Friday, October 14, 2016

Madame President

Gina Ferrara, responding to my comment to:

WikiLeaks Cancels Major Clinton Revelation Amid ‘Security Concerns’

writes: You best get used to saying Madame President:)

To which I respond:

Gina my dear, I am thoroughly enjoying the spectacle of this political season. The last few days of Trump-trashing have made Trump supporters glum -- booey hooey! -- but for me that's just the back and forth of the political battle. Like watching a football game, sometimes your team is in the lead, sometimes behind. High drama, yum! And there's still 3+ weeks of drama left, and regardless of the outcome the entertainment value promises to be delightful. Yes, I have a pleasant emotional investment in the Trumpinator -- it's more fun that way -- but it's limited and I try to suppress it, because in the end it's just Kabuki, with no perceptable effect on me **personally**. I think of myself as a "Carlinite". Divorcing myself from "The Freak Show", my view aligns with George: Whatever genuine emotional engagement I have -- human weakness that it is -- stems from the circumstance George describes here: Your "Madame President" -- enjoy it while you can -- is as phony as a three-dollar-bill. Her tell-them-what-they-want-to-hear "public positions" are thirty years of practiced insincerity, empty platitudes, and "panderisms". She, like WJC, Bush/Cheney, and Obama is the candidate of Carlin's "the owners". Her presidency will give us more of the same-old-same-old, which is to say nothing,... or less than nothing, which is to say more wars and chaos internationally and the continued looting of America. Trump, by contrast, is outside Carlin's cynicism box, a revolutionary, a radical change agent, who might or might not overthrow the established order. We really don't know, and that uncertainty is his greatest weakness. What will we get with a Trump presidency? It's all political talk -- when not drowned out by "Trump the Sexual Predator" sensationalism -- so nobody knows. And of course, the Clinton folks want to fill that vacuum of uncertainty with their defamation narrative -- fact-based and otherwise. Facts? Is anyone really interested in facts? Voters, maybe. Political assassins and commercial eyeball sellers?... not! I'm not complaining. That's the way the game is played. All's fair in love and war, and this is basically war sans bloodshed. Consequently, it will not be the "right" person or the "wrong" person who will win, but the better political "war fighter". Opinions and partisan cheer-leading abound, polls and pundits pontificate, but the noise aside, one thing and one thing alone matters, one thing alone is "real": Nov 8th. We shall see. Okay. Now I'm a Trump guy, howbeit a light-duty Trump guy, an entertainment-value-focused (mostly) Trump guy, a poke-my-finger-in-the-PC-sissies-eye kind of guy. But let me indulge you in your warm-and-fuzzy Hillary love. Let's look at an HRC presidency: Trump fades away, and the GOP is restored to its former leadership. Hillary's negatives remain, which enables the Repubs to sit on her like they sat on Obama. Full spectrum obstruction. She gets nothing done that doesn't serve the one-percent, which is no big deal ***for her*** and is, in fact, her plan: pander, promise, and then use GOP resistance as the excuse for not being able to deliver for her black and minority constituencies. Meanwhile the banks and insurance companies, the military contractors, the hedge fund people, the oil companies, the drug companies and multi-nationals, Saudis and Israelis -- all these folks -- will get everything that they want because the GOP will be happy to cooperate. Her Supreme Court nominees will be centrist: she'll claim, rightly, that she "had to compromise", but -- secretly -- she'll be fine with that, because she's one-hundred-percent establishment and hasn't a progressive bone in her body. Where things get interesting is in foreign policy. People are -- in my view rightly -- concerned that her hawkish attitude will lead the entire world to the brink of nuclear war. She seems committed to facing down a nuclear-armed Russia. And her aggressive posture is amplified by the war-pimping Neocon Kool-Aid that demonizes Russia/Putin as threatening and aggressive. This is old hat: the political utility of the boogeyman-du-jour, in this case a spiffed-up and recycled Commie boogeyman from the good old days of the cold war. I understand the fear, but I'm not as concerned as some folks. I think the fear is overblown, which is the way fear works, particularly in a political context. No, I'm a little worried, but not much, because I believe Putin is a cool-headed and brilliant strategic actor, against whom Hillary will be hopelessly out-matched. Putin will not let Hillary win, and he most certainly will not let her take us over the brink into nuclear war. He will be ready for her, and if she pushes the matter **up to the brink**, Putin will be prepared to defeat and humiliate her and forestall a full nuclear exchange. It is clear that in her arrogance -- and dare I say comprehensive record of strategic incompetence -- she is no match for Putin. After four years of failure and humiliation with Hillary, the country will once again be ready for a revolution, and she will be history. The first woman president, like the first black president, an utter failure. But who can say? I wish you luck. I'm an American and a Jew and I live deep in Mexico outside the nuclear blast zone, so come what may, I'll be just fine. You?

No comments: