Why I hate the poor

A caveat:  our species, homo sapiens, while it goes through a childhood stage where fairness seems the most important thing in the world, is not, first and foremost, really concerned with fairness in any serious, lifelong way.  Please keep that in mind as you read my unfair account of why I hate poor people.

Why do I hate poor people?    First of all, there are just too many of them on the earth.   If you have no money, and a hard time feeding yourself, why do you have a child, then another, and sometimes many children?  Okay, I get the counter position — do the poor not have the same right as the wealthy to have a child to love?   Fair enough, but on the other hand, there are already billions, literally, of poor people on the earth.  Our planet cannot sustain the overpopulation we have now, let alone many millions more poor, hopeless, hungry children.  So when the rich, who tend to have a reasonable number of offspring, complain that the poor lack restraint when it comes to procreation, you can see their point, in a way.

Is it an unfair point?  In a way.  Would it be better, and more manageable for everyone, if each poor couple only had one or two children, or none?    Yes.   Would it be fair to require each poor couple to stop having sex after they had a child or two?   No.   Would it be fair to expect every poor couple to go out and buy birth control (assuming their religion allowed it) for many years after having the responsible amount of children?   Probably not, if they are already having a hard time feeding, clothing and sheltering themselves and their one or two babies.

Face it, though, fairness really does not enter the discussion of poverty.   If fairness in dealing with the brutality of poverty was the issue, everyone with a billion dollars would simply be required to donate 10% to a fund to end poverty by providing opportunities for poor people to emerge from the horrors of poverty.   For every billion you are worth, one hundred million donated, as a tax- write off.   Instead of your tax going to fund the programs of a government you most likely hate, just give it as forced a one time charitable donation to end poverty.   

People like the Koch brothers would contribute about ten billion to the fund.    They would do this hissing, screaming, kicking, biting, marshaling an army of lawyers to bring dozens of lawsuits.  They would be coerced by the very government they’ve spent a small fortune buying influence over to avoid government coercion of any kind.    But if fairness were really to be practiced, they’d be forced to do it.   Betsey DeVos, ignorant Secretary of Education, and her husband, Mr. Amway, would kick in about six hundred million.  The money would be overseen and distributed by a committee of our best and brightest, for low-cost housing, nutrition, job training, health care, education, subsidized college and so on.   Poverty could be eradicated once and for all, within a generation, if fairness were really our goal.

But wait, why should the super rich pay?   Not only because I hate them, they can best afford it.   Why, just because they have been immensely successful, or supremely fortunate in their birth, should they be punished by being forced to give that giant percentage of their hard-won wealth? Not only because I hate them, but because it’s fair.   A person can’t really spend even one billion dollars in a lifetime, no matter how many homes, planes, gold toilet bowls one buys.   If you can spend it just to prove me wrong, fuck off, you and your jackass addiction to sickening, wasteful luxury.

Hating the poor because they just keep fucking is a reductive reason for hating them, I get that.   I hate the poor because they keep churning out more poor people? The same could be said for the fucking rich, or even the middle and working classes.   Look at the president’s entitled offspring.  Would the world be better off without them?   Inarguably.   But I must have more reasons for hating the poor than the dumb one I have managed to spew so far.   I certainly do.

Many of the poor are in despair.   They are depressed, anxious, fearful, sometimes lashing out at innocent people, simply because their victims are not poor.   What the fuck?   Just because you were born in desperate circumstances, just because your parents and grandparents were born in desperate poverty… that doesn’t give you the right to be a jerk. [1]   Or maybe it does?   The jury is out on this one, but let’s look at a few of the facts of the case, for a minute.    

If you have an emotional disorder, like you wake up screaming in terror after short sleep every night, and you are the child of wealthy parents who love you, you will receive immediate treatment.   This includes a serious discussion with the parents, an examination by a physician, a full battery of tests, a psychiatric exam, talk therapy and possibly a course of carefully monitored psycho-pharmaceuticals.   If you are the tormented child of poor parents, the options will be fewer.    If your family qualifies for something like the Medicaid we have here, you will possibly be able to go on to disability and get medication.

Are medications for mental and emotional disorders always the best way to treat something like a reflex to terror, particularly if founded, not on terrifyingly imagined threats but real, day to day existential dangers?    Admittedly, no.   Are the meds better than nothing?  100%, certainly 50%.   Yet there are probably tens of millions of poor people and their children who get no treatment at all for serious emotional problems.

Am I really blaming the poor, who have much more to fear, many more physical, day to day reasons to be anxious than people with the money to pay for their immediate needs and wants?  Am I brushing aside the trauma associated with chronic hunger, violence associated with hopelessness, the fear of having what little you have snatched by someone more ruthless than yourself?   No, but still.   Not hating is fucking hard work, yo.

The children of the poor, when they become teenagers, often display a lot of anti-social behaviors.  They talk too fucking loud.  They throw garbage on the ground.   They are often promiscuous.   They take drugs.   They have children, while they themselves are still children, the poster children and poster grandchildren for irresponsibly.   When you tell them to stop talking so fucking loud they tell you to shut the fuck up and to stop looking at them.   When you tell them to stop throwing garbage on the floor, they threaten to throw you on the floor.   Forget about lecturing them about having less sex, taking drugs, having as many children as they feel like having.   What a bunch of selfish, intractable young assholes.

Of course, this behavior is not restricted to the children of the poor.  Many years ago, I once subbed in an elite private high school on New York City’s upper east side.   As I stood at the blackboard I had an experience I never had in hundreds of classrooms teaching impoverished NYC children.   An angry preppie came up to me, he was about my size, perhaps a little bigger, stood in front of me glaring, smirking provocatively for his classmates and refusing to move.   So I guess the children of the rich, when they become teenagers, can display anti-social behaviors and be just as fucked up as poor kids.   The poor kids I taught, I have to say, were, as a group, less entitled and more inclined to share than the rich kids at the prep school seemed to be. 

I grant you that it is hard to understand the pressures poverty places on an individual unless you’ve actually encountered any of them.  I’ve had the barest taste of it, and I can tell you how bad it tastes, though I am far from impoverished (at the moment) myself.   In order to not have to work for a living I have been frugal with the funds I have.    I’ve been living, since my mother’s death in 2010, on an income 164.74% over the Federal Poverty Level (“FPL”).   The FPL is set by bureaucrats who have never lived at anywhere near this arbitrarily set, terribly low monetary amount.   It is set very low, below what one needs to actually pay for everything required by a life that is not terribly, terrifyingly insecure.    That artificially low number helps when it is time to tabulate the numbers of people who are, from time to time, statistically lifted out of poverty.

I point out again, that though I live on a low income I have fixed myself, for the simple, selfish reason of not having to work for a living, I do not really live in poverty.   Far from it.   If the sun is glaring as it makes its fiery descent, and, blinded, I tap the brakes a second too late to avoid an imprint on the solid white ass of the stopped leased car in front of mine, I can easily get the $400 to pay the outraged woman in front of me (after verifying with a body shop that this charge is about right), meet her in a local Dunkin’ Donuts, and hand her the cash.  It barely hurts, although I could have also bought a nice piece of long-desired musical gear I won’t get now.

I stand on cold, or sweltering, NYC subway platforms late at night, powerless and angry.  The logic for the poor service at nights in NYC is simple: if you were not a powerless asshole unwilling to spend more than $2.75 to get home you could just jump in a cab, an uber, a lyft, spend the $40 or $50 not to be a powerless asshole with nothing to say about how long you have to fucking wait for public transportation, you wouldn’t be waiting forty minutes to stand on your crowded ride.  If you don’t stand for unreasonably long stretches on freezing subway platforms to get home, it means nothing, really, that many poor bastards have to do it every night.   What you don’t actually experience is an abstraction that will not move you very much, more often than not.  

The indignities of the services for poor and working class people are one thing.  Imagine being poor enough to need government assistance of any kind.   My friend, you are pretty much fucked.   When I worked as an officer of the court, I found myself standing in the shoes of hundreds of impoverished New York City tenants who, but for me, were totally fucked.   The double amputee who got a mailed notice, on Monday, to appear for a face to face meeting the following day, and was unable to get an Access-a-ride scheduled on such short notice?   She immediately lost her public assistance, with no right to appeal, for her failure to attend a mandated “face to face”.   Many moons passed, an eviction proceeding was initiated and she was in debt to her landlord something like $13,000 before I was called in to try to prevent her eviction into homelessness.

Wait, I know, I know.   Why had she had her legs amputated?   Diabetes.  How did she become diabetic?  By being obese, by eating irresponsibly, by not hiring a personal trainer, and eating coach, not seeing the proper experts before it was too late, before she simply ate herself into a lifetime disease and had both of her legs amputated.  I know.    Why was it my problem?   I know, I know…

I appeared in court month after month, for more than a year, as her debt to her landlord doubled.   The attorney for the landlord was furious at me, but I played things out as I had learned to do.    The court is loathe to evict a woman with no legs, send her rolling to a homeless shelter, it makes everybody look bad.  Yet, she was a deadbeat who owed her landlord more than $20,000 formerly paid by a government program for disabled indigents.   The landlord’s attorney railed every time we went before the judge, but to little effect.  It took me more than a year to realize I could only resolve the situation by having the judge sign a subpoena for the head of the agency to appear in court and explain why the agency had cut off my client’s benefits and was not hearing an appeal yet. 

When I served the subpoena (ad testifcandum, as opposed to duces tecum — production of documents) for the agency head to appear in court to testify about why the double amputee had not had her appeal, or her benefits restored, in more than a year and a half, I quickly got a call from the head of the agency.   Would it be possible to send an assistant, she wanted to know?

“You should talk to your own legal counsel about this,” I told her, “You are personally named on the subpoena, and the judge ordered you to appear.  I’m not your lawyer, as you know, and I can’t really give you legal advice.  All I can tell you is that refusal to answer a lawful subpoena is contempt of court, and it would be up to the judge to decide how severely  the contempt of court would be punished.”   Of course, I was talking mostly through my ass, there would likely be no consequence for this bureaucrat not appearing in the lowly Brooklyn Housing Court.

The ruse worked.  She showed up, was a lovely woman with whom I chatted for a long time before the judge saw us.   By the time we were in front of the judge we were of one mind.   The director of the agency kept her promise to the judge, had her people pull all the proper papers, expedite the appeal process, and within a week or two the double amputee had been restored to the rent-subsidy program her poverty and physical disability entitled her to.   The back rent was paid by a huge grant and I got paid my $400 by New York City for more than a year of legal services.   Fair is fair.   This particular story, which should never have taken place,  had a happy ending.

Poverty sucks.   Everybody knows that.   Poor people don’t like it, they just often have no choice about whether to be poor or not.   More determinative than work ethic, high morals, determination, creativity, desire, discipline are the circumstances one is born into.   The data shows that a person born into poverty, in most cases, will die in poverty.  Simple fucking math.  Better to be born to parents with money that parents eternally insecure about paying for what they need?  No question.   The children of the rich, while they may have many legitimate complaints about the unfair things they face in their lives, are innately less sympathetic to me than even the often obnoxious, angry, in-your-face children of the poor.   Not to say I don’t hate them too, of course.

 

[1]  I note, in spite of the unfairness of doing so, that the poor are disproportionately locked up as criminals.   This is because they are stopped and arrested in large numbers, cannot make bail (odds of conviction go up tenfold if you can’t get out of jail on bond) and wind up pleading to lower crimes to minimize their prison sentences.   Wiseasses like Anatole France may crack that “the law in its majestic equality forbids rich and poor alike from begging for alms, stealing bread and sleeping under bridges” but, well, wiseasses will be wiseasses.

POTUS 1, 7 year-old Guatemalan girl 0

Another big win for the president in his war to keep America safe while he is making it great again.    You can read the sickening details from the freedom-hating communists at the Associated Press.  The story, published a week after the girl’s death, has suddenly become big news.   A story about one little stinkin’ illegal alien dead kid, who died more than a week ago, suddenly all over the news, like it’s a big deal!   Isn’t that just like the merciless freedom-hating vultures of the lying media for you?

Apparently nobody is to blame for allowing this young child to die of shock and liver failure from dehydration while detained by U.S. border agents in the desert — how were they to know she needed water?   What if she was a terrorist?   They’re already working on a story: she wasn’t sweating, so she seemed to be fine, it was hot, but she wasn’t sweating.  Plus, her father said she was not ill, he allegedly signed papers to that effect (in English, a language he doesn’t understand) before border agents let the little girl die over the course of the next several hours.  As soon as her body temperature rose to 105.7 they took immediate action, flew her to get medical attention, unfortunately medics couldn’t save her.  So, really, who is to blame?

Screen shot 2018-12-20 at 4.28.54 PM.png

I have a couple of prime suspects, though, ultimately, of course, it goes to Individual 1 who is the leader of the free world.   There’s a reptilian self-hating Jew named Stephen Miller who works for the president, helps him formulate many of his most despicable and racist policies and the stirring rationales for them, writes some of POTUS’s most soaringly Hitlerian speeches.  I’m sure there have been others working with them as well, some of whom probably have not yet quit, been fired, arrested, indicted or convicted.

The death of  another little brown girl, this one named Jakeline Caal Maquín, seven, because of a zero-tolerance racist immigration policy promulgated by the leader of the free world and spewed by him to rally after rally of fist-pumping white people, the base, is murder, even after you factor in all the arguments about the tragedy.   Yes, her desperate father may arguably have put her in danger, fleeing from one hellhole into a hostile desert where U.S. border agents took the asylum seekers into custody.   Agents known to be particularly ruthless under orders from this oddly bellicose orange man with the puffy white eyes.  He presides over a land where it is shoot first, figure out your stand-your-ground defense later.   Go out on Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, POTUS, and see how long it would take for a cop to slap the cuffs on you and read you your rights.  Your base might be upset, but then, they are already upset.

I’ve written here several times since October 2 about the Saudi journalist murdered, without consequences, by billionaire crown prince Muhammed Bin Salman (MBS).   During the last few days Senate Republicans joined in a resolution condemning MBS as the person who sent the hit squad and ordered the killing of Jamal Khashoggi.      Several Senate Republicans also crossed party lines to carry the vote to end U.S. support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen.   Progress I won’t sneeze at.    And, while I’m not sneezing, Khashoggi, horrific and inexcusable as his killing was, at least got to live more than sixty years of his life.

But the death of little seven year-old Jakeline Caal Maquín must not be (though, of course it will) just another anonymous, quickly forgotten example of the depraved indifference America’s own leader has shown toward the human props he deploys in his increasingly grotesque attempt to throw meat to his base, focus attention away from his own criminal enterprises and a legal position growing more tenuous by the day.   Call me weak, but I’m more concerned with the immediate fate of traumatized children still in cages, at the hands of my own government, than I am about how soon this Orange menace winds up immiserated and  incarcerated.

Yes, Obama was the Deporter-in-Chief, sure, no dispute here.   Both he and his predecessor, and all of them, really, always talked about deporting criminals, dangerous people without legal immigration status (a relatively small subset of immigrants, by any measure). But look at this graphic and see if you can keep from getting angry.   I can’t. 

Screen shot 2018-12-13 at 8.53.34 PM.png

If you somehow still think the perpetually angry man on the left is “good for America” (or for anything, actually, except perhaps as an object lesson in how not to be a “winner”) picture another child, “accidentally” murdered (nobody’s fault, nobody’s fault [1]) in the service of a “winning” political talking point, take a long look in the mirror and think again.  

And then, go fuck yourself.

 

[1] As even the lying AP admits:  

An autopsy was scheduled to determine the girl’s death. The results could take weeks.

Who knew? President HUMBLE

Not one to brag about himself, fair enough, but how is it possible that this is the first time we’ve ever heard this fantastic news about a fabulous result of the president’s unwavering commitment to protecting us all?  This is from yesterday’s shameful attack by the Democrats.

President Donald Trump: “People are pouring into our country, including terrorists. We have terrorists. We caught 10 terrorists over the last very short period of time. Ten!”

Don’t hide your light under a bushel, sir!

The SAD part is that none of the treasonous, millionaire late night “comedians” are even making fun of him for this one.   No credit whatsoever for an incredible job.  An incredible job.  Incredible, you know, like unbelievable.   Can you believe how unbelievable this is?

Individual 1 and friends

If you are Individual 1 (and, in fairness to his anonymity in the DOJ filings, we know only that he is an American president who came into office at the end of 2016) you’ve lived a life in which you were always number one, and never accountable for any reason.   As an eight year-old you were already, personally, a millionaire with all the rights and privileges appurtenant thereto.  You never had to meet or interact with poor kids, working class Greeks, Jews, Chinese, Negroes, Hispanics (these used to be called, back in the ignorant days, “scum”, Greeks, Kikes, Chinks, Niggers— er, sorry, I mean n-words… N-words, sorry, SORRY, God help me, Spics).  You never developed the antibodies to deal with the many diseases purportedly carried by these types, never learned to play with people who were not born-rich like you, never learned to judge anything on any basis but how much money was in it for you personally.

As an adult you might have had the most successful casino in a casino town.   To give your first wife something to do, to keep her busy while you screwed a bimbo who would eventually become, for a short time, your second wife, you might have built a second casino in the same town for her to personally manage.  Wife one would manage your second casino well and it too would become a gold mine.  And then, because there had never been any consequences for any of your previous errors ($400 million from dad and a team of good bankruptcy lawyers will go a long way to covering one’s ass), and because your ambition knows no reasonable bounds, you will borrow close to a billion to build the mother of all casinos, in the same casino town.  That giant casino (the worlds’ largest), will quickly put all three out of business (not to mention the many local businesses your bankrupt casinos will stiff and put out of business).   Big deal, really, nothing to see here.  Truly, do you all really get it?  NOTHING TO SEE HERE!

So while I do, in a twisted way, feel a tiny bit bad for this guy, as the walls close in, you know, with this “perjury trap” for Individual 1 (a trap that can only work, by the way, if you lie under oath, or can’t help lying because, really, seriously, what fucking difference has it ever made?) there is really a kind of poetic justice side to it.   It’s wise not to put too much faith our justice system, a system built by the super-rich to serve themselves first, food from a different, more discerning kitchen than the rest of us eat from, or in the punishment of the most destructively evil among us, but I can’t help seeing just a little beauty in the recent implication of Individual 1 in the felonies of two close associates who have, under oath, dragged poor Individual 1 into their felony messes.    

Individual 1 may tweet that there is No Smocking Gun, no Smocking Gun, but, of course, he has always used twitter (assuming this Individual 1 is the same guy I’m thinking of) as an engine to blow smoke up everybody’s ass. 

And now, a few words from the sworn testimony of the guy who was Individual 1’s first choice for his second Supreme Court nomination, a supremely unqualified man (based on his own tantrums, partisan rage and unabashed weaselishness during his confirmation hearings) I will identify, in the interest of fairness and full transparency,  only as Individual 2.   At the bottom there is a line I muse about now whenever I consider how a man can behave despicably toward women.

It is literally inconceivable that anyone but Individual 1 would thrust Individual 2 to sit, by the barest of partisan majorities, among the final arbiters of what is lawful and what is not lawful in a nation he claims to love:

20181211_171547.jpg 

POTUS nails the Libtards, in the face, thrice!

Trump had an Oval Office press photo op with Democratic Leaders Nancy Pelosi (House) and Chuck Schumer (Senate) on Tuesday.   You can see the whole video of their filmed meeting here, though it’s really not necessary to see it in any detail.   I can tell you that after watching it, during his statement and while muscularly refuting everything that Pelosi and Schumer had to say, POTUS repeatedly nails the Democrats.   (Trevor Noah’s merciless take, which seems to deny this obvious fact, is here)

POTUS starts off talking about the bipartisan criminal justice reform bill and the aid to farmers bill both about to become new laws.   This announcement is the reason for this press photo op and Pelosi and Schumer surely smile and nod (they are off camera by now, we are close on POTUS, who is speaking)  about the two bipartisan soon-to-be laws they had come to the Oval Office to announce.  

Then POTUS begins talking about the importance of building the remaining sections of the wall which has been very, very successful, in fact, 92% to 96%  successful in the areas where it has been built, he confirms through notes he picks up from the nearby table and reads, in keeping illegals, including terrorists, out of the country.   To understand how effective a complete wall is one only has to look at Israel, he adds, which is 99.9% successful keeping terrorists who want to kill them out of the country, because of their wall.

He tells the Democrats that they’d better be ready to do what needs to be done and sign the proposed law funding the rest of the wall because otherwise there could be a government shut down.   Then he asks Nancy Pelosi to speak.  

Pelosi says that she would like to see the proposed law first in the House, so they can work out a draft and vote on passing it on to the Senate.  The House, she points out, is where bills are introduced, and where they are worked on before being sent to the Senate for the vote on whether they will become laws.   The president’s party, she reminds him, controls the White House and the Senate, (as well, obviously, as the House where Pelosi is currently Minority Leader), which she continues to insist is the only place where any compromise on funding the wall can possibly be worked out.

Trump tells her there is no point going through the House since there’s no way he’s getting the needed sixty votes in the Senate [1].   That’s why he’s going directly to the Senate, bypassing the House and threatening to shut down the government if the Senate doesn’t vote to appropriate the requested funds for the wall.   Pelosi says she’s not at the photo op to publicly argue policy in front of the press, that negotiations are supposed to be done in Congress.  Trump tells her that he could easily get the votes in the House, easily, in moments, but that it’s pointless because the Senate wouldn’t pass the bill anyway, because of the partisanship of the Democrats.  That’s why he’s not going to the House, he tells her again.

Pelosi simply doesn’t seem to get it.  She keeps saying that bills are always introduced in the House, because of something she calls Article One.  The House, she says is where details are thrashed out and the improved draft, if approved in the House, is sent to the Senate.   Trump says he could easily get a bill passed in the House, but that it’s pointless, because he’s going to automatically lose in the Senate, so he’s skipping that step.   Pelosi keeps insisting that this is exactly what he should do, especially if he is so confident of getting the votes, send the bill to the House.   He tells her again that he could easily pass this bill to fund the wall in the House, but that he’s bypassing the House because the Senate is too rigid to get ten votes from the Democrats.   She gets nasty and tells him that he wouldn’t get the votes in the House.   He tells her again that she’s wrong and calls on Schumer. 

Schumer says the most important thing, during these negotiations, is to keep the federal government open for business, to avoid a shut down.   Trump tells him there is nothing more important than border security and Schumer agrees, but is coy about any Democrats voting for POTUS’s proposal about building the wall (which, it turns out, is a measly five billion dollars).   Schumer then gratuitously quotes a recent article from the lying Washington Post awarding the president multiple “Pinocchios” for his untrue remarks about this proposal, about how much of the wall has actually been built so far and how effective it has actually been in increasing security.

Trump cuts him off to announce that his border wall has resulted in ten terrorists already being caught trying to sneak in to murder us.  Ten TERRORISTS.  Arrested. Recently. Because of the wall.  In your face, Chuck Chuck Bo Buck!

Schumer was clearly not ready for this one, and comes back again lamely with the importance of avoiding a government shut down.

The president then reminds Schumer and the rest of us of the how badly things went the last time the Democrats shut down the government.   My memory, I confess, was a bit hazy on that one, so I scurried to Wikipedia and read all about it.  Fucking lying commie bastards!    

Pelosi then tries to bring up the Constitution, Article One, the Legislative Branch and good faith negotiations.   POTUS tells her we can have good faith if the Democrats don’t force a government shut down, which he promises not to blame them for, by the way.  He thanks everybody.  Then the fucking press starts butting in, and I lost interest there [2].  Then I couldn’t resist hearing the rest and the video was almost over anyway.   POTUS then says “border security” many times in a few sentences, and stresses that the wall is necessary for border security.  It’s a national emergency, he stresses, and we have to have border security and a wall.  He says again “border security”.   

Schumer made another remark about the importance of not shutting down the government over the issue of funding the wall.   The president then buried the Democrats as Vice President Pence continued to sit stock still next to the president, saying nothing, betraying nothing.  

“You know what I’ll say?   Yes, if we don’t get what we want, one way or the other, whether it’s through you, through a military, through anything you want to call, I will shut down the government, absolutely, and I am proud, and I’ll tell you what, I am proud to shut down the government for border security, Chuck, because the people of this country don’t want criminals, and people that have lots of problems, and drugs pouring into our country.”  

Schumer mutters something about how bad it would be to shut down the government and then, after the president again thanks everybody, a pushy journalist shouts out a question about the looming chief of staff vacancy.

POTUS, extremely cool, says there are a whole bunch of excellent candidates who want the job and there’s no rush, no rush to choose among them, they have an excellent chief of staff there now and there will be an announcement soon, maybe in a week or two, maybe even sooner, about the excellent replacement.  

All I can say is USA!   USA!!!   And, God bless these United Shayyyshhh.

 

[1] And it takes only a one vote majority to put someone on the nation’s highest court for life?   Something is a little bit wrong there, no?

[2]  Lawrence O’Donnell, liberal talking head for liberal MSNBC, for example, said of this meeting that Pelosi and Trump should have stressed there was no reason for the Senate to vote on funding the wall that Trump had promised repeatedly would be paid for by Mexico.  The gloating O’Donnell even said they should have put that in writing, before the press conference, along with their strong desire to avoid any disruption in payments for government programs that a shut-down could cause, to HUMILIATE the president.   “The most painful thing that Donald Trump could possibly have heard in that room today is ‘Mexico will pay for the wall.’  The chant that he led, and lived by on the campaign trail, would have been the most painful thing that the Democrats could have said to the president today but they don’t know yet how to fight Trump… with Trump’s own words.”   Talk about bastards…

Khashoggi’s last moments

The news finally comes out, more than two months after his murder, that Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi was murdered in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on October 2, 2018 in a particularly gruesome manner.   A transcript of the tape the Turks have of his killing has been made public.   Before his screaming starts, the last words Khashoggi says, as he is being choked to death, are “I can’t breathe, I can’t breathe.”  

This is now reported in the American media, although our intelligence services already knew this.   Gina Haspel, CIA director, had heard this in the recording many weeks ago when she flew to Turkey to investigate.  There is no hint of surprise, urgency or panic in the manner of the team who kill and dismember the journalist with a bone saw.   They are simply carrying out their boss’s wishes, doing a job for their future king, the reformer.

All of Trump’s lapdogs went before the cameras of the Lying Media and denied there was clear and irrefutable evidence that the hit team’s boss, Mohammed Bin Salman, ordered the murder and dismemberment of his American resident critic, in spite of what might have been said on the tape none of them listened to.   “No smoking gun,” one after another claimed.  

These morally challenged sycophants always insist that if there is no absolute hard 100% proof — like a video tape, or an audio tape, or many eye witnesses hooked up to polygraph machines in different rooms, all telling the identical story — that the presumption of innocence must apply to any criminal, or simple scumbag,  they do business with.  

Scratch audiotape from that list, would you?   No proof that it was Khashoggi himself whimpering “I can’t breathe, I can’t breathe.”   No “smoking gun”, because they didn’t use a gun, they simply choked him to death and cut his body into many pieces for disposal, to conceal the crime, assuming there actually is a crime when the future king orders something in a monarchy.  Plus, the Saudis deny there was ever a phone call confirming the kill, even though the killers talk about callimg the boss.   No 100% proof.  See!  Presumption of Innocence, you merciless fucks.

I wonder if there would be any of this media coverage, so long after the murder, if the killers had merely slipped a needle into Khashoggi’s leg with a paralytic agent as soon as he walked into the consulate.   They could have then said, on the secret recording (or one they made themselves)  “Mr. Khashoggi, are you all right?”   It would probably have been the way to go, in hindsight (not that there’s any real problem with this either, as it turns out).    If they’d been more discreet, instead of having to dismember him, possibly while he was still alive and screaming, they could have induced a heart attack with another needle between the toes and announced the sad news that the fucker had died of a heart attack while freaking out because he is an insane, paranoid supporter of terrorism who hates his country. 

The important thing, from Trump’s point of view is that Mohammed Bin Salman maintained his deniability.  The “smoking gun” that is lacking is irrefutable proof that the boss of the hit team, several of who were part of his personal security team, if I recall correctly, orderd the hit.  According to Trump’s assessment really anyone could have ordered the premeditated murder in the Saudi consulate, why assume it was the Crown Prince who had been directly criticized by the murdered journalist?

But like Trump also said, badly conceived, badly executed.  A public relations shit storm for the young, impetuous billionaire Crown Prince.   As POTUS also pointed out, as long as the Saudis are paying hundreds of billions for American weapons (the best weapons, the best weapons) to slaughter civilians in the poorest country in the Middle East, there is nothing to see here.   What is the life of one nasty critic next to 500,000,000 American jobs making bombs for freedom?  Making America great again, yo.

The problem with an anodyne explantion

The good thing about an anodyne explanation is that it does not stir conflict.   Anodyne explanations are calculated not to ruffle feathers, not to feed into controversy, not to piss anyone off.    

The bad thing about an anodyne explanation is that it must leave out certain things in order to remain inoffensive.   An anodyne explanation can never encompass the difficult parts of the truth about any problem that is vexing and hard to solve.   An anodyne explanation explains away deadly complications in the most inoffensive way.   Those deadly complications, as we know, persist, no matter how gently anodyne the explaining away is.  If these deadly complications don’t affect you directly, an anodyne explanation is fine.  If you are hurt by those complications, the anodyne rap will not leave your feelings as unruffled.

Anodyne:  we are family, family loves each other, you must forgive, we love you, you mustn’t be angry or renounce us, no matter what you think or feel.

Left out:  much violence takes place in families, the intimacy of families leads to as much anger and antipathy as love, we have a choice to forgive or not, based on all of the circumstances, including the sincerity of the apology, love is a beautiful thing, but it is one of several emotions at play here, perhaps I must renounce you, to save myself.  Can you think of one family without factions and outcasts?  I can name several in the closest circle of your loving family, now that I mention it.

Anodyne:  our democracy is a meritocracy that recognizes the inviolable truth that all men (and women) are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable human rights including the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.   We have a level playing field in our democracy because our commitment to equality of opportunity and freedom of expression for all are our highest values.   Every vote matters and every vote will be counted as we choose the very best candidates to represent us and rule according to our democratic wishes.

Less anodyne: Let us put aside the hundreds of slaves owned by the visionary men who signed on to those words, open any newspaper to the crime section, pull up the news on your phone, visit any penitentiary, look around.   Our meritocracy does indeed grant equality and freedom of expression, but not always in a fair manner, not always having anything to do with merit.  As far as freedom of speech, piles of secret money talk louder than any single individual in our nation and this unlimited “dark money” plays a bigger role in electoral outcomes than even the most inspiring candidate who does not have a sufficiently huge advertising budget.  Plus, don’t get me started about the voting laws, once the Supreme Court decided recently that racism is dead in the USA, with the Birther President’s undeniably mulatto predecessor and all, and therefore, fair is fair, let the states of the former Confederacy decide who can vote in state and federal elections.

Anodyne:  there is great equality and liberty and social mobility in our country, any child can grow up to be president, or become as rich and successful as he or she wants, provided she works really hard.

Less anodyne:   Every American kid loves to hear that, but the reality is, of course, a tad more complicated.    If you’re born poor, and have a stroke of good luck, you may have one chance to work your way out of poverty– and don’t screw it up because you will have the one shot and that’s it, loser.   If you are born wealthy you will not require luck to have as many chances as you need to succeed.   The small network of your fellow rich will do their best to ensure that you do not fail in the end.    You will be given everything you need to succeed, over and over.  You can mismanage and bankrupt countless businesses, take imbecilic business risks (and fail), embroil yourself in a dozen scandals, fuck up in every possible way, and your social network of fellow extremely wealthy people will find a way for you to succeed, if you are determined enough to keep at it, even if it takes fifty years or more.  

(Thank you Chris Hedges [1] for this insight about endless chances for the children of the rich to make good, and virtually none for the children of the poor, it is self-evident once you put it that way).

Anodyne: George H. W. Bush, Bush 41, was our last true gentleman president, civil, kind, decent, human.

Less anodyne:  George H. W. Bush was a child of privilege, son of wealthy senator Prescott Bush who invested in lucrative heavy industries that Hitler made sure were booming (in the rearmament and lead up to war) and kept those booming stocks, apparently, even after the U.S. entered the war against Hitler.   Patrician Prescott’s connections kept him out of trouble.   H.W. was not decent or kind to AIDS sufferers, who hate him to this day (though he was arguably civil) for his inaction in the early years of the deadly crisis. He told homosexuals that AIDS was a disease of their lifestyle choice and that they should stop being irrational and just stop the behavior (anal sex) and they wouldn’t get AIDS.   His armies slaughtered countless people in several bloody wars, including one in Panama, apparently launched to cover up some drug business between himself, when he was head of the CIA, and Manuel Noriega, who had been involved in the cocaine trade that financed many CIA ops.   He arguably obstructed justice by refusing to testify during the Iran-Contra scandal hearings and later, as president, pardoning everyone involved who had been indicted or convicted of anything,  bringing inquiry into the scandal to a clean and permanent end.  I remember him as a complete dick, a perfect clueless patrician twat, though he did sign the ADA, Americans with Disabilities Act, and was not as in-your-face psychopathic as this stinking pile of born privileged schitt we have in the Oval Office today,   Then again, nobody in public life has ever come close to stinking up the public sphere as much as this stubborn schitt stain currently soiling the office chairs in the White House.

For a definitive, completely un-anodyne discussion of George H.W. Bush’s legacy, check out Jeremy Scahill’s video tribute to the war criminal.

I note here that Jeremy, in the interest of time, does not even mention one of the cannonized Bush’s most horrific legacies, the crippling sanctions on once prosperous Iraq (which, even under a dictator, had free health care for its citizens) that killed uncounted persons over many years.  

Anodyne:  in the land of the free and the home of the brave the only people who claim there is a class war are the malcontents who don’t understand the real nature of our liberty loving society.   Most Americans recognize the beautiful and unparalleled opportunity and equality here, outside of Marxist-type agitators. 

Less:  (the above was not really anodyne, since it was opinionated in a way not designed to sidestep controversy, but onward)   In America there is actually less social mobility than in most other wealthy, developed countries.   The class you are born into is, in most cases, the class you will be in when you die (earlier for the poor, of course, but you get what you pay for here), though people do still escape from poverty or the working class and attain high profile positions that seem to argue that anyone, with enough hard work, can become Michael Jordan, LeBron, Jay-Z.

So, as we can easily see, an anodyne explanation is good for avoiding a fight, agreeing to disagree in an amiable way, simplifying, over-simplifying, walking on the sunny side, staying out of really aggravating terrain.  The New York Times is a long-time master of this anodyne, status quo supportive approach, in many cases.  

We can always set up a grotesque false equivalency to add punch to the anodyne position.  Is the Free Market better than a slave economy where employers are bound by no rules of any kind and are free to kill workers outright at any time?  Of course.   Is the Free Market we have in America, one that grants legal monopolies to certain corporations and huge taxpayer-funded subsidies to preserve already vast profits, truly a free market?   You fucking tell me, buddy.

Freedom is on the march, bitches, that’s all you need to know.  Have a very anodyne day!

 

[1]  Journalist Chris Hedges was a scholarship kid in an elite academy for the children of the extremely rich.  Most of his fellow students were the product of generations of inherited wealth, and were born into an honest sense of superiority.   Hedges was struck by how unaccountable these rich boys were, how stage managed everything was in their lives to make them feel successful and untouchable.   He refers to their isolated, protected sense of entitlement and freedom from the consequences of most of their actions on everybody else, not unfairly, as the pathology of the rich.  

President man, supports his friends

The president defends the murderous crown prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman (“MBS”), saying, essentially, that MBS lied very strongly, very strongly, when he denied direct involvement in the organized murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi citizen, US resident and strong critic of MBS.  Khashoggi was murdered in the Saudi consulate.  

After denying that Khashoggi had been killed at all, in the days after MBS’s brother himself directed the journalist Khasshoggi to the consulate where the murder was promptly carried out, MBS changed the story:  it was Saudi rogues who had illegally entered the Saudi consulate, fifteen of them including an autopsy expert with a bone saw, and accidentally killed and dismembered MBS’s critic in the course of a fist fight ill-advisedly started by the hotheaded, terrorism-linked, middle-aged journalist.    

“He was very strong in his denials, very very strong, like Kavanaugh, ” our clueless, careless president said of his born-wealthy, supremely entitled Saudi counterpart, a soon to be future king and close friend of the president’s billionaire son-in-law, son of a convicted felon billionaire who lost his law license after hiring a prostitute and rigging a motel room with video equipment to blackmail his brother-in-law who was about to testify against him in a federal case.  [1]   

Here is what American intelligence agencies and members of the president’s own party are now saying about the crown prick’s involvement in the murder of a journalist/critic, according to the lying Public Broadcasting Station, PBS ——> clickez ici, mes enfants.

Freedom is on the march.

 

[1]  Jared Kushner’s aunt really didn’t like that videotape of her husband with the hooker. 

A few minutes of internet research

I’m using my phone as a modem and wireless router to get my computer on-line these days.   I was walked through the process the other night by two kind, patient, cheerful women in the Philippines.  Using my phone as a “hotspot” eliminates my need to pay a particularly psychopathic “person” called Spectrum $50 a month for very poor, intermittent internet service.  A beautiful thing not to have to deal with Spectrum any more.  

I’ve been angrily lecturing the kind reps for that psychopath at such length recently (over their defense of an invalid $45 service charge that didn’t resolve my spotty internet service and no internet service going on a week) making so great an effort to denounce a monster clearly and without any unpublishable expletives,  that my throat hurts just thinking about those strained lectures to reps powerless to do the simplest things for an irate customer, no matter how right or superficially polite that ranting maniac might have been.

I did have a call back yesterday from a very nice rep for the vicious psychopath. Michele, based in Ontario, Ca. called to make sure I knew the good news that, after only a week or two of arguments about the validity of the invalid charge, they had removed the $45 service charge, since no documentation was produced that I was ever informed of it, let alone that I signed a work order consenting to it.  

It was true, she admitted, that I still have no internet service from them, but the good news is that I’ll also be credited more than $9 for the last five days without internet service.    I told her that was a truly generous credit, particularly from the personification of psychopathy indistinguishable, in its moral core, from Adolf Hitler himself.   I told Michele she sounded like a lovely woman, but that I am very glad to be done doing business with the company she works for.   Spectrum is one of the worst of the worst, infamous nationwide among its cheated customers and fired employees.

I did a quick search for Tom Rutledge, CEO of Charter, the parent company of monster baby Spectrum, the entity I have been being abused by for the last few years.   As everyone knows, the search took less than a second.   I clicked on “images”.  

There he is in the Oval Office with the president, there are the protests against the painfully “smiling” sociopath’s ruthlessly self-serving policies, there he is trying to squeeze out another  human-looking expression.   There he is, with an almost human expression on his face, at a photo op when his company bought Time Warner Cable a few years back for $56,000,000,000.   There he is over a caption about his $98,000,000 salary in 2016, which led all of the nations finest CEO’s by more than 100%.  

There is the president praising Tom, the union buster who wanted unionized technicians to agree to a new contract without health benefits for their families and without a company pension.   Fair is fair, you know?    These parasite workers apparently wanted everything.   The greedy bastard Spectrum technicians went out on strike, 1,800 of them, rather than agree to Tom’s new work conditions.  He hired workers to replace them, guys commies refer to as “scabs”, workers with reasonable, realistic demands, workers who can probably be fired any time on an hour’s notice and who agreed never to strike under any circumstance.

The striking unionized technicians set up a webpage called http://spectrumstrike2017.com/.   They set out the several reasonable reasons they were striking and vowed not to be defeated.   Then they were defeated, as besieged camps have always been defeated, they were starved out.  A visit to their valiant website is a sad reminder of the power of vastly wealthy armies to starve out less powerful resisting armies and civilians with even the most modest of goals, mere survival with dignity.    

Dignity.  SAD!

 

Corporate Culture — you’re soaking in it

I often lament that I can’t remember a single line of Shakespeare accurately, or more than a snippet of any poem (“…acrobat, hunchbacked with senseless muscles”[1]), or any of my favorite proverbs from the Old Testament, but I can remember the words and melodies to hundreds of advertising jingles and TV themes.  This, I suspect, is largely an American phenomenon, perhaps largely of my specific generation, who came up during the golden age of television advertising.

Whatever the case, it starts young, this inculcation with commercial messages.   I can sing you the great Ballantine beer jingle that used to run day after day on Yankees radio broadcasts.   I can describe a beautiful Fresca commercial, sing the theme song for Veep, so lemon light (Vee-eeeep never spoils… your appetite), a soft drink like Sprite or Seven Up, now long extinct.  When my mother used to take me to the supermarket, when I was barely more than a toddler, she’d send me off looking for some product.   I’d race off down the aisle, singing the jingle, recognizing the product at once among the many on the shelf, grabbing it and running back to throw it into the cart.  

“People used to be amazed.   Sometimes they asked me if you were a midget,” my mother used to tell me.  

 “Yeah, ‘somebody get that midget a cigar’, a guy in a store once said of you,” said my father.   

I suspect many American children could do the same act.   The ads ran continuously on TV.   They were designed to be catchy and memorable, and they always showed the product in close up for the last few seconds.   We were raised literally soaking in it.   

What does that mean, “soaking in it”?  Every American of a certain age will know the reference.  There was an ad with the tag line “you’re soaking in it” that a google search (23,600,000 results in 0.47 seconds) finds for us in the blink of an eye. Apparently the ad ran, in many variations, and with the same actress as the colorful Madge, for literally decades.   Wisecracking beautician Madge is giving a woman a pedicure, soaking her hand in a solution to soften it.  Madge recommends Palmolive dishwashing liquid to the woman, to keep her hands soft.  The woman asks if it really works and Madge informs her, to the comical shock of the woman getting the manicure, that she’s soaking in it now.  The woman starts to jerk her hand out of the liquid, but Madge pats it back into place, another wisecrack on her lips.  A classic thirty second spot, here  you go, from 1967 —> clickez, mes enfants.

We can’t see it because we are soaking in it.

Now we live in an age when our consumer data, our buying habits down to the things we once thought about buying but didn’t wind up buying, are harvested directly by the companies that market to us.  That data is apparently more valuable to corporations than anything else about us.   Ain’t that some shit?    Corporations, by the way, are just “persons” like every other human you meet.  You know, they have rights, and feelings too.   The Supreme Court says so, they came to the legally binding opinion that these business entities, created under certain enumerated sections of American law, have a life and rights of personhood as sacred as those of any unborn child in Mississippi.

Yesterday, after literally years of struggle with an extremely customer-hostile ISP with a monopoly in my neighborhood, getting poor internet service and even worse customer service, I learned, from two angels in the Philippines who work for another global corporation, how to use my phone as a modem, for free, and never again have to talk to the hapless reps who work for the inhuman ISP run by smiling multi-millionaire psychopath Tom Rutledge.   DONE!   A miracle, truly — and about $600 a year back in my pocket.    

We have the technology, in our pockets, to create miracles.  In less than a second we can have information that would have taken a long time to dig up just ten or fifteen years ago.   We have access to an amazing array of things, just by saying a couple of words to our smart phones.    We have a lot to be grateful for, even as powerful “persons” recklessly plunge us toward the death of all life on this planet, even as other psychopathic types wield outsized, merciless influence in human affairs, but there is a lot of work to do.   Including becoming aware of what we are soaking in, that is the first step, surely.  

A lot of work to be done, if the grandchildren are to avoid a dystopian future of famine and cannibalism on a ravaged earth destroyed, in our lifetimes.  Scientists are now emphasizing that we have only twelve years to the point of no return, as far as global climate catastrophe.   Twelve years and counting down, with every incentive to preserve our beautiful planet, only industrialized human greed standing against us.

Corporate culture changes how we look at the things around us, what we value, how we treat each other.   We are soaking in it, friends.

 

 

[1]

I’m that played-out, grown-up acrobat,
hunchbacked with senseless muscles,
who knows that advice is a lie,
that sooner or later there’s falling.  

(piece of a great poem by Yuvegny Yevtushenko) 

link to whole poem    (whatever you do, do not click on expressionless robot reading the poem aloud– WTF?)