Archive for the ‘Political System’ Category

Europe Is Dead, Long Live Europe! And long live US publicly subsidized Pluto universities, too!

March 29, 2017

45 years ago Britain was a member of what became formally later the “European Union”. However, anti-Europeans in Britain, mostly on the so-called left (“Labor”) screamed that a referendum should have been conducted to see whether the British People really wanted to be part of Europe. The matter should not having been left to Parliament. One of these screamers presently leads the British Labor Party (Corbyn).

So a law was passed by the UK Parliament, saying that a referendum on belonging to Europe would happen, and would have force of law. Once again, 45 years ago. (NOT last year!) The referendum was conducted, and nearly two-third of British People approved that the UK should be in Europe.

In the meantime, Thatcherism happened. PM Thatcher, a strident nationalist, actually passed the Single European Act (SEA). SEA reformed the legislative process all over Europe by introducing the cooperation procedure and by extending the Qualified Majority Voting to new areas. The legislative process was also quickened. The SEA was supposed to create a better Single European market. Meanwhile, Great britain became ever more inequalitarian.

The British Are Most Enraged, Because Their Society Is Most Unequal.

So now here we are, and Great Britain wants out of Europe… But not out of the European Single market. That’s a complete contradiction. Indeed, understand that the obstacles to the single market are not tariffs: the WTO limits those to 3%… The obstacles have to do with laws and regulations, hence the necessity for the SEA. The point is that if one wants a single market, one has to have laws which are in common enough.

British PM May evoked Article 50, setting the exit of Britain from the EU within 2 years.

[In fairness, let’s give PM May a word sideways here. PM May tried to strike a firm but conciliatory tone, in her letter to Donald Tusk, president of the EU, declaring that the Brexit vote

was no rejection of the values we share as fellow Europeans. Nor was it an attempt to do harm to the European Union or any of the remaining member states. On the contrary, the United Kingdom wants the European Union to succeed and prosper. Instead, the referendum was a vote to restore, as we see it, our national self-determination. We are leaving the European Union, but we are not leaving Europe – and we want to remain committed partners and allies to our friends across the continent.“]

With all due respect, that’s just PC hogwash. To start with it hurts. Secondly, there is an amount of 60 billion dollars in committed EU projects that the UK is committed to finance. Secondly, to access the European Single Market, the UK will have to respect EU law, and pay for the EU infrastructure, just as Norway (or Switzerland) do.

So what happened? Plutocracy, that’s what. Plutocracy owns the media, and felt threatened by the EU government. Plutocracy depends upon tax evasion and (“elected”) government manipulation (and the more than 17 “crown dependencies, part of UK which are tax havens).

Plutocracy rules by mental manipulation. Example: look at the Ivy League universities in the USA. They are the elite universities where the children of the elite get together, live together, plot together, and get instructed on how the manipulate the naive rabble they are expected, and expecting to rule and exploit.

The Ivy League comprises eight campuses: Dartmouth, Columbia, Princeton, Yale, Harvard, Brown, Cornell, Penn have a combined 191 billion dollars in endowment. They got 41 billion in 6 years from US, and paid no tax on their profits (which should have been 9,6 billion dollars, too!

(Of course Obama went to Columbia and then Harvard; in Columbia Obama met ZBig, the guy who make Carter to attack formally Afghanistan on July 3, 1979… ZBig saw in Obama the ideal vehicle to pursue the Pluto empire…)

Average parents pay $33,000 a year for private universities , and $9,000 for public universities.  

Is there hope? Some of the buffoons are becoming more aware. Richard Dreyfus was one of the fanatics who voted for Hillary Clinton, campaigned against Trump, and ignored Bernie Sanders (as he readily admits; Sanders would have beaten Trump is the democrats had selected him, studies have shown). Now he is against Hillary. Why? He discovered she was “for Wall Street”. Hillary went to San Francisco, all dressed in black leather:”insist, persist, resist!” Actually she is pushing her latest book.

Still No Message Of Any Substance, that’s why people who voted for Obama, in a last burst of hope, in 2012, voted for Trump in 2016, in the crucial states, the famed “Blue Wall”.

The Brexit vote rested on an arsenal of lies, imparted to the minds of British voters by the Plutocratic media. Basically, all is false, therein.

Also the vote itself was fraudulent, as it was supposed to be just a “consultation”, not legislating. No worries: Great Britain is not really a democracy, but a rule of one (mono-archy).   

So what’s next? We will see. London did its best to sabotage the EU for decades, and it’s just more of the same. A few months ago, Teresa May threaten to turn the UK into a “tax haven”. That’s of course disinformation: the UK is already a tax haven, and that’s why real estate has never been so expensive in London, the most expensive real estate in the world, by far. Plutocrats from the entire planet are flocking to London, knowing full well that the British government has no choice, but keeping on playing the Plutocratic card…

The fact that the USA’s richest universities are getting positively enormous subsidies is revealing that, once one has captured the minds of the idiots, even in democracy, especially in democracy, one can get away with anything. A Manchurian candidate made it to the presidency for 8 years, and now the Wall Street “opposition” keeps on capturing the hearts and minds of the fake left. Alleluia!

And what of Europe? Same problem, plus a deer-in-the-headlights syndrome. As long as progressives have not figured out in which direction progress lays, the likes of may will rule, complete with leopard shoes high heels, just to make sure she overlords all the uneducated out there… Her “Brexit” has no meaning, and she knows it, but the lords she serves, the world plutocrats have no meaning either, all they want is ever more prerogatives… And they don’t intent to jump off the gravy train, anymore than president Putin and PM Medvedev in Russia. Massive demonstrations there have exposed the latter as the face of state corruption in Russia (his enormous palaces, for example next to Sochi have long been notorious; a bat researcher was emprisoned for taking pictures of Medvedev’s palace there, and protesting the destruction of bat caves next to it; ultimaterly he had to flee Russia to the UK…)

One may wonder why this global plutocracy problem seems so much alike all around the planet. It is simple: the democracy we have is NOT the real thing. The ideal of democracy we have (as espoused by Russia) is NOT the real thing. Clinton-Bush-Obama, this triple head hydra is the same problem as Putin. Basically. It does not matter if it’s Russia, or California.

Real democracy should be about We The People ruling directly, as much as possible. Instead, what we have is a parody of democracy. Brexit is the poster child of this absurdity: although there was a referendum, it was all about lies. The referendum was conducted in a sea of lies, under fake assumptions, and false pretense. So now Britain is going to spend, and waste, Europe’s time for the next ten years of its convoluted, unending Brexiting… Before asking to go back in, supposing in ever leaves, which is not really the plan.

The real plan is to make the British National Health Service a new source of profit for the US health “care” industry. Oh, by the way, do you know how many people are enrolled in “Obamacare”? Eleven millions. Another nine millions are truly in Medicare. Meanwhile, the subsidies to the health care for profit industry, just as the subsidies for US plutocratic universities, have much augmented. Alleluia! We may as well have fun, watching plutocrats soar into orbit.

Just to make sure we get the picture, British PM May wants us to know she is completely mad. On day first of the Brexit negotiations she let it be known that if the European Union will not submit, she will let terrorists do their thing to Europe. May’s words insist that there is an implied threat, the prime minister’s letter being explicit. “In security terms, a failure to reach agreement [with the EU] would mean our cooperation in the fight against crime and terrorism would be weakened,” she wrote.

It does matter that PM May personally lacks credibility. That’s the whole point: plutocracy will make people do, and submit to, incredible things. Reason is in the way, so it should be disposed of.

Patrice Ayme’

Obama: “American People Voted To Shake Things Up”

November 16, 2016

Yes, that is what Obama said in Athens, Greece, November 15, 2016, about the US vote for Pluto Donald Trump. Yes.

Obama did not shake things up, but, according to Obama himself, Trump, a fixture of the US plutocratic scene since the early 1970s, will? http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/15/obama-says-voters-wanted-shake-things-donald-trump/

From the horse’s mouth, says Obama: “The lesson I draw … is we have to deal with issues like inequality, we have to deal with issues like economic dislocation, we have to deal with people’s fears that their children won’t do as well as they have… Frankly that’s been my agenda for the last eight years. The problem was, I couldn’t convince a Republican Congress to pass a lot of them.”

We have to deal with inequality? Wow. That’s news. “Democratic” news. Well, with all due respect, that is was Obama’s agenda, is a misrepresentation: the problem is that there was no SERIOUS plan for SERIOUS change, and no SERIOUS will for SERIOUS change on the part of the Democratic supermajority, crammed with plutocrats and their sycophants.

Then Obama said of the election results, “Perhaps the view of the American people was just to shake things up.”

Wait: where not you, Obama, supposed to “shake things up?” What happened to you? To your shaking?

Obama himself explained that the presidential office grows on you, transforms the beholder… And that it will happen to Trump. Obama gave the example of himself, that he was all disorganized when he got to the White House, and then learned organization. All too organized, I would say, around a few plutocratic principles…

Truth: Obama was a child, a child who thought he was fully grown up. A child who, being at the right place at the right time, posing in the right way with an all-inclusive message, got elected president. However, Obama had strictly no idea what he wanted to do with his presidency. (Whereas Donald Trump is on the public record about some of the things he wanted to do as president since the 1970s…)

G. W. Bush, the self-described “Decider” ordered Obama to the White House, in October 2008, and the ex-CEO of Goldman Sachs, Hank Paulson, told Obama what the plan to rescue the US economy from the devastation caused by the financial plutocrats was going to be. Nancy Pelosi, the Democrat heading Congress, had signed on it, after Hank Paulson had gone on one knee in front of her.

Most Of The Newly Created Money Went to Plutocrats. Rest of the West Got “Austerity”

Most Of The Newly Created Money, Above the Trend Exponential, Went to Plutocrats. Rest of the West Got “Austerity”. Most of the Media Never Talks of This.

[In the graph above, notice the brutal take-off under Obama; Quantitative Easing kills commercial banks, thus kills the real economy; at the same time, it fed, & feeds, financial speculators, “investment banking”.]

As a good doggie, of the obedient type, Obama signed on the Paulson plan. After all, when you are going to be president, you may as well sell your soul to Goldman Sachs, no? What about when you are president no more, won’t they take care of you? Navigation, navigation. Then Obama spent his first two years enacting said Goldman Sachs plan, using all sorts of tricks to cover-up was truly being done. And not done. 

TARP, Transferring Assets To Rich People, was then covered-up, in turn, by “Quantitative Easing” and “The Twist”.  That was pure rhetoric, pure dishonesty. In practice, all newly created US money was sent to the richest of the wealthiest. And the same demented, unfair policy was extended throughout the West. Thus it was rather ironical that Obama was in devastated Greece, thoroughly unawares of the devastation he visited on Greece. (And why are not the high executives of Goldman Sachs not prosecuted for what they did to Greece?)

Out of the ashes of 2008 a new, stronger plutocracy arose. Proof? A certain Steve Mnunchin, ex-Goldman-Sachs partner, profited immensely from the Obama’s administration friendliness to financial manipulators (Mnunchin made 40 million dollars personally, thanks to Obama’s financial policies…).

Amusingly, Bannon, another Trump support, and now nominee, in charge of “strategy”, declared that his new boss, Donald Trump was “selling to Wall Street”. It’s a bit complex: if I were Trump, I may nominate a financial manipulator to help “drain the swamp”. In many cases, what matters is not who one supposedly is, but what one does.

In any case, all those who voted for Clinton, the Goldman Sachs candidate, should feel better: their much admired puppet master, Goldman Sachs, knows how to hedge. Mnunchin the munchkin is there to munch them down, the way they like it.

The son-in-law of Trump, the 35-year-old Kushner, is an immensely wealthy real estate developer, himself son of one. Kushner bought his own media at 25 years old. As an observant (!?) Jew, he defended Trump from the grotesque charges of anti-Judaism leveled at him, by the likes of Paul Krugman.

Trump has asked for the high security clearances for Kushner. So, no worry, we are not going to run out of plutocratic targets.

Meanwhile, a smug Joe Biden told the press, next to VP elect Pence, that there was a lot of immensely secret (paraphrasing) things nobody who had not been as high and as long in the system as he, Biden, knew, and know he was telling them all to Pence.

My lashing answer to the Goldman Sachs/Clinton nostalgia:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLG9g7BcjKs

The truth is that the left, indeed, has let the left down. It has been corrupted by its corrupted luminaries. Now they are waking up. Nobel Joe Stiglitz, a part of the establishment with Paul Krugman said: ”Eighty percent of the activities revealed through the Panama Papers didn’t actually take place in Panama.” What’s needed is reform in the EU and US. But this reform did not happen under Obama, or the EU governments. “There is a widely shared perspective that these tax havens only exist because the United States and Europe have looked the other way.” Stiglitz suggested that empowered lobby groups on both sides of the Atlantic blocked progressive tax reforms for decades. It is not just this: even the suggestion of progressive reforms have been censored out of the Main Stream Media.

The solution is to establish a world cadastrum, a public registry of the true owners of companies and trusts (I said so, long ago, in connection with old Roman Republic anti-wealth laws; hence the word “cadastrum”). I have suggested this forever, Pickety suggested it last year. And now Stiglitz. Why did it take so long. Why is it suggested now? Because the world, the world of plutocracy, is now in Trump’s safe and trusted hands?

One reason plutocrats have been opposing Trump desperately, is that this Trump adventure makes the control that plutocracy imposes on the whole planet, not just disorganized, but all too obvious.

Patrice Ayme’

Globalocracy, Obama, Trump, High Water

November 15, 2016

A week ago today, Trump was sure to lose, the globalocrats were saying from every roof. A week ago today, the plutocracy owned media was red-hot hysterical against Trump, a lonely guy, while Hollywood was surrounding Clinton, singing, praising, celebrating her, insulting him. Bruce Springsteen made a long speech before a concert, psychoanalyzing Trump, telling us what a pervert egoistic psychopath he was (I am sure horny Bruce is trying to be invited at the White House now).

A week ago, the establishments, from dumb academia to corrupt Main Stream Media, were sure that my year old prediction that Trump would beat Clinton was assuredly madness. Intellectually corrupt Krugman was filling up pages of crooked polls supposed to demonstrate Clinton’s intrinsic superiority and manifest destiny (as if how well one polled had anything to do with ideas, and was of any bearing! But that is what one expects from dumb people grasping at straws). 

A week later, the fascist corporations which profited so much from Obama’s rule are down 10% on the stock market. The aghast Googles, Booked Faces, Bad Apples, Tax Cheating, Ruthless Amazons, & their captive or capture media, Corrupt Electrifying Generals, Micro Softs in the head, etc. They had a good deal with the Deep State: pay no tax, then expand on the empire worldwide, using corrupt justice and corrupt political leaders, worldwide…Trump was very clear he was not going to persist with that deal, thus joining Snowden, Wikileaks and yours truly.

Having Discovered The Wall Already Exists, Trump Concedes that "a fence will be enough in some places". Existing Wall Between USA and Mexico.

Having Discovered The Wall Already Exists, Trump Concedes that “a fence will be enough in some places”. Existing Wall Between USA and Mexico. Notice there is also a fence. And two patrolling roads.

Idiots will bemoan the collapse of corrupt technological monopolies doubling as spy agencies. The opposite is true. Those giant fascist corporate monopolies of the global corruptocracy have ruined technology and the Patent System, in particular.

Obama gave a press conference. Obama was subdued, meditative. Trump’s election has made him much more reflective. One should say: philosophical. Politics is practical philosophy. In substance Obama said: People have spoken D T will be the next president. That’s how democracy works. It takes a while for people to reconcile themselves with that new reality. We differ on a  whole bunch of issues so I am concerned, yet the office of the president changes the office holder, including his/her mood.

Obama praised Trump for his connection with the American People. He said that Trump saw some things others had not seen, and created a movement. Indeed, he did: the post-election analysis is out, and the results are shattering. Compared to Romney, Trump gained 8% on Hispanics (so Clinton touring with a would-be murderess once promoted by Trump, did not turn out as well as expected, surprise, surprise…)

One thing I disagreed with was Obama drinking from a styrofoam cup. What about one of these nice White House embossed ceramic, re-usable cups? Styrofoam, and no-use plastic things are going to be outlawed. Show us the way, Barry!

Obama legitimately said that his was the most ethical administration. Yes. And well, no: Obama did not control to lobbying mood. High level officials left his administration early, to go out and earn multi-million dollars incomes. The way out of that is to outlaw lobbying for years after leaving government (Trump has suggested a lobbying block of five years; I would make it ten years against income, five, free of charge).  

On the globalocracy, Obama said correct things. Finally. But he was not very clear that globalocracy should never, ever, contradict local democracy (except when it is a war authorization, as the French Republic got from the United Nations before striking in Libya to save Benghazi.

By the way, on Syria, Obama said the situation was now a mess, and there is nothing obvious one can do. Right. That’s why Assad, and his closest entourage, should have struck down, when France was ready to go it alone with the USA. Nothing wrong about the two top military powers of the West striking together a rogue, mass murdering dictator. Rogue, mass murdering dictators should always be struck. First, because of the danger of contagion through example. 

My idea was just to replace him with some other Alawite general. On Libya, the ball was dropped. Now it has to be picked up again. An empire has to be extended.

Obama was asked what he thought of Trump, after talking to him one on one for 90 minutes; he called Trump “pragmatic”. Trump will need pragmatism to sail the Acqua Alta. Here is a picture of Venice, November 2016:

Flooding, Worldwide, Is Accelerating. As Expected. Trump Has Already Made Noises That Renewables Are An Economic Asset of the USA.

Flooding, Worldwide, Is Accelerating. As Expected. Trump Has Already Made Noises That Renewables Are An Economic Asset of the USA.

I think that the interdiction of being elected more than twice in a row is correct, but somebody like Obama should be able to run again, sometimes in the future. So an advice to Obama: get your loud mouth, smart ass wife in politics. She would make a good president, sometimes in the future, come to think of it.  

Trump spent 90 minutes talking one on one with Obama. In a tight schedule, the meeting was supposed to last only 15 minutes. None of this is demanded by the US Constitution. And some transitions, even modern ones, have been extremely nasty, complete with ripped phones. Trump talking about Obama:“I told him I will look at his suggestions, and out of respect, I will do that.” Trump said he also looked forward meeting with Obama many times in the future, apparently to profit from this well of wisdom.

Meanwhile Trump was interviewed, and was boringly reasonable all over. Yes, the Wall with Mexico could just be a fence in some places. On hundreds of miles, the present wall is just deadly desert. A Wall would save hundreds of lives a year.

Trump is forced by law to accept a presidential salary. So he will take a one dollar a year salary. (instead of 400 K). He also says:”there is so much to do, we will not be big on vacations.” Trump is also digging in about terms limits for politicians, in a full confrontation with the Republican held Senate.

Trump was given a security briefing, a while ago, with top generals. He listened. Then he asked:”Do you know what a continuous pour is?” Nobody did. Finally a top general confessed his ignorance. So Trump explained what it was. Superficial message: I know stuff, too. The Economist was dismissive of Trump, saying he knew nothing. I think that it is rather the editors at The Economist who know nothing outside of what their masters tell them. Actually Trump may be the best prepared president. Ever. After all, he is a 70 year old builder of great buildings, and a business empire. When Obama got to power, he was smart, but all too young and inexperienced.

(And please don’t tell me JFK was experienced. Yes, he was a great war hero, and that made him experienced. And a Senator, and a scion of plutocrat, worth billions. However, as Allen Dulles pointed out:”That little Kennedy, he thought he was god.” Hint: nothing that a few bullets from several directions could not cure… JFK had uncautiously fired Dulles from his own creation, the CIA… But now the CIA has created the Daily Kos, which feeds the sick minds of the little protesters in the streets, and the situation has got worse…)

So what is a continuous pour? When building a great building, the foundation, a giant concrete pool, meters thick, has to be poured in one flow. So concrete trucks line up, sometimes for many city blocks in the case of a giant skyscraper (like Trump Tower). Then the pour is effected, in a matter of hours, truck after truck, with up to 16 trucks dumping concrete simultaneously. In California, the world’s largest pours have seen more than 40,000 tons poured over 24 hours (giant towers in California have also the world’s deepest foundations, around 80 meters, out of respect for giant quakes).

Obama did not know about continuous pour. That is why he waited the end of his doomed presidency for a constant pour of executive orders. A president who wants really to change things will have to engaged in a continuous pour. Trump is perfectly aware of it, that was his secret message. (BTW, FDR did the mother of all continous pour; his transition from Hoover was full of hatred. FDR cruised on a yacht, for weeks, full of contempt for the lame duck president…)

Meanwhile, the super Moon, in combination with global warming, flooded Miami Beach. Trump is getting flooded, even immersed, by reality. Right away. Expect him to love it: that man loves to fight. The Wall he will have to build is the one with the ocean.

Patrice Ayme’

Obama “Lack Of Supermajority” Lie

October 29, 2016

The simplest, and most efficient, way of thinking is by not lying. Lying consistently requires to know both some elements of reality and the lies one adorned them with. The democrats lied about why they did nothing in the early part of Obama’s reign. They claimed it was because of the Republicans, but they are Republicans in disguise, and they did not do anything for “We The People“, because they identify as “We The Plutocrats” (“WE”, as Hillary Clinton admitted to Goldman Sachs partners). And often they are.

Diane Feinstein, one of Hillary Clinton’s main support, was a pure politician her entire life. Feinstein claims to be worth around 50 million dollars. She will conveniently forget to tell you her husband is at least a billionaire. We are demoncrats, and the demon, the devil, Pluto, made us lie, so please forget it. (And how come, as a pure politician earning no more than $160,000, she made 50 million dollars?) These people rule the world, not just the USA: Feinstein’s husband, Richard Blum, was a major investor in China… while his wife prepared and reigned, over pertinent legislation.

Sometimes, of course, one should lie. Say, if a dying child is anxious, full care requires lying with no limits whatsoever. Just tell the child she better sleep and will be refreshed when she wakes up.

However, in a politico-social context, lying is never a good idea. If one is on the side of We The People. Reciprocally, lying is how plutocrats rule. And they go all the way, inventing religions to justify their horrors (the most famous cases being Christianism and Islam, both set-up by dictators, respectively Saint Constantine, Roman emperor, self-described “13th Apostle“, and Prophet Muhammad, self-described “Messenger of God“; the latter imitating the former).

Obama was the do-nothing president. OK, Obama did a lot for plutocrats, transferring trillions of federal debt to the richest people and corporations in the world. As I called it ironically, TARP, Transferin Assets To the Richest People. But Obama did nothing much for “We The People“, besides very effective lip service. To justify doing nothing, to his supporters, from day one, Obama accused the “Republicans”. He just could not convince them, Republicans, he said. That was true, but it was also a lie. A true lie. Obama did not need to convince any Republicans. Not a single one. He was in control. In total control. (But is a child in control? Of course not: a child does not know enough. A fortiori a puppet of Goldman Sachs, Gates, Apple, etc. )

Lying Has Helped Rulers For Millennia, But It Does Not Help Civilization

Lying Has Helped Rulers For Millennia, But It Does Not Help Civilization

The Nazis used, and advertised, the big lie technique because they believed they had achieved a superior understanding of the human condition, so it did not matter what ways they used to implement their rule. There were enormous lies implemented by self-described “democrats” in the last 24 years. Passing laws in the service of what turned out to be plutocrats who have names: Hillary Clinton considered major plutocrats (Gates, Cook, etc.) as potential Vice Presidential choices (before she realized that would compromise her chances too much) .

While Obama claimed he could not do anything without the Republicans, the democrats had a majority in the House of Representatives, and the democrats had a majority in the US Senate. So was Obama lying? (Silly question, sorry.)

No, say demoncrats. US Senate tradition (since 1993!) is that one can talk and talk and talk and talk in the Senate, and block any bill. Once Democratic Senator Byrd talked around 24 hours. Continuously.

However, filibusters can be overruled when one has 60 votes in the US Senate, a SUPERMAJORITY. Obama had such a supermajority, for many months perhaps six months. He could have also forced a 12 months bullet proof supermajority by forcing two ailing democratic  senators to resign

In January 2009, there were 56 Senate Democrats and two independent senators who caucused with Democrats. This combined total of 58 included Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), whose health was failing and was unable to be at the Senate everyday. As a practical matter, in the early months of Obama’s presidency, the Senate Democratic caucus had 57 members on the floor for day-to-day legislating.

In April 2009, Pennsylvania’s Arlen Specter switched parties. This meant there were 57 Democrats, and two independents who caucused with Democrats, for a caucus of 59.

On June 30 2009, Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) was sworn in, after a lengthy recount and legal fight. At that point, the Democratic caucus reached 60, but two of its members, Kennedy and Byrd, were SOMETIMES unavailable for votes.

In August 2009, Kennedy died, and Democratic caucus again stood at 59.

In September 2009, Sen. Paul Kirk (D-Mass.) filled up Kennedy’s vacancy, bringing the caucus back to 60. At this point, the democrats were back with a SUPERMAJORITY. Senator Byrd’s health continued to deteriorate. A forceful president with a progressive agenda could have made him resign. But Obama had no progressive agenda whatsoever. Neither did his helpers and sycophants. The leading ones are all establishment, they are happy wioth the establishment.

In January 2010, Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) replaced Kirk on January 19, 2010, bringing the Democratic caucus back down to 59 again.

In June 2010, Sen. Byrd died. Byrd’s replacement, a Democrat, Carte Goodwin, was sworn two weeks later. So the caucus stayed at 59.

Obama said, it’s all the fault of the Republicans, and here is this Obamacare, my “signature achievement“, plutocrats will take care of you, as long as I send them your tax dollars.

When FDR became president, he enforced a progressive agenda on his first day. In the first month, Obama did just one progressive thing: sign, with great fanfare, the evacuation of arbitrary detention at Guantanamo. Well, not really. Guantanamo is still in operation, eight years later, with people inside, arbitrarily detained. The Do-Nothing president really did nothing. His true signature achievement. (Except for arbitrary drone lethal strikes, for all to see, a new judicial precedent, and savagely hunting those who reveal some bad actions of the US government, some of them unlawful.)

A progressive president needs a supermajority only for a couple of hours. In the early twentieth century, one morning, in a couple of hours, two laws passed: one set-up the Income Tax Law, setting up the IRS. The other law passed within the hour was the Foundation Law.  

The reigning democrats are lying. They are Republicans in disguise. Republicans brought up on a Reagan psychological diet.

In the last debate Hillary Clinton attacked Trump, because Trump had attacked then reigning president Ronald Reagan in 1987… with exactly the same position Trump has today.

Need I say more?

Yes, I do. I pointed out the preceding, at the time, in 2009, as it happened. Much later, the “Tea Party” was created later. So I got to be called “Tea Party”. Last week, some people on the Internet, in public, called me a “liar, racist, xenophobe”, and added even more flattering qualifiers, for daring to say that Obama had a supermajority, for many months, in the beginning of his presidency. Some added that I reiterated “Republican talking points“. Whatever. (If politicians adopt my ideas, i am not going to complain.)

I follow the truth, an attempt to espouse reality. Politically I am somewhat on the left of Bernie Sanders, but also in the future, and that means, on the side of Mother Earth. I know Obama, and wish this will help him to stop lying. The truth is that Obama wanted more progress than he got, because most “Democrats” are rather “Demoncrats”: just ask how come some of them made hundreds of millions during their strictly political careers. Say ask the two top California democrats, Nancy Pelosi, who headed Congress for six years, and Diane Feinstein, the Senior Senator of California. Pelosi is the richest US representative. She is married to an investment banker, Paul Pelosi, the sort of people Obama helped, Clinton breathe with (Goldman Sachs). Obama will say he did a lot to crack down on bankers. Right. And another lie. Another true lie: the Obama administration cracked down on commercial banking, and on banking for “We The People”. (Worldwide, it turned out, as American jurisdiction is brandished that way.)  Meanwhile, investment banking was helped, thanks to the pernicious pretext that banking needed help (yes, commercial banking needed help as Quantitiative Easing made it unprofitable, while derivatives were allowed to run amok, same as before, profitting investment bankers…)

There are system of lies, just like there are systems of thought, and the least plutocracy can do, is to lie systematically. To lie, or not to be, that is the existential question which defines plutocracy.

Patrice Ayme’

Between Friends: Donald, Hillary, & Angry Plutocrats

October 23, 2016

Trump Hatred Originates With The Average Plutocrat, Not The Clintons:

The Clintons and Trumps have long been friends, their children are great friends, especially Chelsea and Ivanka, and it shows. So why all the hatred? Well, it’s manufactured, It is part of a distraction show, kabuki theater. And a genuine worry, among most plutocrats, that Trump is a traitor who plays apprentice sorcerer. The figure of the rogue plutocrat turning treacherously against plutocracy, his alma mater, his nourishing mother, is a familiar one in history

Roughly all Main Stream Media, worldwide, are owned, held, or otherwise controlled by plutocrats (yes, including the public NPR and PBS in the USA). Those plutocrats hate Trump, because Trump has dared to say, and has been saying as loudly as possible, since at least 1987 (when he attacked Reagan in writing) that globalization, as practiced, does not work for We The People. That has been proven aplenty, and now angry voters are discovering that Trump was right all along.

Amusingly, Sanders’ final success in 2016 was forged by Donald’s iconoclastic work, from way back when he fought Reagan with the exact same idea he rolls out today again (whereas the ever more popular Obama lauds Reagan; that, and not racism, is the source of the antipathy between Trump and Obama: Obama was born half white and educated by 100% whites). When crafty Bill Clinton called Obamacare the “craziest thing in the world“, he was craftily following Donald Trump too (and thus neutralizing the Donald: no need to vote for Trump to put Obamacare out of its misery, Bill will do it for you…)

***

The Ill Informed Sing The Praises Of The Clintons, but the Clintons are followers of Goldman Sachs, establishers of  the financial plutocracy. One, of course, has to be educated enough, and curious enough, to understand the following graph. As rabidly pro-Clinton minorities are in general not graced with as much discernment, they are rather obdurate: they suffer you know. Thus it is that the victim elect their torturers, a generalization of the Stockholm Syndrome (the feelings of trust or affection felt in certain cases of kidnapping or hostage-taking by a victim towards captors). It is a case of capture-bonding. 

The Clinton Destroyed FDR’s Banking Act and Re-established The Vicious Financial System Of 1929, On Steroids

The Clinton System Destroyed FDR’s Banking Act of 1933 and Re-established The Vicious Financial System Of 1929, On Steroids

 Since the Clinton economy affected income, median GDP per capita has lost 40% relative to the GDP of the USA. How come? The 40% went to the top, and mostly the .1%. 

***

We Are Friends, And Long Have Been:

Trump and Clinton roasted  each other in a funny way at the annual roast and Catholic fundraiser. Trump said he was delighted that Hillary was nominating him ambassador to Iraq or Afghanistan, and he got to choose which one. Hillary said Donald said she did not have stamina, but she had spent 4.5 hours with him, debating, and that was longer than any of his campaign managers ever did (an allusion to the fact Donald’s managers keep on resigning, or being resigned).

The host, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, said the candidates had “nice things” to say offstage.

“I was very moved by the obvious attempt on behalf of both Secretary Clinton and Mr. Trump to kind of be courteous, to get along, to say nice things privately to one another,” Dolan said on NBC’s “Today.” “I was very moved by that. That was pleasant.”

Dolan, who sat between Trump and Clinton at the dinner, acknowledged the two were, like President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney in 2012, “kind of awkward together.”

“But the purpose of the evening is to break some of that ice, and thanks be to God, it works. The Al Smith Dinner by its nature literally tries to — I’m sitting there between the two — and literally,I’m supposed to be kind of a bridge to bring these two people together. And I try my best, and there were some very touching moments.”

The three of them prayed together. “And after the little prayer, Mr. Trump turned to Secretary Clinton and said, ‘You know, you are one tough and talented woman…This has been a good experience in this whole campaign, as tough as it’s been” She replied “And Donald, whatever happens, we need to work together afterwards.”  

Trump: Sometimes Vulgar In Below The Belt Considerations. Clinton: All Too Often An Awfully Vulgar Laughter Which Looks Like Something A Donkey Would Do. Made For Each Other

Trump: Sometimes Vulgar Below The Belt. Clinton: All Too Often An Awfully Vulgar Laughter Which Looks Like Something A Donkey Would Do. Made For Each Other

So much love! Not like the “arrogant” Dylan who, members of the Nobel committee loudly whine, has refused to acknowledge their glorious, yet most generous existence. Well, what do they think? It is embarrassing, that Nobel is embarrassing and Dylan knows it. (At least he did not get it just because he received power and brown skin!) If I were me, i would accept the Nobel, if i were Dylan, I would refuse it. The Nobel should be used to reward what, and, or, whom, deserves to be discovered, not one of the planet super stars. (Salman Rushdie was supposed to be a runner-up for the literature Nobel, Rushdie is a martyr of the struggle against fanatical, lethal theology, yet how come I get bored to death reading a few pages of his books? At least Dylan, I appreciate, and not just the music.)

So who hates Trump, if not the Clintons? Well, in the last presidential debate, Hillary accused Donald to be a “puppet” and he angrily retorted:”No, you are the puppet“. She meant he was a caricature, he meant she was something whose strings were pulled by multi billionaires (Soros, Buffet, the Gates, etc…) They both knew that they were right, and in which different ways. (Clinton may have enough of a temper to break a few strings, though…)

***

Hatred Against Trump Is Self Interested Among the Mighty:

Typical is the hatred of the (light weight, yet courageous) billionaire-intellectual-charming corruptocrat,  Bernard-Henri Lévy who nebulously accuses Trump of “possible infidelity to America itself. The party of Eisenhower and Reagan has been commandeered by a corrupt demagogue…”

To put Eisenhower and Reagan in the same category is embarrassingly ignorant: Eisenhower launched FDR New Deal style massive programs (for example the construction of a continental size FREE freeway system, all the way to Hawaii! Or several massive defense programs reminiscent of FDR again). To pay for them, Eisenhower brought up the tax on the wealthiest up to 93%. Free, highest quality public university system went up in the USA, for example the University of California. In shocking contrast, Reagan, an enemy of cognition, established a tuition at the PUBLIC University of California, starting the great movement of making it so that only the wealthiest are fully human (Thatcher would pursue it much later) 

By comparison, in 1981, Reagan significantly reduced the maximum tax rate, which affected the highest income earners, and lowered the top marginal tax rate from 70% to 50%; in 1986 he further reduced the rate to 28%.

The result was pandemonium (see the second graph in https://patriceayme.wordpress.com/2016/08/02/trump-a-traitor/: that’s when the rich started to get ever richer, and the poor, poorer). Reagan was the anti-Eisenhower (but Reagan’s followers were even worse! All those who laud Reagan in any way are just ignorant, Neoconservatives, or worse, clueless clowns. And most probably, all the preceding. Logically enough, as Trump blasted Reagan during his presidency, Trump hatred and Reagan loving are two sides of the same coin (many of Trump partisans, or their parents actually believed in Reagan, before realizing later that they had been had… hence their indignation).

***

Plutocracy strikes aging societies. Just like metastatic cancer strikes older individuals, and for similar reasons: the corruption of entrenched nefarious mutations. When a society is struck by plutocracy, it needs a revolution. That is why France, the core of the European civilization, went through so many revolutions: precisely to rejuvenate itself, from revolution to revolution (and France implemented a revolution machine in England, which worked for many centuries; even Brexit is a form of revolution, however flawed and misguided…)

Trump, by lashing back against plutocratic globalization, is refreshing. He is also sincere: his mood against some aspect of globalization can be found in a campaign he made against Reagan. Trump’s campaign against the “Politically Correct”dates from the early 1970s. It is not clear what Hillary will do against corrupting globalization, as she did a 180 degrees on the Trans Pacific Partnership (she said the details changed, she didn’t). The Democratic platform adopted several of Sanders’ propositions.

In any case, the differences between Hillary and the Donald are less great than feared by the young and naive. The difference of either of them with Obama, will be more marked: the impulsive Donald and the Hilarious One have lots of experience with the system, and do not really need said system, to become somebody: they are already superstars, and they think highly of themselves. But progressives have to understand they have to exert continual pressure if they want progress, be it Donald, or Hillary. Just making a blind Hillary cult after 8 years of blind Obama worship will mean ever more plutocratization, same as what we have been going through.

And keep in mind that the grotesque racist campaign against Trump is an example of how much manipulation is going out there. After a visit with John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, the Ecuadorean president, Correa, cut Wikileaks’ Assange his Internet access. Assange had been revealing various Clinton manipulations all over. The strident accusations of the US administration against Russia in the US electoral process, mean, precisely, that it takes one to known one. 

Hillary is a monster: a good sign. Devils know best how to fight evil. Maybe she will gobble Bill and his financial puppet masters too.

Patrice Ayme’

Goldman Sachs’ European Union

July 9, 2016

Goldman Sachs, one of the generous employers of the wealthy Hillary Clinton, has recruited José Manuel Barroso, the former president of the European Commission, as the chairman of its international operations, “a non-exec, advisory role”…. To handle “Brexit” Goldman-Sachs said. (An interesting case of self-dealing: Who was one of the main forces behind “Brexit”? Goldman Sachs, as it cheated on the accounting of Greece, thus enabling Greece to enter the Eurozone, when it should not have, leading to the “Grexit” crisis, which ruined further the reputation of the EU, thus enabling Europhobes to howl their xenophobia even louder, etc.…).

Goldman knows how to employ international bureaucrats and politicians: the previous holder was Peter Sutherland, a former European Commissioner and ex-boss of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Goldman Sachs has plenty of money, because the tax structure of the US makes it so, while, if a young Afro-American wants to make it, he can always enroll to be train as a killer for the establishment… This is not just conspiracy and corruption on a local or national scale, this is corruption on a global scale.

Barroso was the 115th Prime Minister of Portugal for three years, then head of the European Commission (EC) for ten years. The EC is the executive administration of the European Union (EU). It employs 33,000 workers in charge mostly of regulating the regulations embodying European Laws (passed by the European Parliament), to rule the single market of more than 500 million people (that makes it much more efficient than the British government employing 4.5 million people). 

Meanwhile California papers announced proudly that California had the sixth economy in the world in terms of nominal GDP, having jumped ahead of France and Brazil, Italy, India… This reflects in part a surge in the dollar and the pound (which has gone down 15% since the “Brexit” vote). It also reflects the mercantilist strategy of the USA, conducted with brio under Obama.

Let's Plot All Together Now! Obama, Elon Musk, and the Military: Laughing All The Way To The Bank!

Let’s Plot All Together Now! Obama, Elon Musk, and the Military: Laughing All The Way To The Bank!

Take for example Tesla, the poster concept of present-day American mercantilism. It is flooding the world with luxury electric car of dubious ecological merit. All the way to Norway, huge government subsidies are piled up on it (and I would be very interested to know the details on the mortgages and conferences various officials involve take) . Thanks to well-organized propaganda and financing by the US government. In truth, Tesla and the other companies of Elon Musk (Solar City, Space X) are companies massively financed by the US governments (yes, the government of the US and the governments of other states, such as New York, Nevada, to California). Those subsidies on just Solar City and Tesla amounted to 5 billion dollars by 2014. Mr. Musk himself made, personally, 12 billion dollars under the Obama administration: the beauty of the (pseudo) free market.

Why? The South African born Musk, tall and lean, looks good next to Obama, tall and lean. Not that Obama knew what was going on: Chu, the Nobel Prize winning Secretary of Energy of Obama, yanked American Federal Government support for further research in fuel-cell electrics (a US technology, which served us the Moon on a plate). Now Chu is very close to those who invested in battery electrics (fuel-cells are vastly superior to battery electrics in the present state of technology)

The case of Mr. Musk is highly visible, but just the tip of the iceberg (a tip which loves to live dangerously).

Many American corporations have moved their headquarters to tax havens, thus escaping the 33% US tax, something Obama had to loudly deplore, and did loudly deplore. Meanwhile, the full might of the US government is still helping these corporations (diplomatically, through traded delegations, etc.).

Pure mercantilism. The fostering of American business is used to enrich the US by weakening the rest of the world. Just like fostering London as Europe’s financial center brought a weakening of continental Europe (most of the Euro money-changing happening in London rather than in the Eurozone). The USA uses its political and propaganda heft to get its way in business.

For example, Tesla was authorized to let drivers use its “Autopilot” function, while it would be non-imaginable to enable a non-American car maker to do the same. (A Tesla in Autopilot did not detect a tractor-trailer and went below it at full speed, killing the driver.)  

The war of the US mercantilist empire against the barely conscious European sheep is all azimuths. For example, after decades of anti-French propaganda using most American comics, it is very difficult to sell anything in the USA coming from France. Even French cheese is considered to be dangerous biological warfare. One can be arrested for sneaking a French cheese inside one’s luggage: special dogs are out there to get the French contrebandiers, and their hidden Roquefort.

All is fair in love and war? Not really. Especially when one does not know that one is at war. The Europeans love their i-phones, but they should ponder more where they come from, and how.

The USA is behaving, right now, like a traditional European power, at the time when the European powers were jostling for world control. Whereas the Europeans have opted for behaving like traditional European sheep. But even their cheese does not make it in. So what are the European sheep going to do? Die off through low birth rate, and a civil war with Muslim migrants?

The American government has a law forbidding government to buy non-American products, except if nothing else available; the EU does not have an equivalent, symmetric law, thanks to the fact European politicians know that, if they behave well during their European political “duty”, namely if they favor US interests, US oligopolies and financial conspiracies will employ them, afterwards. And “compensate” them very well.

The US behaves like a traditional, aggressive and imperialist European power, but for three caveats. First, the US is a superpower, “the one and only superpower, probably”as a chastened Russian president Vladimir Putin put it recently. That feeling of superiority brings a supplement of hubris. And hubris does not replace soul, as the Ancient Greeks knew, all too well.

The other caveat is that the US, and its institutions, arose in great part from the “West Country Men” mentality, of greed foremost. Four centuries of English North American history have shown that, the more greed, the better, overall, for the empire. What could go wrong? No appetite is large enough, if it can eat entire mountains.

The final caveat is that US mentality did not arise from thousands of years growing among, and learning to live with, disagreeable, incomprehensible, insufferable neighbors. The US is a new country which experiences  itself as a new civilization, on an island-continent.

The “Brexit vote” at first sight, weakens Europe further. The US had fostered, before it attacked, and after it attacked the Prussian Kaiser’s fascist imperial design to take over Europe in an alliance with the US. Later, as early as 1921, American plutocrats led by the maverick racist Henry Ford, and, soon enough, Wall Street’s entire might, American leaders fostered Nazism. And Stalinism too. The result was the world as we know it.

Esteemed commenter Gloucon on this site just suggested that everything American has to be expunged from the US mentality.  He called that Amexit from itself, “exorcism”. It may well be true. However, the policies of various European powers right now enfeeble Europe ever more. In what was a minor crisis (the 2008 greed crisis), the US did not hesitate to run astounding record deficits for years, up to nearly 15% of GDP, well above 10% of GDP for more than four years running. Meanwhile the servants of Goldman Sachs at the European Commission, and in various other European governments insisted, and keep on insisting on the 3% deficit limit. The french commissioner of finance is very strict on this: France has to lower its deficit to 3%. Well, I don’t know if that’s Marine le Pen’s plan, but, considering the sorry state of France, the french deficit should be brought up to 20% (investors would probably pay France for that: the French ten-year bond is basically at zero percent…)

European countries, thanks to European laws, kept their deficits extravagantly low, while their economies sunk. Except for… Britain, which ran much higher deficits that then rest of Europe (the Eurozone). Hence the surge of the British Pound, because, paradoxically, the ability, or, more exactly, effrontery of running high deficit is viewed by money manipulators, as a sign of strength (that’s in contradiction with classics economics of the obsequious type). And this is correct: it’s the friendliness to plutocracy, and the ability to enforce that, which have contributed to the clout of the US and the UK.   

Deficits Don't Count, If You Have The World's Biggest Army: Obama Is A Strategic Genius, Whereas European Leaders Are Mentally Retarded Traitors Of The Vicious Type

Deficits Don’t Count, If You Have The World’s Biggest Army: Obama Is A Strategic Genius, Whereas European Leaders Are Mentally Retarded Traitors Of The Vicious Type

But let’s contemplate the very high deficits of Obama’s first six years. Is not the only excuse for very high deficit, war? Was there a war the US was engaged in. I mean a big war, not this little weapon testing in the Middle East. Of course there is. And the enemy is doing poorly, melting like Camembert. The European Union, ladies and gentlemen, and its increasingly tiny and irrelevant corporations… is not on the winning side. And how could it be?

In 1940, the Duke of Windsor, inspector general of the British armed forces and ex-king, wrote to his friend Adolf Hitler that the weak point of the French defenses was at Sedan (where, coincidentally, the Second British armored division was assigned, but never arrived, conveniently enough, leaving just one French infantry reserve division to block the bulk of the Nazi army). That was high treason. And it served, ultimately, the “American Century”: France and Britain won, but much diminished.

All the high officials of Europe working for conspiratorial plutocratic money manipulators are also traitors, and they serve the same master. Why can’t laws be passed, outlawing such practices before (PM Mario Monti, ECB’s Draghi), or after (Barroso)? Over a lifetime? Or over entire families and acquaintances (immediately after Ted Cruz was elected Senator, Goldman Sachs, which had secretly financed his campaign, made Cruz’s souse into a Goldman Sachs director…).

This is not just an American problem. After all the Russians hired ex-Chancellor Schroeder of Germany to head, nominally, a giant gas pipe line, in an affectionate mark of appreciation to be meditated upon by present and future “leaders”. The bottom line, on this planet, is that too much power is put into too few hands. This is how World War One was launched: five persons, conspiring together, four generals and the grandson of Queen Victoria, decided to launch a world war, within 18 months. (They overruled the two aghast admirals, including Admiral Tirpitz, who knew the Kriegsmarine could not win over the Royal Navy, and thus were against war; the other admiral wrote the secret report, found, more than half a century later, hidden in an attic.)

Some people want to stop hurting animals. Nice. A new ethics is necessary for doing so. More urgently, a new ethics is needed in politics: the simple moral fact that too much power in too few hands is as immoral as it gets. After all, too much power in too few hands was the principal idea of Nazism (the “Fuerer Prinzip“).  And it is also the principal idea of… Islam (which Hitler copied to the point of parody).

A planet whose leaders are the puppets of tyrannical greedsters cannot end well. Greed, cupidity, avarice, the will to dominate others, do not correspond to mental modes of operations, and their attending neurohormones, that we can afford, when the entire biosphere is tottering on the verge of the most massive extinction. Ever.

Why? Because such neurohormonal regimes amplifying the basest instincts, do not correspond to the highest possible states of intelligence. Politicians and financiers, are, fundamentally, of the lower sort (as Jesus and Muhammad themselves convened!)

Patrice Ayme’