About a month ago, the story of New York mayor Michael Bloomberg commenting on “Iraq” being “like 1776” only this time “we’re the British” blipped on past us.

Which means that there would be fun-land at Free Republic.

… just as there is almost certainly a fun-land item at Free Republic defending the actions of Blackwater(*) from the words of we, the traitorous, as well the Iraqi civilians and — such as it is — the quasi – representative government of Iraq. They cannot put themselves in the Iraqis’ shoes.

What you can say about Michael Bloomberg is that he did not wimp out. The tact of the typical American politician is to praise the American troops in Iraq (you know — the British colonists of 1776), and say that if the Iraqi Government could get their act together — either we wouldn’t have to be there or we wouldn’t be in a bind. This strikes me as pandering, and after a spell I can’t help but think that a column in the latest issue of the American Conservative (**)– on stands now, online in a week or two, is probably right — in reference to a letter from Max Bacus and Jon Tester to their Montana constituents regarding Iraq with this line: they’ll both win re-elections through the same means of logic. Feel good patsyism, obliterating and obscuring core problems. And this is part of the problem.

(*) Yes, I realize Blackwater is the new Halliburton.  A catch-phrase example of some things.  Companies eating at the Regime’s Governmental teet.

(**)  Mixed bag, that.

You know that Canadian pedophile who was just caught by Thailand officials after an International Appeal?  He had all these photographs of him online, with his head swirled into a kaleidoscope of colors, which, naturally was straightened out to reveal his face, and from that he was caught.

I kind of have to pity the man whose face is that kaleidoscope of colors.  Not only would he have had to have had to deal with that for his entire life — you can just imagine the childhood insults — but now his reputation is tainted by this Pedophile creep.  Maybe “Swirl Face” can sue the pedophile?

“Paid for by Morris USA”

The current buy in rotation against Measure 50 has shifted from “Phillip Morris USA” to “Morris” (and then on to “Oregonians Against The Tax” or something or other.).  Dump the Phillip and maybe you won’t notice.

Maybe next they can go to “Mo” and be done with it.

They tell us they have to “go along to get along,” and that LaRouche’s policies might “alienate the voters.” Now see where it’s got them. Only 11% of respondents in the latest Reuters/Zogby poll released today gave the Congress a positive mark.

… And so it is, in the Larouche World, where somebody is telling somebody something about Larouche. The further problem comes in with:

U.S. Congress Could Learn from Argentine First Lady on How to Fight the British

Larouche is back on a straight-forward uninhibited “British Empire” kick. It is more simple that way. But, while we’re looking at the British Empire, take a look at this. A bit unimportant, but firstly:

What the Ministry of Truth, Wikipedia, will never tell you, is that Sir Rupert Murdoch is a second-generation protégé of the British oligarchy’s 20th-Century propaganda baron, Lord Beaverbrook.

Hm. Now that would be an interesting thing to see in the wikipedia edits page!

More importantly, note footnote #1. The preparations have been made to ward off the Washington Monthly article — online any day now.

…………………………..

There is a topic I need to get to, which I think explains a cornerstone meme for a Larochite. But that topic will take a bit of work and thought. For more mindless fun, a fun gallop through some of the things offered as evidence of Larouche’s Political Power by, um, the now departed long time Larouchite.

I did some Googling of my own and if LaRouche is this crazy whack job he sure had some big boys conned into listening to him.

A plain falsehood. The man did not “do some googling of [his] own”.

I used to watch his old TV broadcasts (back in the 80s) and he’d make some pretty wild charges against very prominent people but they never would sue him would they? If these VIPs wanted to shut LaRouche down why not sue? Maybe someone has sued LaRouche but it wasn’t someone like Kissinger or other prominent political figures.

Have some fun with that one. It is the very definition of circular logic.

I wish they’d put the photo of Reagan and LaRouche talking up there. I bet they were talking about the weather!

There is this photograph Larouche uses for his propaganda, inrternal consumption that convinces a Larouchite of his importance, at a candidates’ forum with Reagan and Larouche. Fringe candidates along with real candidates in New Hampshire. I have you know that I have a photograph of presidential candidate John Cox along with the other Republican candidates for this year. Never mind. The Reagan administration had the strongest connections made between the Fantasy Shadow Government propped up for Larouche’s ego and the real government, running off of the fringes of the dark corridors of the Intelligence services. This would dry up relatively soon.

I also remember when Reagan attacked Dukakis over his mental health — Dukakis slipped 20 percentage points in the polls and if I remember LaRouche’s “minions” slipped the story of Dukakis mental state under the door of a the Democratic delegates.

Now that I review these comments, I can see he was largely reliving the glory days. Dukakis was a horrible candidate, easily caricatured and with a tone-deafness that makes one wonder how he succeeded in politics in the first place (Does he feel your pain?), whose main accomplishment and pitch — the “Massachusetts Miracle” — was already decaying into Recession. Gary Hart, had he stayed out of trouble, I believe would have won in 1988. And I’m sure that Larouche would have come up with something at the Democratic Convention for the purpose of convincing his cult that Larouche is a serious contender for the Democratic nomination.

Here’s another tidbit for you (I suspect you know all of this and just utter things that are false as a habit):

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2007/3437nbcsl_resolution.html

“To National Black Caucus of State Legislators

“State Rep. Juanita Walton (D) of St. Louis, representing the 81st District in Missouri’s House of Representatives

Something about this one, and the mood I was in when I saw it, prompted me to a near immediate response — with the second half of this post. More can be said about that matter — the discrepency between the amount “LarouchePac” rasies and the amount it pours into these electoral campaigns. (Hint: Memory serves, $900 is the latter figure.) Maybe I’m missing some things, but I think I have the gist of the picture down.

Dennis King and his theory that “British” is a code word for “Jew”. 

If it weren’t placed in and around other clear quasi-code words (can you really refer to “Locust Fund” as a code word?  That’s not so much a double-entendre as a single-entendre, so to speak), it just might be completely hackneyed.  It’s somewhat sympathetic — continue the Greatest War on to today, from the German vantage point.  But I can and will relent.  The war against the British Empire is not an anti-Jewish crusade — it’s just a kooky nutcase one.  Happy now?

More later, on this post. Things get a little bit weird.

Something popped into mind when mulling the Republican Leadership*’s offensive against the Frost family (Graeme Frost being the 12 year old who was grafted into the poster-boy for S-CHIP) .  Over the years, I have heard any number of Republicans and Conservatives bellow  at the use of the phrase “working class” — suggesting that — hell!  The Rich work every bit as hard as anyone else, and who is it to suggest they shouldn’t be so?  I have also heard a certain amount of fury in terms of tax burden on the upper middle class and formulation of how these things play out, with the suggestion that Liberals and Democrats are  placing the bar for the definition of “Rich” rather low — the better to create class resentment and envy, the better to justify or rationalize a tax increase here and no tax cut there.

Today the Frosts are being accused of being too rich for assistance from the S-CHIP.  Graeme was not “vetted” well enough, because — well, just pick through a search engine.  Suddenly, the admission of the lines of poor, middle class, and rich are being re-adjusted for this battle.

* Can’t quite say “Republican” because it is, after all, a bi-partisan bill.  Though I suspect it won’t get past the House with a veto-proof margin, with any number of “Catch and Release” Republicans prepared to ensure such to be the case.

Lynne Cheney has discovered through her genealogical research that Dick Cheney and Barack Obama are — eighth cousins.

Okay. So, this is what sells a book basically pre-packaged for the remainder bins? (Alongside Mary Cheney’s book and the Bush daughter’s book and…)

I am descended from Scottish royalty in some round-about way. I think we all are, if you get down to brass task. But you will have to do better than “eighth cousin” to forge a lineage between Cheney and Obama. Or for me to get back to my Scottish Royal roots.

I had to think about Jared Diamond’s expansive book Collapse when thinking about Al Gore’s Nobel Prize Award.  We are dashing into a strange conceptual territory hereabouts, connecting Global Warming with “Peace”: all good and well — indeed, just as sensible as the founder of the micro-loan, with its equal “two degrees of seperation” from the focus of “Peace” .

A fun game might be to google up (or search a blogging database) “Yassir Arafat” and “Al Gore” and see the slurring of Gore as “sharing the same award with Arafat”.  It will be more than the number who did so with Jimmy Carter, merely due to the proliferation of the Internet — more blogs (even the greatest part of growth is spam-bots) — but with the same idea in mind.  Arafat’s Award, alongside his two Israeli counterparts, was an effort in political prodding.  Which brings to mind the charge of this being a political slight against the current American administration, purely a political hit — one can argure a bit more pursuasively that Carter’s was, and one can argue a couple others.  But it is akin to stating that Martin Luther King, Jr’s award was an attack on the political maverns of the Southern United States — this too shall wear off.

Anyway, the trendline has the “skeptics” on global warming sidelined further and further into the margins, as effects move on from the poles (We watch Russia take renewed interest in claiming the North Pole for excavated oil deposits, for instance).  And Al Gore won a Nobel Peace Prize.

The Democratic leaning groups who are targetting Mitch McConnell like crazy right now, with some relatively boiler-plate anti-war attacks, would do well to drum up some advertisements about the current Mitch McConnell – directed line of attack on the family of the 12 year old who delivered the DNC radio address on behalf of the expansion of the S-CHIP program.

The goal is to get the approval rating of McConnell below 50 before the year is out.  I think the incumbency factor negates the support of the war (which tends to be a mixed bag, as you can always somehow posture up an attack on the “wimps” in this regard) — and that only gets one so far.  So you highlight his sliminess in attacking… um… a 12 year old? — with only the thinnest lines of “plausible deniability” built into the racket.

Mitch McConnell: #11 on the Senate race list of Democratic targets.  (Yes, I have them unscientifically ranked… because I’m a dork.)

Noticing that the 50th anniversary of the launching of Sputnik was coming up, I had to ask myself:

Did I see Sputnik back in 1998?  Specifically, hanging off the ceiling in a corner of Krasnoyarsk State University?  My brother, who lived there at the time and who my parents and I were visiting, pointed it out.  “Sputnik.”  So it was.  Sputnik.

Showing the photograph of a Sputnik to a few of my peers in the following months, I would point to it and say “… and that’s Sputnik.”  A strange location for Sputnik to be, and seemingly a little random.  There was a disconnect, and the response would tend to be a little confused.   The unasked question:  Doesn’t Sputnik deserve better?

Probably.   But that wasn’t the Sputnik, which apparently was incinerated on re-entry.  I probably should have known that.  What I saw was some other Sputnik.  But maybe it is best to suggest that if you’ve seen one Sputnik, you’ve seen them all.

Oh mercy me.

I left that Jeremiah Duggan post incomplete, leaving up simply the Larouche model of crisis management in the parallel lines of one NCLCer’s experience in ’74, what I’ve observed in real time with Kronberg, and what I understand about Duggan. The other part of that picture? Well, I’ve been waiting for the right insult to be delivered to me from the Cult Apologist.*

And this morning I got to do a little mental jig.

Right about here. After expressing puzzlement, his response, “You don’t like to be challenged”, is a complete non-sequitur. Lined up next to a very interesting and useful insult.

So, Jeremiah Duggan attends that conference. Now, I cannot recreate much of what went on with the conference, even with the Washington Post “No Joke” article in hand. (“Question Your False Assumptions.”) There are second hand bits here and there, which at the time I’ll jettison. (In part because I’d have to shift about to find any of it.) But instead I’ll paint an imaginary picture, based off of Larouchite experiences that have been thrown my way. So, maybe there was some singing at some point.

And I am not kidding that when they sang the “Battle Hymn of the Republic” they changed the lyric of “my eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the lord” to “my eyes have seen the glory of the coming of LaRouche”!

I don’t know what they would be singing there — it cannot be the “Battle Hymn of the Republic”, but let’s just go ahead and figure that Jeremiah is sitting there, the conference meeting room sings… and…

They were there to hear solutions to stopping the War in Iraq. After participating in a rousing spiritual where key lines are changed to “Larouche”, we get the solution for the war. Running down the enemies list, which Jeremiah Duggan surely shared to a great extent (Cheney, the neo-cons, Blair), — that which is why he is there in the first place — he gets stuck on that title “Children of Satan“. He shifts a bit uncomfortably when you rummage into Jewish named bankers, and perhaps policy visa vie Israel.

And we rumble on through the Larouche Doctrine.

Somewhere along the line he gets the soft sell, the positivity expressed in the slogan “Do you know the difference between Man and the Animals?”

He mutters “This is an f’ing cult.” Reportedly he asked any number of questions, and was shunted. Which brings me back to what is the Hard Sell for the cult, the negative manner one urges one to join up:

You can’t even defend yourself? Your thoughts? You would we weak fodder for a real cult you know that? They’d suck you in like an old Hoover vacuum.

He has to get out of there.

And he calls his dear old mum. (“Still teeting off of mother’s milk, are you?“) It is run of the mill intimidation for Larouche’s minions, second nature — almost quaint.

There is one other item I wish I had immediate access to, an account of someone who was simply bored by his experience with his would-be cult recruiters, but I’ll have to move on from that.

I would have to shift through the articles on Jeremiah Duggan for how one gets out of there. At its most innocuous for the Schiller Institute, I imagine he fled out and tried to wave down a semi-truck. Conjecture can be built up from there.

(*He who practices the “1 + 1 = 11” logic; as well has the unfortunate habit of claiming to hear people say “B” when they say “A”.)