Monday, April 28, 2008

"I wonder if we can carry Idaho!"

You know, I'm starting to like this Wright fellow.
Speaking before an audience that included Marion Barry, Cornel West, Malik Zulu Shabazz of the New Black Panther Party and Nation of Islam official Jamil Muhammad, Wright praised Louis Farrakhan, defended the view that Zionism is racism, accused the United States of terrorism, repeated his view that the government created the AIDS virus to cause the genocide of racial minorities, stood by other past remarks (”God damn America”) and held himself out as a spokesman for the black church in America. . . .
The O-bots look at this stuff and tell themselves: I don't see how these words could possibly alienate anyone. In fact, I think America will be mighty impressed by the Reverend Wright. Jewish voters won't be offended. Moderates will LOVE Wright.

I'm not kidding. Look at this DU thread on Wright's comments: If you don't fall off your chair laughing, you must not be sitting in a chair.
"Senator Obama can sweep this nation with the largest landslide in US History."
I wonder if we can carry Idaho!
Honest, I didn't take these quotes out of context. These predictions were inspired by Wright's performance. See also here:
I watched his speech to the NAACP last night and wonder why the "media" calls him a liability.
Unlike these buffoons, a few O-bots do have a certain awareness of the world outside progland. They understand that Wright's speech might inflict political damage on the Savior From Illinois. Thus, they have formulated a fallback plan: Blame Hillary.
Remember when Hillary Clinton announced that she would have resigned from Wright's church over his remarks?
Yep. I'd have resigned too.
However I think the Clinton campaign has been stoking the flames of this issue.

I think they owe the party an apology for using a man of God, a pastor, as a political tool against a fellow Democrat. It is inexcusable. This is not just a hit on Obama, but a hit on the character of Jeremiah Wright and the nature of black churches.

I am white, and I am a former Baptist. I heard truth from Wright's mouth in a few speeches that I never heard in my former church.

The Clintons hit a new low. They should apologize.
See? Those eeeeevil Clintons forced Wright to say these things -- even though the things he said were good. The Clintons forced the media to cover Wright. They forced Fox News to talk about what Wright said to the NAACP. Clinton forced Bill Moyers to interview Wright.

And that scratch in your car's new paint job? Bill Clinton did that too.

Note that the above-quoted O-bot never points to one specific piece of evidence for his contention that the Clinton campaign has somehow used Wright to "swiftboat" Obama. Hillary's only statement on the topic was in response to a direct question, and her words on that occasion were measured. As I've noted a couple of times, if she were running a truly negative campaign, she would have plastered Wright's face across every television screen in the primary states.

If you follow the above links, you'll also see the usual comments indicating that any Dem who votes for Clinton must be racist. This meme should have been killed by Obama campaign manager David Plouffe's recent concession that only Republicans (and damned few of them) would allow race to determine how they vote. But never mind Plouffe: People will believe whatever they wish to believe.

The progs have gone insane. Absolutely bugfuck insane.

Added clarification: From the initial response, I gather that this is another post which forces me to be very specific. The point I'm trying to make differs from the point you may think I'm making.

I am not asking you: "Do you personally agree with this or that statement made by the Reverend Wright?"

I am asking: "Do you think progressives are correct when they assert that America will embrace Wright?"

I am also asking: "Are progressives correct when they assert that Hillary somehow engineered the scandal?"

Added added note: Pro-Obama progblog commenters have now made three statements which I will never forget.

1. On Clinton: "Vince Foster! Vince Foster! Vince Foster!" (Seen on DU.)

2. On Obama: "He is risen. He is risen indeed!" (Seen on this very blog.)

3. On Wright: "I wonder if we can carry Idaho!" (See above.)

If the Dems lose in November, blame the sheer effing stupidity of the progs, as exemplified by those three quotes.

23 comments:

AitchD said...

Did Wright really say today that very thing about the AIDS virus being created by the US gov't? He's not a doctor or scientist. I listened to him answer when that question was put to him directly. I know what he said (after he turned for a second, and in pantomime opened a window and yelled up for Norton to come down), he dodged the question, he mentioned the Tuskegee horrors, which is public knowledge now, he mentioned ebola, he mentioned the biological warfare he claimed the US gave or sold to Saddam Hussein, shit like that, and he expected his listeners to conclude from that kind of induction what the direct question asked. Enough about him from me; he's a tortured, weary, and sick old man. God damn to hell forever the motherfuckers who have destroyed him.

Barry has been a fool, hasn't he? He's been used for so long, applauded and praised every day of his life, told to believe in himself and in those who showed him kindness and love. All he had was belief, trust, faith, smarts, and a fool's heart; he had nothing else, least of all power or wealth that can make power. A thousand Iagos will have their day, have been working Barry over, even telling him to beware the green-eyed monster. Maybe he'll put a flag pin in his lapel button hole and just turn and walk the fuck away and give his daughters what they deserve instead. We'll never learn with him or without him. Peace, amigo.

Anonymous said...

I agree with you. In my own miniature survey of Americans in London it appears they are horrified by the ideas expressed by Rev. Wright.

My problem is I couldnt find much I disagreed with from the Rev. Wright. Seems pretty much like the truth to me. For example although I wouldnt want to fall out with someone over it, how can america not think it brought 9/11 on itself?

I dont get any of this. The Democrat party is self-destructing after 8 year of Bush rule. The economy is detonating. The working classes are about to become totally impoverished, and you guys seem to be keen to focus on the Arian controversy.

It is astonishing to us foreigners.

Harry

Anonymous said...

Wow. If this goes on like this there will be a landslide. But in the opposite direction... Spot on analysis Joe. Keep on the good work, your blog is one of the only ones I read regularly.

Gary McGowan said...

Joseph, to me this brings to mind some more questions:

Do the progressives you speak of express themselves outside of the internet? If so, where? Political organizing? Ongoing or longstanding organizations? Political action committees? Testimony before Congress or or in city councils or state legislatures? Recent books? Publications? Who can we call their leaders? (Chompsky? Albert? Zinn?) – Are they too expressing the insanity you document in your post?

I have at best only vague impressions of what might be answers, and maybe incorrect ones, to these questions. I could of course go surf the net and google, but I think you can answer them from knowledge coming from years of study and involvement.

How significant a political force are the progblogs? What is their relationship to the real world where people have first and last names with families and public records attached?

Anonymous said...

If what a candidate PASTOR said can have influence in US politics, you're in deeper shit than I expected, you're screwed. In any civilized country (not talibaland), we would be ashamed of choosing (or not choosing) a candidate based on 20 seconds of a speech by his PASTOR !!! In Canadian politics, I cannot even tell you what religion the main candidates are practicing, I even suspect 2 of being atheist.

What a bunch of backward and retarded morons Americans have become. Land of the free ??? Anyway, what can we hope from a population that elected Bush TWICE !!!!

I suspect that this pastor incident has become the best attack angle for racists who don't want to admit they are one.

Why are you calling Obama supporters "Bot" ? is that a way to feel superior to them ?

Anonymous said...

Joe, I thought you were in agreement that Zionism is racism? I seem to recall quite a few tussels you had with some pro-Israeli bots over this very issue.

As for gov't induced AIDS, how about those Tuskegee Experiments? Believing such a thing is not that far-fetched. If fact, it seems down right rational to me.

If there is a God, I hope he does damn this blood soaked country. By condemning this particular remark, are you saying now that the US is NOT guilty of terrorism and of making war on it's own citizens?

I don't care if Rev. Wright hurts Obama. Obama sucks. But the corpulent, complacent American public needs a rude wake-up call and needs to face the fact that America sucks, and badly, and it's looking like the good Rev. is just the one to do it.

BTW, Hillary sucks too.

Ileana

Joseph Cannon said...

Ah, Ileana. I wish I coudl do that -- return to the paranoid wilds of conspiracy-land, where I would be freed of any responsibility to care about who wins the election. Doesn't matter who wins, because the fix is in, right?

But this blog is not about that, and you must go elsewhere if that is what you seek.

And so I must remind you: This post does not ask "Will Wright give America a rude wake-up call?" (He won't.) I'm asking: "Are the proggers out of their freaking gourds or what if they think that Wright will benefit the Obama campaign?" I'm also asking "If the proggers can blame Wright on Hillary, can we also blame Hillary for the Ebola virus, morning traffic jams and the filmography of Adam Sandler?"

Anonymous said...

"The progs have gone insane."

They always were.

HD:

I realize that you are immune to reason, but the answer to your question is "yes." In Wright's post 9/11 sermon, he said, " "The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. The government lied."

He's not tortured, he's not weary, and he's not sick. He's a hale, healthy, vigorous 66 year old, and he's RICH, too. Drives a Porsche, and lives in an estate in an all-white Chicago enclave near a golf-course. No one has destroyed him. He has a book deal, for crissakes. He surrounds himself with thugs, like the New Black Panther Party (which idolizes arch Jew-hater Khalid Abdul Muhammad), and lives very well, denouncing the country in which he lives in ease and comfort.

You, on the other hand, defend him, for which I would say, God damn you to hell, except you are too sick and negligible to warrant cursing.

AitchD said...

"Added added note: Pro-Obama progblog commenters have now made three statements which I will never forget.

2. On Obama: "He is risen. He is risen indeed!" (Seen on this very blog.)"

I recall when that was posted here. Didn't you two have sport with NT exegesis, or something? He posted several things evangelically, which to me seemed to verge on being rapturous. I thought he meant Jesus, not Obama, but so what? That Easter Sunday thread was satiric, your target being the embracers of Brown's Da Vinci Code success. Has he posted elsewhere? Yours isn't a "progblog" as such. You remind me of Minnie's lawyer who told Mickey that insanity couldn't be used as grounds for his divorce suit. Mickey said "Who said anything about insanity? I said she's fucking Goofy and fucking Daffy".

I misread this post (in its RSS format) and hadn't realized you were quoting WP's crackerjack reporter Dana Milbank. Any unintended consequence is regretted if appropriate.

Joseph Cannon said...

H: The "He is risen" comment was on Good Friday, but the entire piece was on Obama.

J: Ah, Khaled Abdul Muhammed. I think of him every time I visit UC Riverside, where he was shot. Not long before that incident, I heard the guy speak at length on CSPAN. He resurrected much of the rhetoric used by white American Nazis in the lead-up to World War II: "Jew York City," "Jewnited States of America," that sort of thing.

Proof, once again, that the black segregationist movement has NEVER been progressive. In fact, it is fascist.

Few people understand that fascism always (deceptively and strategically) allied itself with oppressed peoples around the world. That's why pro-Nazi American rallies in the 1930s always included an American Indian onstage. The fascists reached out to the anti-Colonial movement in India, to the Irish, to various ethnic groups in the Soviet sphere...and even to the Jews in Palestine.

The NOI was part of that effort.

Wright's really just a conspira-crank. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that he believes in UFOs. In another life, when I had a greater affection for cranks of that sort, I might have enjoyed talking with him.

Right now, though, even folks like Andrew Sullivan are saying that Obama must do the Prince Hal thing and give the "I know thee not, old man" speech.

If he does that, he risks depressing black support as he enters North Carolina.

Joseph Cannon said...

From Wikipedia, about the New Black Panther Party (Wriht's pals) and KAM:

"Muhammad is still remembered by some members of the New Black Panther Party and seen as the de facto best leader the movement ever had because of his belief that a race war should be ignited where whites and Jews could be killed. The organization is currently headed by Malik Zulu Shabazz. The majority of Black leaders consider him to have been a shameful figure whose racially inflammatory views have hindered black progress. Members of the original Black Panther Party have insisted that this party is illegitimate and have vociferously objected that there "is no new Black Panther Party."[6]"

Seems to me that if you are too extreme for the Panthers, you are extreme indeed.

AitchD said...

"Seems to me that if you are too extreme for the Panthers, you are extreme indeed."

Which is it? Extreme or too extreme? Your implication is that the Panthers were either extreme or too extreme. Do you think whole-wheat bread is extreme? 100% whole-wheat bread too extreme? If you're tagged as a J. Edgar Hoover mouthpiece, would that be an extreme assessment? Too extreme? Right on, brother? Help me out here, Joe, because the political discourse in Amerika is way extreme and intentionally incendiary, baby.

Anonymous said...

Pro-fascists have been a strange and varied lot. Jabotinsky was pro-Mussolini. Avram Stern actually thought he could effect an alliance with Nazis. (Never happened, for rather obvious reasons.)

And in Australia, there were a few hardcore Aussie nationalists who became, get this, pro-Aboriginal. If I have the time I'll look up the names & email them to you.

I think the thing that links all these wackos together is an obsession with "race" and "blood."

That and a total male adolescent delusionalism. You don't find many women amongst these groups. They have male cult quality.

It gets way creepy.

Anonymous said...

PS. I read Sullivan the way you do Kos, which is: occasionally, and with great care. He is doing exactly what you suggested. In fact, Sully ignored the Wright rant at the Press Club, and feigns being pulled into a swamp that he despises. He has called on Obama to denounce Wright forcefully - while claiming that Wright has no relevance to the "real issues." That's what you call Sully-logic.

Anonymous said...

Joe-- it's one thing for you to be so absolutely certain --from a few phone calls-- that WJC and HRC had nothing at all to do with the cocaine flooding into Arkansas... and to surmize that they had nothing to do with Herbert Walker's coke deals...

It's one thing for you to tell everyone that Gary Webb killed himself with those two gunshots to the head (i believe you quoted his parents certainty of that one, i have a friend who's parents got paid off to say their older son killed himself in Dubai a few years back, but they would have also said that if they were threatened), and while you constantly bring up one (1) other "suicide," you do so almost exclusively for a broad stroke dismissal of all strange deaths on the Clinton watch.

They're all just a "return to the the paranoid wilds of conspiracy-land,", they're all just tin hatter. Sure, now they're even UFOlogists apparently..

And now, according to you, not only are the Clintons nothing more than fodder for the paranoid-- but now apparently every sick demented thing YOUR country has done. it's all just conspiratorial..

is that what you have become Joe? An apologist for the evils of your country?

So basically were one to believe that anything covert happens, and perchance your country did some evil things (remember I'm a Canadian, I'm Austria to your 5th Reich) that is just wild loopy conspiracies.

I know this is your home, Joe, but that is one pathetic pile of shit

Joe. Tusceegee is akin to believing in Area 51???

FFS Joe! Since when are you rim- jobbing Kissinger's asshole?

You are now doing what the CDers do. When they throw the real events in with all the make believe stuff--- and then rational people dismiss it all. By throwing the improbable and neo nazi messaging in with the rest it just makes it all unbelievable.

But this time you have gone too far. Tusceegee was real. NSSM200 was real. just as was Operation Paperclip. Or am i seeing aliens now too?? Aitchd saw Norton and Ralph while i heard the Rev. cite his sources... i guess we can see the same things very differently.

I'm not saying that it doesn't matter who gets elected. Nor am I saying the SIBPSA (not SIBPATS but BOTH PARTIES SUCK ASS). But the events I have mentioned (and many many more) are nonpartisan. you can blame them on GWB if you want but he's not the first nor the last, nor have these all been by his party. It takes two wings for a beast to fly. You claim to respect Michael Parenti-- I can't understand how you don't see him as a progbot or whatever--- but if you do have the gumption to tell the class exactly how you can dismiss what he says about all of this
And what exactly did Hilary mean when she said to AIPAC "No Option Should Be Left Off The Table" when dealing with Iran?? Yeahhhh she's MUCH safer than McCaine or Obama. So much safer.

Even your halcyon days when WJC was POTUS. Your economy was great, thats true. The dot com bubble was still makig people really rich. Depleted Uranium was a great way to bomb Iraq for 8 years without hurting "our troops" (apparently its much better to just poison the Iraqi kids, right? and introduce them to wild cancers?) was Osama Bin Laden busy having a love fest for the USA? Did the prison population in the USA not go from 200K to 2M on his watch? Who created the Northwest Forest Plan one of the greatest works of ecological doublespeak ever?

I'm not saying he was worse than either Bush-- but really aside from the fact that that world still loved you no matter what abuses you'd hew-- they're not that much different.

And the proof is in the dirty campaigning. They all do it. You know Joe for ages i wanted to tell you about what my friend and campaign manager for Jerry BRrown had to deal with from WJC and his lovely wife. You wanna talk about negativity in a primary??? How about sex & drugs parties with lying secret service agents who lie about seeing A JESUIT PRIEST doing drugs and having sex with Linda Ronstadt?? How about the Clinton office sending 10,000 page faxes of junk to Brown's fax machines to tie them up from fund raising?

So boo hoo hooo Obama is fighting dirty(er) than Hillary. She has just been so genuine with crocodile tears, false memory syndromes, and cardboard politicizing?

She may be the most "Liberal" of all the Dems (please read that Parenti link), and BHO is probably the least likely to nuke Iran.

But when i see you cow-towing to the USA did not create AIDS, had nothing to do with West Nile, Clinton's have nothing to do with cocaine, and all of this belongs in the same boot as Area 51 drivel...

well that makes me wanna wish you all good luck. Hope that you don't nuke Iran. and hope you don't fuck up the world for the rest of us.

..but if i wanted an apologist and someone to pretend that none of this stuff happens. I would stick to Fox. I expect more from you Joseph.

Joseph Cannon said...

lee, I'm letting this post through, although it is the last one from you on this blog.

Look, I spoke to THE prosecutor on Mena. The guy who was literally eyeballing a shelf filled with evidence as I spoke to him. He wasn't all that fond of Clinton, either. But he had heard NOTHING about the insane "Clinton drug dealing" stories to which you are wedded.

Why whould I believe you, not him?

When did I ever say that Tuskugee never occurred? You are reading words I never wrote!

Like most progs, you have gone completely round the bend. Seriously. I honestly think that Clinton Derangement Syndrome should be a genuine clinical diagnosis.

You are simply no longer sane, lee. I am dead serious when I suggest that you should consult a psychiatrist.

Joseph Cannon said...

I want to say a few other things, even though I won't let you do so, lee.

In 1992, Jerry Brown's candidacy was almost universally considered a joke. Why the hell would the Clonton campaign, or any other, target him with dirty tricks? Anyone making such a claim reminds me of a paranoid granny in the cold war era who would call the FBI to report that the commies had moved in next door to spy on HER.

If you think that Robert Parry, Gary Webb's family and myself have all taken a pay-off -- fine. Think that. You're nuts.

Wright "proved" his AIDS theory by quoting a man who thinks that the "Bible code" proves that he is the lineal descendant of Moses and Christ.

Anonymous said...

OK I am going to answer the Qs first so that I won't be accused of ducking.
Q-1: I am not sure.
Q-2: She didn't engineer it but has used it the same way that she used the controversy over his religion when asked-Do you believe that Obama is a Muslim? As far as I know....he is not.
NOW, what most commenters are saying is that the United States government(of both parties) has been behind some atrocious policies around the world as well as here in the US. These policies have elevated some and have oppressed some regardless of their party affiliation. That is not to say that both parties are the same, but that both parties have had their share of ruthless politicians and all politicians will use some unsavory methods to win.
Here is what I object to:
-If Obama is not the MESSIAH then Hillary is not a SAINTE either!
They are both politicians. Not everything Hillary does is defend-able and not everything Obama does is objectionable.
I don't judge Obama or Hillary by what you or Markos say about them, but by what they themselves say. So far I like Obama better. I just heard him discuss the gas tax elimination that McCain proposed and Hillary is pushing too, and he made sense. He said what keeps the oil companies from raising their prices to offset the tax decrease, which would have the same net effect on the American public, except it will empty the US treasury of that sum.

AitchD said...

lee, I hope you understand how Joe distinguishes banishment from excommunication, and that he exercises both depending on one's status.

It's stupid to argue on the Internet. What I wrote about Ralph Kramden and Ed Norton was a subtle dig at Joe's disagreement with me in a prior exchange, when he inexplicably called Wright "inarticulate", and I said he's (maybe too) articulate, and then Joe said he's like Kramden going hommada hommada hommada. The brutality was aimed at our generous host, being parenthetical, but it was also intended to evoke the awfully disgusting and vulgar Eddie Murphy routine from an HBO special he did, when he imitated Ralph and said, Hey, Norton! How would you like to come down here and fuck me in the ass? which is an apt metaphor for what's going on, if you ask me. Nevertheless I still prefer my sublter, parenthetical version.

And, lee, more important, there's no difference between my saying Wright "mentioned the Tuskegee horrors...mentioned ebola...mentioned the biological warfare" and what you call "cite". This is a blog, not a seminar.

I'm glad you brought up the destruction of Jerry Brown since I brought it up last week but forgot to turn off my invisible fonts. Jerry was our last and best-ever hope. Hardly a day passes that I don't play Linda - what else can one person do?

Anonymous said...

OK, it's Gunfight at the OK Corral now:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0408/A_big_press_conference_on_Wright.html

AitchD said...

The credit-card 'bankers' (Joe almost never misses an opportunity to say whenever someone says 'bankers' they mean 'Jews') love the high consumer gasoline prices. They get 2-4 points off the top of every credit-card transaction. For one thing, it's factored into the price, and it's almost impossible to find gas discounted if you pay with cash. For another thing, since people have lost their home equity surplus, they've stopped being able to use that equity, which usually involved their credit card. Consequently the bankers need to make up the slack, or they'll go belly up. The economist mavens will tell you every other reason for higher prices at the pump, including supply, demand, and especially the dollar's falling 'value', whereby oil's cost is relatively stable, but it takes more US dollars to buy it. They'll also tell you that it's Iran's counter-threat to US threats. Unless the fixers admit what's going on, nothing can be proved. Believe it or not, socialism and a managed, non-free market economy will be friendlier to you than free-falling in gravity ever will be, or going green. Anyway, do the math: # of gallons/day @$x.xx9/10 X .0025 (conservative) = what the bankers get. Keep in mind the bankers' cost of doing that business doesn't rise (is statistically insignificant); so its increases are windfalls.

Gary McGowan said...

HD, And with all of that (informative, thanks) the Bank of England just had to throw in 100 Billion to bail out Englands biggest banks, including the Royal family's Bank of Scotland or whatever it's called. They are taking worthless crap as collateral. Anything to keep the patient appearing alive for just a bit longer. The US citizens got called upon to bail out Bear Sterns. Does anyone know how many central banks there were 100 years ago? We need a fucking firewall to protect the state and federal chartered banks. We need a two-level interest rate system a la FDR to give 1-2% state credit for development and whatever the fuck % for the gamblers. We need a fixed rate (not floating "market" rate) international monetary exchange system to get cooperative world development going again. And we need, first, a firewall to stop families victimized by this Venetian scam shit from being thrown out of their homes.

AitchD said...

The US and Canada - can anyone name any other country/society/economy - haven't lived in a disaster/catastrophe society in any living person's memory. Our discomfort threshold is the lowest in the world. Combine that with our stupidity ranking (math, science, culture, religion), and, well, I won't finish the sentence. But I'll predict that we'll increase by untold magnitudes our coal and oil production, an easy prediction since it's already happening.

If I were a church pastor, I'd say our mischief (which Jen rightly calls mass murder) in Iraq was to provide a laboratory with controls, while the Katrina aftermath provided a laboratoy without controls, purposely.

The investment threshold for tar sand oil industrialization to be profitable is about $90/bbl of sweet crude oil, which we've passed and will now be delighted to return to. All the oil companies have already begun to invest in and develop the tar sand oil industry where the deposits are:

"The tar sands begin near the border of Saskatchewan and extend north and west almost to British Columbia. All in all, they cover some fifty-seven thousand square miles, an area the size of Florida. They consist of quartzite, clay, water, and a hydrocarbon known as bitumen, which can be converted into a form of petroleum known as synthetic crude. It’s estimated that there’s enough bitumen in Alberta to yield 1.7 trillion barrels of synthetic crude. Assuming only ten per cent of this is recoverable, it still represents the second-largest oil reserve in the world, after Saudi Arabia’s. In Fort McMurray, what might be called the world’s first unconventional oil boom is under way. Since 2002, Shell, ConocoPhillips, Chevron, and Imperial Oil (which is primarily owned by ExxonMobil) have all received approval to construct major projects in the tar sands. Over the next five years, investment in the Fort McMurray area is expected to amount to over $75 billion. Thanks to what’s happening in the tar sands—output now tops ... 1 million barrels a day—Canada has become America’s No. 1 source of imported oil."

- Elizabeth Kolbert, A Reporter at Large, "Unconventional Crude," The New Yorker, November 12, 2007, p. 46

Fuel for our cars is a moderate but not major use of oil. Plus the US Southeast and the Southwest need impossibly huge amounts of coal to make those areas livable: the coal trains move from Wyoming to Georgia constantly, depositing huge sections of the Rocky Mountains every day. People who urge us to develop alternative fuels tend to prefer their pizza from wood-fired ovens, and thank god they're so tiny a group. I wish the emerging green industries well, I hope they also produce new wealth, but they cannot solve any of the life and death problems that face modern societies. The half-full or half-empty drinking glass trope was best answered by Bill Cosby's grandma who said either way it means she's drunk.

Whether oil prices have been manipulated to surge catastrophically (if the indie truckers strike next month, we'll be peering into some horror), or whether they were allowed to rise to their more-realistic price level are moot points. It's now profitable to produce synthesized high-energy fuels.

At this very hour the news blitz has begun to take off the gloves with its emerging unrelenting reports of "food riots", fresh water shortages, and, at this second, the projection of fertilizer insufficiency. We are being primed for very bad shit, the worst in memory. We lack anything like a critical mass for understanding and solutions; only elites participate in the democratic process - 600 of them at the federal level; and our news sources come from hopelessly stupid and ill-educated reporters and on-screen news readers.

But it's not as bad as it appears as long as we can come to realize that perception isn't the truth or reality. We have been relying on amusement (and too much beer) for three generations, so it's easy to see why a scarcity of acrylic for artificial fingernails can lead to violence in someone's day. Yet if we can keep our cool, we can avoid martial law or worse draconian methods.

Erm, my mistake in the equation: not .0025, but .025.