Saturday, April 6, 2013

Still The Only Man To Beat Obama, Was A Black Panther, Meet Bobby Rush

Aside from Bill Ayers any number of people have influenced the Presidents decision to preside over an America in decline, there was Bobby Rush, a former Black Panther who handed Obama his first and only ass-whoopin in Politics.  It may have been the radicals who educated him, but it was the Latte-Liberals who glommed onto his every word as if it was pure magic.  What they love most about him is his shared belief in an engineered decline and the tech savvy to do it..  I qoute an New Yorker article on the rise of Obama..

The rise of Barack Obama includes one glaring episode of political miscalculation. Even friends told Mr. Obama it was a bad idea when he decided in 1999 to challenge an incumbent congressman and former Black Panther, Bobby L. Rush, whose stronghold on the South Side of Chicago was overwhelmingly black, Democratic and working class.
Mr. Obama was a 38-year-old state senator and University of Chicagolecturer, unknown in much of Mr. Rush’s Congressional district. He lived in its most rarefied neighborhood, Hyde Park. He was taking on a local legend, a former alderman and four-term incumbent who had given voters no obvious reason to displace him.
Mr. Rush’s name recognition started off at 90 percent, Mr. Obama’s at 11. Then Mr. Rush’s son was murdered, leading Mr. Obama to put his campaign on hold. Later, while vacationing in Hawaii with his family, he missed a high-profile vote in the Legislature and was pilloried. (One Chicago Tribune editorial began, “What a bunch of gutless sheep.”) Then President Clinton endorsed Mr. Rush.
“Campaigns are always, ‘What’s the narrative of the race?’ ” said Eric Adelstein, a media consultant in Chicago who worked on the Rush campaign. “In a sense, it was ‘the Black Panther against the professor.’ That’s not a knock on Obama; but to run from Hyde Park, this little bastion of academia, this white community in the black South Side — it just seemed odd that he would make that choice as a kind of stepping out.”
The episode revealed a lot about Senator Obama — now running for president, against the odds again and with a relatively slim résumé. It showed his impatience with the frustrations of his state Senate job; his outsize confidence; his fund-raising powers; his broad appeal; and his willingness to be what Abner J. Mikva, a former congressman and supporter, calls “a very apt student of his own mistakes.”
It also shed light on the complicated ways that class has played out in Mr. Obama’s political career as a factor entangled with his race. Class emerged as a subtext in the Congressional campaign, along with generational differences that separate Mr. Obama from older black politicians.
He might have fared better if he had jumped into the race sooner, campaigned even harder and found a way to speak more effectively to working-class black voters, people involved with that campaign say. But most say they doubt he could have won. It is hard to take out an incumbent, and though Mr. Rush may have looked vulnerable after losing a lackluster campaign against Mayor Richard M. Daley in early 1999, he was not vulnerable enough.
“He was blinded by his ambition,” Mr. Rush said. “Obama has never suffered from a lack of believing that he can accomplish whatever it is he decides to try. Obama believes in Obama. And, frankly, that has its good side but it also has its negative side.”

More here

Friday, April 5, 2013

The Chew Toy Update

In all honesty, its been a hell of a ride.  My faith has been shaken but not completely gone, what was predicted by me and countless others has been marshaled into everyday life, Obamacare is still in the news.  The downturn economy is following the Japanese model and every crisis of the Presidents choosing turns into red herrings and cash for his political PACs.

Quite honestly, I haven't felt much like writing.  The new surveillance systems seem to exist solely for the purpose of intimidating free ideas and free expression and intimidation of the opposition.  Not one to shy away from confronting a bully, I have been vocal and assume under the watchful eye of some fusion center somewhere.  It has revived an old interest in Russian Intellectuals, their humor and hundreds of thousands of links later, we have fully one third of the population actually believing the world is run by a conspiracy.

As I write this I have been lucky enough to get back into school and view the college scene from a community level. More on this later I suppose but suffice it to say my Biology teacher explained Darwin by saying that most of the worlds people believed that the world was flat when the Theory of Evolution was propose (1859).  You literally can not make this stuff up.

In my search for how to approach life on its mythical perspective, some things needed to change.  Outrage did not seem to be working from any discernible level. Millions of people marching on Washington DC did not seem to be working on any discernible level.  By careful observation and contrast with previous Administrations some of the governing models seem to be still intact but not working in any meaningful level of efficiency.  Primarily, all that outrage seems to have done only one visible thing in the last five years; that of depriving the Federal power grab of a means of governing by consensus.  It forced them into the Conflict Model of governance.

Paradoxically, the model suggests that when people have stronger reasons to doubt their neighbors—for example, when an oppressive government censors speech—they seek out even more opinions, and information spreads even faster. That could explain how the harshest regimes often breed a united and well-organized resistance.
 more here.

 I made some astute observations and drew some conclusions that could help me understand what the 'New Model' was really about. Spengler concocted in his theorems on History; that civilization forced by the State is always an enemy of the culture.
The story of the High Cultures is that of societies that ultimately fail. Cultures eventually die, but produce fossils, canons of art and science and political forms. The period of fossilization, after the end of the culture proper, is what Spengler calls “Civilization”, which he said began for the West at the end of the 18th century. The work of modernity is the completion of the final forms. Spengler was the first philosopher of world history to write about the other great civilizations not as a mere prologue to Western history.
Spengler’s idealization of the history of High Cultures had obvious implications for the future of the West. If the analogies held, then, within a few hundred years the West should collapse into a universal empire, with a culture that would ultimately become as stiff and curatorial as Egypt’s during the New Kingdom. Meanwhile, money and democracy would increasingly hollow out the traditional forms of society, until both collapsed in the face of power politics. Wars would reach a climax of technical sophistication and speed, even as nations disintegrated internally.
Everything is in your face and full of hate now.  We just wanted to be left alone to live our lives. Who has got time for it? We have sunk fully into Spengler prediction of Power Politics and endless war.

Trying to find a means to perpetuate my mindset among the population has been difficult since the organs of control amount to a form of soft tyranny, a kind which you don't see everyday and the status quo changes minutely but consistently but along the the lines of communication, the information flows freely, some of it too quickly for proper information gathering.  One has to put a proper governor on what one is likely to believe, or is susceptible to believe.  If one is in conflict with the Conflict Governance Model, the opposition has placed you under a form of quarantine, not by bars and windows but of fear.  Almost anyone can see what this will lead to.  It foments a more powerful entrenchment of radicalism.  The radical elements become more vocal and expansively less subject to actual corroboration of the facts.  There can not be any level of agreement as to what constitutes a fact, yet people simply offer ideas which affirm or anguish over ways to dispute another's favored belief system.  One's fears tend to drive an inner tension which builds until it most likely breaks down at some point, making increasing levels of violent expression more likely.  The mediocrity of facts are obliterated by what brand of media we favor.  It is done for a purpose; namely to keep a containerized random level of disinformation, primarily to pry the status quo into acceptance of the soft tyranny of 'civilization influences.'

It sounds complicated, but the basic message of Amaral's model is that if you don't believe you have perfect information, and you don't think any single other person has perfect information, consensus will eventually be reached. That's because everyone's trying to figure out what the majority of people think. And by doing that, they actually help shape majority opinion.

Put simply, by the Amaral model of consensus building, the simulations are run from the model, the government directs where it needs to go and then the rumor mill starts hashing out bits of disinformation. This portion of the one third of the population may believe in Trutherism, or Birtherism, or the Prepper Nation but the melange has the effect of building a consensus by fragmenting several portions of the populous around internet communities.  Distance no longer seems to be a determining factor in consensus of opinion to the degree as it once was.  The 'shift in demographics' could be another belief system without enough sustainable information to build a consensus, we just don't know what to believe anymore.  But taken as a whole, when one third of the American population believes enthusiastically in secret cabals of aliens bent on evil destruction, clearly we do not have that high a bar to jump to reach complete bafflement and support for the completely incompetent "Sign the Bill in order to see what is in it.'  Pandora's box may be a Christmas present, we just don't know.

So, what must we do to preserve our liberty? One could be forgiven for having fallen into cynicism, or would have to pray for another cataclysmic event which virtually no one could explain to see the utter uselessness of trying to reach a consensus.  Who ever is the architect of this state of affairs has such great purpose as to deprive us all of our senses to come to any meaningful conclusion and has put our fate into the box until the full engineered decline or their entire system crumbles from corruption.

That may be quite a long time.  Now for a little me time...

I am learning how to hack computers, it may be the only thing worth doing when truth is subversion in a society of lies.  There comes a time when going along to get along makes you a part of the problem.  That the outrage at what you are doing to yourself and your posterity means contributing to a system that no longer is capable of feeding your need to fulfill your destiny.  One Confucious Master said to know a thing is wrong and to do nothing is the same thing as doing the deed yourself. Where are those people who said; never again? Never will the State solution for their entrenched opposition result in millions if not billions of lives destroyed, someone will have to stop it.  Who pledged never again and where are they now?

In those times; it is far more ethical to have to pick up your sacred monkey wrench, and have a go at knocking it down.  You have to look boldly into your neighbors eye and ask if they would be willing rat you out, or watch your house be vacated by men dressed in black storming it in the middle of the night.  At that point, it is the only ethical thing to do to cut your ties with them and move to a place where you might be a little safer.  Might a bright spark find a method to disprove that we aren't subject cogs in their wheel and build countless models of consistently equal value with which to bury them in their idiocracy.