Curious note from Alex Jones, begging a simple question.

“I’ve been racially attacked by black people, probably—let’s not exaggerate—thirty-five times?” Jones said. “I’ve been racially attacked by Hispanics, let’s not exaggerate, five times. Let me tell you, that’s when you really get hurt bad. Compound fractures, you name it.”

“I am sick of it,” Jones said. “I am sick of the fact that I have been racially attacked over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over. And the politically correct thing to do is just offer your kids up to have their noses broken and their eyes blackened and their bones broken, because the one thing you don’t do is ever go stand up against it. That’s what political correctness is in this country.”

Er… if someone is physically assaulting you… shouldn’t you press charges?

Where are these 35 fights with blacks and 5 fights with Hispanics taking place?  Are these just bar-room brawls?  Or was did this happen outside the Bilderberg Group meeting?

I know Alex Jones lifts weights with his good pal, Charlie Sheen.  He made sure to mention that every third sentence during his (in)famous interview with the man, the first stop of the Charlie Sheen public melt-down tour.  Doesn’t that give Alex Jones an advantage against these 35 black men and five Hispanic men?  (I’m going to assume they’re men — sorry for sticking to my political incorrect gender norms.)

And are they asking for his kids as a sacrifice, or is offering them up without any prompting?

I always have to be weary when  works from an author are published post-posthumously.

When I finally got around to reading Catcher in the Rye… well, I basically liked it, and understood roughly what is so effective about it.

More importantly, I understand both the reason for the detractors of this book it (class issue at stake: your spoiled rich kid who needs to just get over himself already)  and the lovers of the book (though I have been puzzled by some fans — like, your 18 year old proto- Abercombie and Fitch shopper… but, we’re all phonies calling everyone else phonies).

Into the darker corner of the book… the  “implicated in a the killing of John Lennon and attempted killing of Ronald Reagan” reputation.  Yep!  I got that too from reading it.  It’s good to read Arthur Bremer’s diary right alongside Catcher in the Rye, and then compare and contrast.
(And, no, don’t try that for a school assignment.)

So, what do I make of this commenter?

again, reads ever so much better if you are/were in/from New England. Not a book for summer time little league baseball kids.

it reads ever so much better if you live(d) in New England … not a book for southern farm kids

Wait.  He’s just calling everyone who doesn’t like Catcher in the Rye a bunch of phonies.  It’s like… he’s Houldon Caulfied.  Though… with a rather geocentric twist on his classifications.  Maybe we go back, a bit back-handedly, into the “having trouble sympathizing with some whining rich kid” in a New England border school idea, with what comes across as disparaging the “southern farm kids”.

Well… I suppose he’ll be able to dig further into his inner-world. One of the Salinger books would center on “Catcher” protagonist Holden Caulfield and his family, including a revised version of an early, unpublished story “The Last and Best of the Peter Pans.”   

I don’t think I will ever quite understand something like this:
Salinger: a burnt-out author running a publicity scam.
Notwithstanding the obvious:
That’s a good trick. He’s been dead since 2010.
Like: is this author worth actively hating, as opposed to passively hating and punting when you see an article put up concerning him?

This comment makes a bit more sense:
Another book about whiny, self-obsessed teens is just what America needs !!!
Particularly followed as it is by this response:
Only if it has vampires.
That’d actually be an interesting book.  If only that “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” fad (which probably only netted that one reasonably good book) had brought in a “Catcher in the Rye with emo-vampires/zombies/whatever” item… no, it wouldn’t get past the estate of JD Salinger.

Another bemusing comment:
They made me read Catcher in the Rye, when I was a kid in school, about thirteen I think.
I really disliked that book. I disliked everyone. I kept wishing Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein, which I had read just before that one, would show up and rip off every one of their heads and defecate down their necks.
Wait.  It’s Houldon Caulfied again!

Belgh.

“He’s so far out on the extreme, even for the people of Georgia, that he could be a key player in helping the Democrats win,” said Jim Manley, a Democratic strategist and former aide to Senate majority leader Harry Reid. “There would be pages of comments that Democrats could use against him in a general election.”

One:  Maybe not.  Two: the “even for the people of Georgia” has a ring of smugness.  Three:  Particularly below the Senate level, some of these people are going to get elected.  Four:  It’s not good when the Overton Window is moved, such that some objectionable policy becomes “at least it’s not this Broun”, while the scion of the last conservative elected Democratic Senator from the state gets elected on a platform of always being willing to “reach across the aisle” — to work with… hm… a side of the aisle now devoid of any workable force because she was elected thanks to a strategy of aiding the nomination of candidates  “they’re all Mr. Hitler and Stalin on the other side of the aisle” nominated, a few of them to be elected…

Consider.

I’m searching for a column I distinctly remember, from either after the election last year or the beginning of this year at around the time of Obama’s Inauguration.  It rings of the partisan goober-snickering of EJ Dionne (or, another columnist just like him of the same prominence whose name escapes me right now.)  It goes into “Obama’s Path Forward” and has this idea that now he can work with different Democrats on budget ideas and has a list of a “range” “from moderate figures” such as Maine’s Susan Collins to “right right Republicans” such as… Tom Coburn.

The very same Tom Coburn who is now in the news for musing about how we could Impeach Obama.
Among other ideas...
It appears Tom Coburn is moving into the wistful Dream Sequence of spit-firing ideas.

Update:  Gerogia.  Interesting move by the state’s Republicans.

The new May 20 primary date will now (more than likely) also be the date of next year’s primaries for state offices. That will require an act of the Legislature, but Georgia’s 159 counties will certainly counter any opposition by pointing to the added expense of two separate voting cycles.
The mid-May date, because it would be more likely to attract more voters than a traditional mid-July date, has also been eyed by many Republicans as a means of reducing the influence of hardcore conservative activists and tea party elements in the GOP. Many GOP strategists fear a field of Senate candidates moving too far right will give Democrats an opening next year.

How much longer before I start seeing “Free Chelsea Manning” bumper stickers?

I probably shouldn’t post to this comic book writer’s blog — because I don’t ever want to see Jay Leno’s face again — but meh.  The “Electoral Lock“.

Myra Adams offers the interesting (and to some, surely infuriating) theory that Democrats these days go into each presidential election with a simple advantage: A near-lock on 246 of the 270 electoral votes it takes to win.

This is due in no small part to the fact that the youth and aged out of youth only know successful Democratic Presidents.

Circa 1991.

  “From 1932 to 1964, the Democratic Party won seven of nine presidential contests. The Republicans have won five of six since and, according to virtually universal expert political opinion, will win again in 1992. The experts, in fact, have been arguing for some while that the national electorate, as scattered among the 50 states, has crystallized into a GOP “Electoral Lock” on the White House, even as local electorates continue to deliver Democratic majorities to the U.S. Congress and most state governments. Disheartened Democrats also contemplate demographic trends that show younger voters increasingly identifying with the party of the “successful Presidents” they have known, Ronald Reagan and now, George Bush. It begins to seem that the Republican Party may become even more dominant as the Ruling Party than it was in the seven decades after the 1860 victory of its first presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln, a period in which the GOP won 14 of 18 presidential elections. This thinking is becoming conventional wisdom.”

Yes.  Conventional Wisdom.

But these are things I bandy about before.  Why?  I don’t know.  Boredom?  Scramble the problems of American politics.