpley in his 2008 anti-Obama book.)
Trump is vulgar, ill-informed and poorly spoken. He has no foreign policy credentials and a disturbing inclination to give credit to Russia’s Vladimir Putin where it isn’t due. But he has one thing that the fifty former officials lack, and that is healthy common sense. That is what propelled him to the Republican nomination.
So, there you go. The two most larouchian of the post-larouchians weigh in for opposing candidates in the coming election. Where does that leave Larouche himself, and the Larouche org?
This can’t be right, as the analysis of webcasts pour on… One questioner wondered out loud why he hadn’t heard any support for Donald Trump. […]
ITEM NUMBER FOUR: Blather
Over the last five weeks the world has changed. Events combined with willful interventions, especially those of Vladimir Putin, have created a new global dynamic and transformed the potential for real and total victory in the immediate period ahead. Success now depends first on the adoption of LaRouche’s ‘Four New Laws,’ […]
What is urgent is the requisite creative pre-emptive action, rather than the repeated failures derived from Newton’s systemic fraud of action-reaction—a fraud that predominates in the neurotic impulses of the political and financial class of the trans-Atlantic today, and a fraud that Einstein so brilliantly exposed. Such pre-emptive action, as required by LaRouche’s Four New Laws, is the very foundation for the preliminary steps by which we eliminate the unnecessary burdens and debts of this failed system.
ITEM NUMBER FIVE
French journalist and founder of Agora Erasmus, the Belgian LaRouche movement,
Not enough attention is paid to Belgium’s Larouche organization. But there it is, an appearance in Russian media.
ITEM NUMBER SIX
The Democrats have had to deal with firing Lyndon LaRouche many times over the years. But sometimes, the LaRouche Democrats win!
AND… Then came AIDS. In 1986, when right wing extremist Lyndon LaRouche launched his Prop 64 initiative calling for mandatory HIV testing and quarantining HIV-positive people in camps, Weinstein and his best friend Chris Brownlie started the Stop AIDS Quarantine Committee. They distributed more than 60,000 fliers and organized over 4,000 demonstrators to march on La Rouche’s headquarters in Atwater Village, according to gay journalist Bruce Mirken. That march and the No on 64 campaign helped defeat the measure by a whopping 71% to 29%.
It’s a goddamned shame that Lyndon LaRouche isn’t running for president this year. Based on the accuracy of his predictions over the years and his intensely cult-like following, he’d stand a pretty good chance.
Hm. After being hired for my first outdoors job I was chatting with the human resources person and somehow the topic turned to why Bill Clinton deserved a second term. So of course I calmly stated I was going to vote for Lyndon LaRouche. She stared at me as if walrus tusks had sprouted from my nostrils, paused, and then wryly asked if I was simply “stirring the pot.” I surely was, though I didn’t let on. Nor did I reveal the fact I didn’t have a clue about LaRouche’s politics, or anyone’s politics for that matter.