Palm Beach Post, January 17, 2012…..

Florida Republicans say the latest voter registration and absentee ballot figures point to a GOP enthusiasm advantage over Democrats heading into the 2012 presidential election.

The election "enthusiasm gap" talk is a relatively new entry in the game of bullsh*t played by the Very Serious People every 2 years. How does one actually measure enthusiasm? For my money, the way to measure how enthusiastic voters are is to, pardon the simplicity, count the number of votes after the election. Even then, any claims of higher or lower enthusiasm on behalf of voters is nothing more than pure speculation.

In Florida, before Tuesday's primary, 446,000 Republicans had requested absentee ballots compared with only 307,744 in the 2008 primary….140,000 more. In 2012 the gap between Democratic registration in the state and Republican registration found Democrats leading by 4.3%. In 2008 Democrats led by 5.8%.

Those numbers were seen as evidence that Florida Republicans were hot to trot to get out to vote and get on with the business of taking their country back from the foreign President Obama. The "enthusiasm gap", it is being called…..and by jimminy, this year Republicans are really, really enthusiastic about the upcoming election. You may have heard something about all this from one of the millionaires reading a teleprompter while pretending to be a journalist on teevee. The oft-repeated messaging?…Republicans, when we're talking this fall's general election, are 'roided up on enthusiasm.

So how did all that enthusiasm work out in Tuesday's Florida primary? Using The Reverend's enthusiasm measuring stick….how many Republican voters actually voted in Florida on Tuesday…..we find that 1.660,000 Floridians voted in the GOP primary. In 2008's Florida primary 1,940,000 registered Republicans voted in the GOP primary. I suppose 15% fewer GOP primary voters in 2012 as compared to 2008 could, somehow, demonstrate greater GOP voter enthusiasm this year than 4 years ago…..but you'll have to forgive me for not seeing it.

Furthermore….even though I concede that Republicans in 2012 are really, really, really angry, angry, angry at Obama and the Communists he brought in with him to the White House….exit polls from Florida's Tuesday GOP primary demonstrated that 38% of those enthusiastic GOP voters down in Florida would like "someone else to run for the nomination." Someone else other than Romney and Gingrich, the candidates who finished first and second, respectively, on Tuesday.

To boot, only 51% of Florida GOP primary voters who voted for the eventual winner, Mitt Romney, said that they were "satisfied with the Republican candidates." All chubbed up on enthusiasm and nowhere to go, I suppose. Or as Jimi Hendrix once put it…"I know what I want but I just don't know."

So, once again, whatever this "enthusiasm gap" Republican voters are supposed to have opened up on Democratic voters……color me skeptical. I'm not seeing it…..no matter how many times conservative-pumping teevee anchors and guests repeat it.

What I see is a political party in peril. At war with itself. Teetering more closely to the edge of fragmentation each and every month we go forward. Out of touch with the American public yet still holding on for dear life to their shredded, rotted, and proven-failure-policies of out-of-touchness.

Republicans are experiencing their own little civil war this primary campaign. That's why Johnny Mac McCain called recently for an end to any more GOP candidates debates. Too embarrassing to the party. Too divisive. Making the GOP look as if they are not united.

For the last number of years the GOP has been purging their party of candidates who have shown a willingness to compromise with the Communists Democrats in order to promote the general welfare of the American people. The clamor from the Tea Party has advanced that purging process.

Eventually….I'm hoping this election cycle…..the Republican Party will implode from their misguided, self-imposed purification process….and start to rebuild their party by jettisoning their extremist elements.

Contrary to Village lore….America is not a conservative-right nation. A conservative-right nation would not be in favor, by 70-75%, of increasing taxes on only the rich. A conservative-right nation would not prefer, by 54%, to have abortion remain legal. A conservative-right nation would not be moving ever closer to legalizing marriage for gays.

Republicans and angry conservatives can insist all they want that America is a conservative-right nation…..just as they have been insisting that Republican voters are way more enthusiastic than Democratic voters about this year's election cycle.

But just like in Tuesday's primary down in Florida….it's only the evidence that counts.

In 2002 when neo-cons within the U.S. military and inside the Bush White House worked hard to deceive Congress and the American people into cheering for an unprovoked attack against the non-threatening nation of Iraq, steady and repetitive neo-connish messaging cleared the pathway to aggressive war.

Not only was Saddam Hussein's Iraq not a threat to the U.S. in 2002-2003….after a decade of harsh sanctions mainly affecting non-military Iraqis….but Hussein's military capabilities had never returned to pre-Iraq War I levels. The con by the…umm….neo-cons was to convince Americans who didn't know any better, and were still filled with vengeful hate from 9-11, that Iraq and Saddam Hussein were about to devastate the east coast of the U.S., as well as Israel and Europe…or all three simultaneously.

In 21st century America, it's all about the messaging. Veracity has nothing to do with any of it.

The Iraq Sequel.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper acknowledged that sanctions so far had not caused Iran's leaders to change their pursuit of nuclear capabilities.

But he said some Iranian officials appear more willing to conduct an attack in the United States if they feel threatened, citing last year's alleged Iranian plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to Washington.

"The 2011 plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States shows that some Iranian officials – probably including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei – have changed their calculus and are now more willing to conduct an attack in the United States in response to real or perceived U.S. actions that threaten the regime," Clapper said in his Senate testimony.

"We are also concerned about Iranian plotting against U.S. or allied interests overseas," he said.

Insert 2002 Bushie claim here. "Smoking gun-mushroom cloud", "grave and gathering danger", "there's no doubt Saddam is reconstituting blah, blah effing blah"…..you know how it works, or should by now. But Americans in the beginning of the 21st century have become a caricature of a "short attention span theater" skit…..can't recall what happened last week, let alone what happened almost a decade ago.

And so the deceptive and duplicitous neo-con message machine cranks up again. This time in order to dupe U.S. citizens into accepting yet another military assault on yet another middle eastern sovereign nation.

How it's done.

In October of 2011, U.S. officials launched a new propaganda message against Iran claiming that Iran planned an assassination attempt of the Saudi ambassador to the U.S. Why Iran would risk nuclear annihilation at the hands of the U.S. and/or Israel over some cockamamie Mexican drug cartel/Quds Force story of clusterf*ckness…..was never explained.

Alireza Nader, an Iran analyst at the Rand Corporation, found it "difficult" to believe that Khamenei or Suleimani would order such an attack that "would put all of Iran's objectives and strategies at risk".

Reza Sayyah from CNN questioned the plausibility of the claim by asking, "Did an elite branch of Iran's military handpick a divorced, 56-year-old Iranian-American used-car salesman from Texas to hire a hitman from a Mexican drug cartel to assassinate the ambassador to Saudi Arabia by blowing up a bomb in a crowded restaurant in Washington?"

Sure it's ridiculous…but then Saddam Hussein plotting to spray anthrax down on the eastern seaboard of the U.S….was a ridiculous notion as well…and yet that deceptive and ridiculous story reached the homes of millions of post-9-11, still-feeling-vengeful Americans.

See how DNI Chief James Clapper carefully constructs his misleading message meant to gin up support for a U.S. attack of Iran?

"The 2011 plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the United States shows that some Iranian officials – probably including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei – have changed their calculus and are now more willing to conduct an attack in the United States in response to real or perceived U.S. actions that threaten the regime,"

Using the laughable, really, claim that a used car salesman from Texas, allegedly hiring a Mexican drug-cartel hitman, was about to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the U.S…..and that the highest leaders in Iran were behind the laughable story….using that as his springboard of disinformation, Clapper then implies that Iranian leaders are…"probably", "more willing"…to do what?

"conduct an attack in the U.S."

See? Just like Saddam was about to do in 2002.

Of course, when disinformation…like Saddam spraying anthrax over New York using small prop planes…. doesn't carry quite the deceptive punch neo-cons are looking for…any DNI can always fall back on the old American standby….

"We're doing a lot with the Israelis, working together with them. And of course for them, this is, as they have characterized, is an existential threat," Clapper said.

I wonder if Iran considers the 200 nuclear-tipped warheads the Israeli government has pointed in their direction to be, you know, "an existential threat"?

The WTF-ness of this latest propaganda salvo ginning up support for an eventual military attack against Iran is found in this Clapper comment….

"We assess Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons, in part by developing various nuclear capabilities that better position it to produce such weapons, should it choose to do so," he said in written testimony. "We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons."

Iran does not have a nuclear weapon right now and Clapper admits that he and his smart guys don't know if Iran will "eventually decide" to make one or not, but those wily Iranian leaders are, you know, keeping their "options" open…..so who knows, right?

All I can conclude about this clumsy, juvenile attempt to rah-rah the nation into another act of pre-emptive military aggression….is that the militaristic neo-cons who work so hard to deceive us into slaughtering more Muslims…..are in need of better script writers.

According to Wikipedia, the United States has 413 billionaires. The world's total number is 1210.

The U.S. Supremes have ruled that money equals free speech and that free speech, understood as spending money on political advertisements, cannot be limited by government. That is our new national paradigm…at least until the whole enterprise comes apart at the seams.

New paradigms, built on rational thinking about the first amendment and democracy of, for and by the people…or, you know, not,…..nevertheless create new opportunities.

413 billionaires in the U.S. is way more than our country needs to launch an entirely new process for electing presidents and what not. So, I'm proposing a new league…like a sports league….made up of only billionaires. Money equals free speech….free speech is a guaranteed right….so what better way could there be to celebrate how free we are than by having our most successful free speech earners choose not only our presidential candidates every four years, but the president as well?

I think Chief Justice John Roberts would consider such a league the pinnacle of American political freedom.

For those of us who don't have enough free speech in the bank to participate any other way than passively….it will be essential to make our new league as entertaining and fun as possible so that the free speech/bank account-impaired stay engaged. This is vitally important because America, by god, is a nation of, by and for the people.

The league should be made up of 16 billionaires….allowing room for expansion of course….with 4 billionaires making up each of four divisions…a northwest, a northeast, a southwest and a southeast division each with four billionaire "teams." The 16 billionaires will be selected, rightfully, by all 413 current billionaires….because….well….they've stored up more free-speech over their lifetimes than the rest of us have ever earned, and would be, therefore, the most qualified.

Once the 16 billionaires were chosen and "team" logos, uniforms, banners, cheerleaders, and network and cable teevee rights determined….my proposal would feature a four year long process of elimination. The day after Inauguration Day would mark the beginning of each new season.

Each divisional billionaire league "team" will choose a presidential candidate….all behind closed doors and, naturally, in total secrecy so as not to compromise the greatest example of pure democracy the world has ever known. Once the candidates are selected, each candidate will be matched against another in a series of 800 primetime debate/talent show extravaganzas spread over the 40-odd months between general elections.

The format for these debate/talent shows would be similar to the highly-intellectualized, reality teevee programs that Americans have come to love and cherish so much. Each billionaire candidate, in turn, would choose whether to sing, dance, play an instrument, drink a beer with a handful of the unwashed, recite a poem, scratch his/her ass while pledging allegiance to the flag, challenge another candidate to a live duel on stage….or anything else that would help maximize the democratic-entertainment experience.

The audience would text in their choices after each "debate" night's fun. Texting would only be permitted once per debate night….with the punishment for cheating being a first class, expense paid trip to Guantanamo. DHS officials, not coordinating with the CIA, would oversee security of the voting process.

At the end of the "season" the four billionaire divisional debate leaders…think the Final 4 of NCAA basketball….would draw lots for the playoffs. Single elimination matchups would take up the month of October before the general election with the Super-Freedom-Democracy Bowl scheduled for the first Tuesday of November. What a night that would be.

So glorious would be the American display of freedom and democracy on that night that the roar from the national audiences just might cause the Framers to roll over in their graves…no doubt signifying their approval.

Think about all the new jobs and enterprises that could be spun off. The Fantasy President League alone would move billions of dollars and how about the growth in greasy and sugary junk food sales….through the freaking roof.

My proposed league would also eliminate the huge conservative effort necessary now to suppress voting, shorten the voting window, and pass complicated ID laws. In effect making the democracy league more efficient than our current system.

Just think….if my proposed league was fully operational today….we could be voting texting our choices for either Northeast Corporate Raider Mitt (sponsored fully by a hedge fund to be named later) or Rambler Gambler Newt (sponsored by the Adelson chain of casinos). Mitt could sing a Mormon ode written by one of his three grandmothers (on his father's side) and Newt could mime out, in full blackface, his impression of current President Obama.

I'm talking riveting, must see teevee here.

And really, when you give it some thought as I obviously have, what better way could there be to honor our Founders than to make a total entertainment mockery of the democratic process?

Once again, another GOP presidential candidates "debate". CNN…again. Transcript.

CNN's John King, once a promising young reporter, now simply another Village idiot pretending to be a reporter, began the politico-drama last night by bringing up one of Newt Gingrich's ex-wives.

CNN, just like every corporate media outlet today, feigns objectivity. CNN knows…because they are oh-so-in-touch….that what viewers really want is to be entertained. King's opening question to Newt was offered purely for it's entertainment value. John King knew that his question to Gingrich about his 2nd ex-wife would rile up the far right audience…..another monumental confrontation (in conservative brains, at least) of the "liberal mainstream media" going after yet another poor, under siege, Republican.

John King has been around long enough to know that Gingrich would take the opportunity to bash "liberal media"….and that's just what Newt did. To CNN, and King, that would add entertainment value to the kickoff of the debate. Get the conservative audience's juices flowing and what not. To the question….'did you ask your second wife for an open marriage so you could continue banging your former aid Callista?'….Newt responded…

“No,” he said when asked if he wanted to address the issue. The audience burst into wild applause at his response. “I think the destructive, vicious, negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country harder to attract decent people to run for office. I’m appalled you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that.”

Now first off….the revelations from Newt's second wife that Newt behaved badly, you know, banging his former secretary while still married…..while simultaneously aggressively attacking President Clinton at the time for similar behavior….is well known. Not new and not news.

Quite a while ago I read the second Gingrich wife's account of life with Newt. She said that Newt told her it wasn't about what he did in his own life which was important. What was important, according to Gingrich, was what he had to say….allegedly his conservative message. All that was important was that Newt's message be heard by the American people. What Newt did in his own life was simply insignificant…not that important.

Therefore, when John King asked a question implying that Newt's personal life was…umm…less than virtuous….the question could easily be dismissed by the former Speaker. You see, asking Newt personal questions is irrelevant…..unless, of course, you are part of the "destructive, vicious, negative" news media out to do harm to the Party of Jesus, the GOP.

In the soap opera debate last night, John King played the role of 'nasty, Jesus hating, commie-loving, liberal mainstream news guy'…out to victimize yet another pure and righteous Republican candidate by asking a question about an old ex-wife story. Gingrich played the role of the pure and righteous Republican being victimized by "lamestream liberal media" guy.

The audience played the role of a World Wide Wrestling-like audience piling on those "liberal" refs who dared to question their righteous and beloved, "liberal media"-hating superstar.

It was all oh-so-predictably nauseating…..and phony.

But again….it's just what the "hate Obama" crowd needed. Like a heroin fix. Slapping a "liberal media" guy, even if that media guy is not liberal and is only play acting for the sake of ratings, invigorates the Jerry Springer ultra-conservative audience. And isn't that all that really matters? Isn't the entertainment value of these mock-debates all that matters?

I sincerely hope that Newt Gingrich wins in S. Carolina tomorrow…and eventually goes on to win the GOP nomination….though I still doubt that will happen. If Mitt Romney personifies all that is wrong and destructive about Wall Street and the financial industry's control of our nation over the last 30 years…..then Newt Gingrich personifies all that's turned ugly about the modern Republican Party over the same period.

Gingrich was the creator of today's ugly, hateful, divisive and fact-free politics. The Founding Father of Ugly. Trail blazer of the Alice in Wonderland politics which oozes daily, like slime, from America's right. But to people who pretend to be reporters and journalists….Newt packs just the entertainment punch corporately-owned, non-news outfits are looking for.

Finally….the opening of last night's "debate" reminded me of the old teevee show, Laugh-In. That's the one where Goldie Hawn giggled and became famous. Audiences for Laugh-In knew what was coming, what to expect. The straight man would ask a question…and then Goldie, or someone else, would pop their head out from behind a prop wall with window openings and give the punchline answer. All very humorous and entertaining….but only silly, childish fluff that no one took seriously.

You do the translation.

Writing about Mitt Romney in Esquire, the excellent Charles Pierce had this to say….

He (Romney) is really the only true class warrior in the race. He's counting on prejudice and ignorance because he is running in the Republican primaries and that's the coin of the realm. But he's also counting on the desperate dreams of desperate people who want to believe that there is a big bag of money out there that's going to the Wrong People, and that, if someone would only re-direct it, their lives would be better. Well, there is a big bag of money out there, and it is indeed going to the Wrong People, and those would be the people in whose company Willard Romney has spent his entire, cosseted, entitled existence. He has embarked on a divisive campaign of misdirection, hoping against hope that nobody notices that he mortgaged himself to his ambition on an adjustable rate, and that he's underwater on his soul.

From the moment Barack Obama was elected president, that has been the daily message from the right. Lazy, working and non-working Americans sucking on the government teat are the real source of all of America's economic problems. That, and too many restrictions and taxes on all those rich jaaabb creators.

I've always found that curious. Not curious in the sense of not knowing what the right was doing….but curious in the sense of wondering how in the hell the right was going to get away with blaming the victims for Bush's Great Recession and its consequences.

Through Foxian outlets of deception and the 24/7 braying by racist liars on AM propaganda radio, through a compromised and often corrupt Village media totally beholden to the wishes of the top 1%…and even through despicable GOP presidential candidates claiming that one of our problems is that the working poor simply do not pay enough in taxes….Americans have been bombarded with this, "look over there at those irresponsible poor", malarkey for almost four straight years now.

Apparently, Mitt Romney, will feature this "the poor are responsible for our economic problems" message in his upcoming national campaign to oust President Obama.

The largest threat which faced our 1% overlords following the big bank bailouts of 2008 was the threat that Americans would turn against these bankster overlords in a significant way. The prospect of the 1% paying higher taxes to deal with the galactic loss of government revenues in the aftermath of the crash was real. The fear that these banksters, along with the others who make up the 1%, would face the vitriol from an angry American population was real.

But because so many media outlets and so many politicians are nothing other than servants for the top 1%, the pent up rage and frustration of the American people has been kept to a minimum. Instead, Americans were bombarded with the new, yet counterfeit, Tea Party movement. The Tea Party, whether members realized it or not, was used as a foil, a distraction to keep any serious talk of tighter regulations and higher taxes on the 1% from happening. The Tea Party assisted the bankster criminals, and their political servants, in redirecting responsibility for our nation's economic problems onto government. It soon became the government's fault that banksters removed trillions from the economy. A monumental case of Ayn Rand capitalism gone bonkers became the fault of big government socialists and their lazy-ass dependents.

And that's where Romney comes back into the picture. Mitt Romney is the personification of all that's wrong with America during the bankster era. Mitt is the Wall Street candidate. Romney, apparently, plans on campaigning for the presidency by blaming the poor, the elderly, the vulnerable, the outcasts, and the average working men and women of America for the damage done to our economy by a handful of very wealthy controllers. All governmental programs that assist the poor, the elderly, etc. will be endlessly pummeled by candidate Romney….when the truth is that none of that had anything to do with the economic predicament the banksters put the nation into.

It is not an accident that the last 3 years have been marked by lengthy sermons about deficits, entitlements, the "food stamp" president, the lazy-assness of the unemployed, the "unfairness" of taxing the 1% a bit more, the "makers" and the "takers"…and all the rest of it. It is all part of a very concerted effort by our oligarchial overlords to keep the spotlight off of where it belongs….on them.

Americans have had enough time to evaluate the Tea Party servants of the rich. Americans are now more alert to the deceptive and misleading ways of a corrupt media. Americans have seen the results of an extreme right wing element controlling one chamber of Congress. Nevertheless, Mitt Romney, with his rich overlord funding, and in coordination with a Village media hard wired for Republicans…will undoubtedly take their best doubletalk shot throughout the first 10 months of 2012.

As voters, we must be prepared for the tsunami of propaganda, deception and lies that will be upon us very soon.

So, I open my Akron Beacon Journal this morning to find an article entitled, "Gingrich gains anti-Romney Ohioans"….by AP writer, Dan Sewell. The author goes deep into the heart of Ohio RepulicanLand….West Chester…asking a few Republican voters who they will be voting for in the GOP presidential primary to be held in Ohio in March. The featured interviewees, some guy who owns a bar, and a couple standing on their back deck, answer with the name, Newt Gingrich.

Why Newt?

"He's the guy they think can go toe to toe with the president."

As I previously documented, Newt Gingrich can't even go toe to toe with Mitt Romney….and Mitt Romney holds both sides, devoutly, on any given issue. But, hey…whatever.

I'm tempted to say that you can fool most of the Republican voters most of the time….but out of respect to the few that can't be easily fooled…I won't. But in that spirit, get a load of this…

Ohio could be more crucial to Gingrich than some of his rivals because the former House speaker failed to qualify for Virginia's primary ballot. Gingrich has said he will pursue an aggressive write-in campaign in Virginia, although state law prohibits write-ins on primary ballots.

…..Failing to get on the ballot in Virginia, where Gingrich lives, underscores the difficulty first-time national booksellers candidates have in preparing for the long haul of a presidential campaign.

A handful of West Chester, Ohio Republicans are now attracted to Newt Gingrich as the GOP presidential nominee. Newt Gingrich will really, really need Ohio BECAUSE Gingrich didn't qualify for the ballot in his own home state of Virginia. Because Newt did not qualify in his own state, his campaign will launch a write-in campaign there….not simply a write-in campaign, but an "aggressive" write-in campaign….something which is prohibited in Gingrich's home state.

Again, I'm tempted to ask the age-old pertinent question WTF? But I won't because I'm sure the serious and responsible AP would not permit the circulation of an entirely incoherent puff piece. The profundity of Sewell's piece must be woven so deeply that mere mortal readers, like The Reverend, might struggle to find the turds gems.

I wonder if the AP's Dan Sewell knew about this before he authored his article….because this, if you can believe it, is even more profound than what we've already read….

Campaign director Michael Krull went on Facebook to convey that Newt told him “this is not catastrophic — we will continue to learn and grow.” Then, in the very next paragraph, Krull employed a “catastrophic” metaphor to suggest the campaign is now recovering from a calamity:

Newt and I agreed that the analogy is December 1941: We have experienced an unexpected set-back, but we will re-group and re-focus with increased determination, commitment and positive action. Throughout the next months there will be ups and downs; there will be successes and failures; there will be easy victories and difficult days – but in the end we will stand victorious.

Newt Gingrich's failure to qualify for the Virginia ballot is just like when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. Well…yeeaah.

Let's examine Newt's brilliant anal-ogy. Newt's home state launched a surprise attack against him. Although Virginia has always required 10,000 signatures to qualify for the presidential primary ballot there, Newt and his campaign were taken by complete surprise. No doubt a sign of Newt's superior toe-to-toe intellect and laser-like organizational skills…..just what the office of the presidency requires.

But Newt's personal Pearl Harbor attack, though catastrophic, makes it possible for Newt's campaign to "learn and grow". After the smoke clears from Virginia's "unexpected" attack on the surprised Newt, the favorite of at least 3 West Chester, Ohio Republicans….."in the end we will stand victorious."

How will the surprised Gingrich learn, grow and eventually prevail? By launching an "aggressive" write-in campaign in Virginia….a state that prohibits write-in campaigns. See how quickly Gingrich's crew adapted, grew and learned?

Has there ever been a presidential primary campaign as brilliant in it's strategy as that of the former disgraced Speaker? I cannot think of any.

Now, allow me to shovel the bullsh*t out of the way. Newt Gingrich does not want to be president. The job doesn't pay enough money. Newt and Callista launched their half-hearted campaign for the sole purpose of advertising the Gingrich brand. Gingrich sells books and videos, is paid handily for giving speeches and takes millions from groups willing to pay for Newt's access to government historian skills.

The 3 West Chester Republicans notwithstanding…..Newt has no intention of being president. But there is gold in them there winger hills and it must of necessity be mined. If there ever were a golddigger…..Newt is the guy. The Newt presidential primary branding, like the Trump presidential primary branding, is, for all intents and purposes, just like any other corporate branding effort…..heartless, deceptive and ever focused on how much more profit can be squeezed out of an often-fooled consumer base.

Politics as a profit-center. That's the genius of Newt. The only opponent Newt can successfully go toe-to-toe with is the checkbooks of uninformed Republican primary voters…like those 3 trend-setters down in West Chester, Ohio.

One of the reasons I started blogging was because of what I saw, and still see, as a failure by the main media to tell Americans the truth about…well…basically anything. Specifically, I was motivated by corporate media's collusion with the Bush White House in the run up to attacking the sovereign and non-threatening-to-the-U.S. nation of Iraq.

This U.S. media problem is not insignificant. Hundreds of thousands of dead people and a trillion dollar debt is what came from corporate media's active participation helping the Bush administration advance it's unscrupulous cause to attack a country rich in oil, but absent al-Qaeda.

To illustrate where the compromised corporate media is trying to lead us today, it is first necessary to remind readers of what the American people have repeatedly told pollsters….

September 22 polling…conducted by a Democratic/GOP research partnership….

•Opposition to cutting Social Security & Medicare is strong across party lines with 82% of Democrats, 73% of Independents and 58% of Republicans against cuts to reduce the deficit

•A wide margin of all Americans, 94% of Democrats, 82% of Independents and 64% of Republicans, would prefer to raise taxes on the wealthy than cut Social Security and Medicare

•By a 3 -1 margin, self-identified "fiscal conservatives" of both parties oppose cutting Social Security benefits to reduce the deficit and by a 2 ½ -1 to one margin, fiscally conservative voters oppose cutting Medicare benefits to reduce the deficit.

Those findings are not an anomaly. Poll after poll have resulted in similar findings.

In fact, not one political demographic, Democratic, Republican or Independent….is in favor of cutting SS and Medicare as a means of solving the national debt problem. Instead, all groups…including Republicans….would choose higher taxes on America's wealthy over cuts to the very popular entitlement programs.

With that backdrop in mind, here's how veteran Villager Charles Babington of the AP explains the failure of the Super Committee….

The supercommittee’s failure reflects the nation’s divide: Americans crave both the Republicans’ demand for low taxes and the Democrats’ insistence on protecting social programs.

According to Babington, Republicans and Democrats are simply reflecting the "nation's divide" over raising taxes and protecting social programs. Really? The "nation" is not divided over raising taxes on America's wealthy while sparing cuts to Social Security and Medicare. The "nation" is in favor of taxing the wealthy a bit more. The "nation" is against cuts to Social Security and Medicare.

But Village journalists, like Babington, don't care what the majority of Americans actually want. The job of "centrist" Villagers is to convince readers that neither political party's viewpoint reflects the view of "average Americans"…even when it is clear in the case of the debt reduction debate that the position of Democrats, in fact, does represent the voice of "average Americans."

Charles Babington, rather than tell the truth that the Democratic viewpoint of sparing entitlements from cuts and raising taxes on the wealthy actually does reflect the will of the majority of Americans, simply lies…simply makes stuff up. The supercommittee failure does not reflect the nation's divide. Not at all. The supercommittee failure, instead, reflects the unwillingness of Republicans to listen to the will of the American public.

Republican lawmakers respond to activists who overwhelmingly oppose higher taxes. And Democrats answer to activists who will tolerate no nicks in Medicare, Social Security and other programs without steeper taxes on the wealthy.

See how it's done? Republican lawmakers respond to activists who oppose higher taxes. Democrats respond to activists too. See? Both sides do it. Only, in this case, the "activists" who the Democrats are answering to are the majority of the American population. On one hand you have Republican elected officials, Grover Norquist and Pete Peterson's smallish band of billionaires….the activists Republicans are listening to. And on the other hand you have over 60% of the American people who Democrats, this time, are listening to.

To Babington…those two "activist" groups are equivalent.

Babington's bogus search for equivalency goes on to explain that the divide over the nation's debt, which Babington simply made up out of whole Village cloth, "stems from an all-too-familiar reality of modern politics." Which provokes The Reverend to respond that Babington's failure, or inability, to acknowledge the will of the American public on taxes and entitlements is an "all-too-familiar reality" of modern corporate media.

Republicans who hold office today are not in D.C. to do the will of the majority of the American people. They're not. If they were, they would realize that Americans want to raise taxes on the wealthy and take Social Security and Medicare cuts off the table….and act and vote accordingly. In that, nothing is really new.

What makes this stuff all the more confusing, however, is the fact that Village "journalists", like veteran Charles Babington, refuse to explain to readers that in this specific debt/deficit-debate case….the Republican position does not reflect the majority view of Americans. In this specific case, the Democratic position DOES represent the will of the people.

To me…given that our nation is a democratic republic….I would think that truth would be kind of important.

I haven't commented much on Occupy Wall Street because I didn't have much of anything to say about it.

There were a lot of protests during the 1960's and 1970's. Many were anti-Vietnam War protests. Many, many people turned out for those protests. But those protests didn't end the war, just like the huge anti-Iraq war protests in 2002 and 2003 didn't prevent the Iraq War from being waged. Yes, over time, more and more Americans became weary of the Vietnam disgrace and eventually, politicians were pressured to bring it to an end. But street protesting against the Vietnam War didn't force our Leaders to change course. Because Leaders minds were already made up.

I think that is how it is now. Our Leaders minds are made up. And no amount of street protests are going to change any of our Leaders minds. Wall Street, Big oil, Big Tel-Co, and Big Insurance now make up our Leaders minds for them. And once a mind is made up, or paid to be made up….then there's nothing any demonstrations can change.

Even though I am basically in agreement with where the OWS movement placed it's focus…..I don't think there's anything to be gained from street protesting anymore. I'm probably wrong about that. But, that's where I am right now.

I think that the corporate-government enemy that Americans are up against has become impervious to any democratic change through the traditional means of non-violent protesting. And I don't advocate violent protesting….so what's the greatest nation of people on the earth to do? I have a couple of ideas I'll share later but the short answer for now is…not much.

It is clear what our Leaders want to do…and will do. In the wake of our Greatest Recession, our Leaders will punish everyone in America except for the top 1%, except for the richest and most powerful. During a period when deficit reduction shouldn't even be on the table, our Leaders on both sides have talked, virtually, of nothing else. When trillions should be spent by the federal government to move the economy right now, our Leaders will act to cut spending, and most likely, without raising any revenue.

In all of this, it has been the corporate media who have rushed to defend the top 1%. It is the corporate media who endlessly tell audiences of the "centrist" position of raising Social Security and Medicare eligibility ages. It is the corporate media who defends the historically low federal tax rates that our nation's richest pay. And so any protest which targets that top 1% must be ridiculed and dehumanized by the corporate servants in the media.

Today's corrupt corporate media have been instrumental in painting the OWS protesters as savages who use the sidewalk as an outhouse and..oh, yeah….have sexy time in public as well as other dangerous and suspicious behavior….and besides, they couldn't answer certain questions the way we wanted them to, and, anyway, they're socialist-commie people, that's what they are. Oh, and lazy, too.

So, naturally, with that bang-up media characterization, the protesters deserve any violence done against them by authorities because…well…let's review: there's the public sex thing and the urinating all over and…the reefer…Oh my god, you can smell marijuana smoke at the protests. There you have it. They deserve to get kicked around by the storm troopers. Revoke their 1st amendment rights too….they're hippies, for Christ's sake.

After the OWS camps were brought down by a wave of storm troopers Tuesday, here were a few of the tweets from the editor-in-chief of Andrew Breitbart's online site…

*sniff* *sniff* There’s just something about a police baton swung towards the skull of #OWS that *sniff* chokes a man up. #ItsSoBeautiful

[…]

Hard to watch #OWS #OccupyWallStreet hippies get what they deserve while tender tears of joy cloud the eyes.

[…]

Dirty, filthy #OWS hippies getting what they deserve from cops = MY PORN

[…]

POP THE POPCORN! Dirty, filthy #Occupy hippes getting what they deserve from police — LIVE!

Having sufficiently dehumanized the OWS protesters by repeating the defecation, urination, and public sex accusations as often as possible….it is but a short step to claiming police violence used against these sub-human beasts is "deserved."

Nothing new about any of it. The hippies who protested back in the 60's-70's were characterized similarly to how the OWS'ers are being characterized now. Characterized as a bit dull, definitely smelly and probably sub-human a little, unlike our Leaders and the opportunistic defense industry CEO's of the time, who were smart and acceptably human when they profited from the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese…and all for no good goddamn reason.

A Florida poll taken in May of 1970 reported that 58% of the people polled blamed the protesters at Kent State for the Ohio National Guard's murdering of 4 students on the campus. America has a long history of blaming the victims.

And in the establishment's reaction to the Occupy Wall Street movement, we're blaming the victims again.

Back in the early goings of 2009, corporate media loved themselves some TEA Party. The hanging teabags. The Mel Gibson Patriot rent-a-costumes. The "don't tread on me" flags. The "taxed enough already" signs.

Teevee media was all-the-hell-over the TEA Party. Sister Sarah and the odd Glenn Beck embraced the TEAs early, Fox News became the TEA Party's promoter. Even "liberal" MSNBC's Chrissy Matthews, and others, were twitterpated by the enthusiasm of this allegedly grassroots conservative movement, championed by, according to Fox's Roger Ailes, the "hot" Sarah Palin.

The Taxed Enough Already motto should have been the tip-off that the TEAs shouldn't be taken seriously. Federal tax rates were, and still are, at 60 year lows and President Obama had, early in 2009, rolled back 2% of an employee's side of the payroll tax. The TEA's Taxed Enough Already motto seemed strangely disconnected from reality. Early on, The Reverend called the TEA's message, incoherent, a denial of reality.

But the teevee media nurtured their own love affair with the TEA protest movement. Would Sarah ride the TEA wave to the presidency, many Serious, Professionals in media asked repeatedly and breathlessly. And even if taxes are at 60 year low rates….they COULD go up…so there.

For 2 straight years, teevee media carried water for the incoherent, astroturf, TEA group. Media "stars" rarely asked what "taking their country back" meant. Few pointed out that Obama had not raised taxes, but lowered them.

The TEAs were never about taxes, or smaller government or "taking their country back." The TEA movement was all about electing more, and more extreme, Republicans into halls of power. That's what the TEAs meant when they said they were "taking their country back"…..they simply forgot to include the "from the Democrats", part.

However, with all of the manufactured, ahistorical nonsense of the anti-Democratic Party TEAs, the one crucial issue that the TEAs and their corporate media sponsors never brought up was the banking crisis.
Not once did I here a TEA representative speak negatively or even excitedly about holding the banksters responsible for the terrible financial situation they had put the country in.

In fact, while the nation was shedding hundreds of thousands of jobs per month in the first half of 2009, and a record number of houses were being foreclosed upon, the TEAs helped spread yet another phony meme that the new recession had all been the fault of Barney Frank, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and, of course, Fanny and Freddy. The housing foreclosure nightmare, as far as the TEAs were concerned, came about because Democrats had forced Wall Street banksters to sell mortgages to millions of Americans who could not afford them. It was the government's fault, we were told, not those greedy banksters.

Alan Greenspan and numerous other government and former government officials from the world of finance testified under oath that the fault for the recession fell on bankers and various paper shuffling entities who had been left alone to police themselves. Greenspan said that he had been proven wrong….a belief he had held all of his life….that bankers could be trusted to act ethically and morally without oversight. Greenspan said under oath that he had been proven wrong.

No matter to the TEA Republicans. It was the Democrats fault…..liberalism, to be precise….and no facts, testimony or evidence would ever change their opinion.

Today, the TEAs are disapproved of by 46% of Americans while only approved of by 28% of Americans. It took awhile for Americans to decipher teevee media's code-of-bullsh*t about the TEAs….just as it did after the Iraq crime was launched…..but after the debt ceiling hostage situation, Americans have finally caught on, and the apparent love-affair with the incoherent, Democratic Party protest…is over.

So, the teevee media, ever the pimps of the rich and powerful….have simply refocused their attentions on another protest movement. This time it's the Occupy Wall Street protest. I'll be reviewing later the culpability of Wall Street in much of what is wrong with our national economy….but for now….take a look at this clip of teevee media personalities commenting on the OWS protesters. This three minute clip goes a long way in explaining why American voters are so often confused.

Warning: the arrogant and smug condescension exhibited by teevee personalities towards peaceful protesters on Wall Street may cause uncontrollable swearing by viewer…

Watching True Grit from outdoor video projector a few weeks back at family members lakehouse. Picture was taken with Droid X Motorola cell phone, no flash.
____________

The Reverend, June 20, 2011…

No matter how often you hear the Serious and the Professionals go on and on about how essential it is right now to cut, cut, cut government spending in order to save the national economic patient, doing so will only put the patient in the intensive care ward. Choking the ability of the government to carry out it's role as "spender of last resort" when the conditions in our economy absolutely call for more spending…..is akin to practicing the primitive art of bloodletting.

Paul Krugman, July 31, 2011….

So those demanding spending cuts now are like medieval doctors who treated the sick by bleeding them, and thereby made them even sicker.

Just found that interesting, that's all.

_______________

File this under, "what could this guy know?"…..

Billionaire Warren Buffett urged U.S. lawmakers to raise taxes on the country's super-rich to help cut the budget deficit, saying such a move will not hurt investments.

"My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It's time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice," The 80-year-old "Oracle of Omaha" wrote in an opinion article in The New York Times.

Buffett, one of the world's richest men and chairman of conglomerate Berkshire Hathaway Inc , said his federal tax bill last year was $6,938,744.

"That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income – and that's actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent," he said.

…..

"I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone – not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 – shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain," he said

"People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off."

Like I said, what could Buffet possibly know about anything?

Sometimes my more….say…imaginative….conservative readers like to go on and on about how wacky The Reverend's ideas are on the economy, taxes and government spending. So, I guess the lesson here is that billionaire Warren Buffet and Nobel winner, Dr. Paul Krugman…..are just ignorant, wacko, lemmings for the loony liberal left. Or something.

____________

Wanna see the future of American labor? Look no further than the poorest state in the Union, Mississippi….

….high-priced consultants are….predicting that within five years certain Southern U.S. states will be among the cheapest manufacturing locations in the developed world — and competitive with China.

For years advisers like the Boston Consulting Group got paid big bucks to tell their clients to produce in China. Now, they say, rising wages there, fueled by worker unrest, and low wages in Mississippi, Alabama, and South Carolina mean that soon it won't be worth the hassle of locating overseas.

….

BCG bluntly praises Mississippi's "flexible unions/workers, minimal wage growth, and high worker productivity," estimating that in four years, workers in China's fast-growing Yangtze River Delta will cost only 31 percent less than Mississippi workers.

If Republicans could only have their patsy on the Supreme Court, John Roberts, rule that federal minimum wages are unconstitutional….then Mississippi could quickly tout how business friendly their state really is. I can see it all now. 'Mississippi….the state which brings Chinese wage levels back here so we don't have to fight them over there.'

Keep racing to the bottom, Mississippi…and America…..you're still a few years out, so you'll need to hurry. Do read the entire article….America's middle class may just get hollowed out quicker than I thought.

____________

Finally…speaking of hollowed out……consider The Professional Media Guy, NBC's David Gregory. The Fluffster doesn't do news. Not his job to tell viewers which politician is lying and which one isn't. This gutless approach to journalism was rewarded, naturally, with Gregory winning the anchor chair to the Village's Meet the Press. Gregory is the Fluffster Formerly Known as Karl Rove's Backup Dancer.

He's the man.

Chuck Todd: Perry-Obama would be a picture of sharp contrasts.

David Gregory: You know, Perry talked about potentially seceding from the union. You think that's extreme. Well people on the other side think that introducing health care reform for the whole country is akin to European Socialism.

If you will allow me…..Talking about seceding from the Union and talking about every citizen of America having health coverage…..wait for it…..are not f*cking similar….even in some gutless, phony, extreme-equivalency search. You gots to do better than that, Fluff.

Seceding from the Union is illegal and any efforts to do so would be punished for the treason that it most certainly is. It doesn't get any more extreme than that.

OTOH, advocating for universal health coverage for all American citizens, and yes, talk even of single payer, has been part of America's ongoing debate throughout all modern-era presidencies of both parties. Not the least bit extreme.

But in Serious Dancer Dave's world those two things are equal in their extremism, one right, one left. That's how the Village media works. Meaning, of course, that it doesn't.