IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Reality and its tethers
Since we’ve been discussing the likely outcome of the 2016 election, which you are predicting will result in a Trump victory and I am predicting a Clinton victory, the November results will demonstrate whether your feet or mine were planted on more substantial ground. If the contest is close, which I do not rule out, your prediction will appear less droll than it does today, and if the short-fingered vulgarian prevails, I will make certain that one of the last things I do before mixing up and downing that Drano cocktail will be to post a handsome tribute here to your perspicacity.

Am I troubled “that Hillary will not allow the American People to know what she said to the bankster class behind closed doors?” Since you ask, not particularly. I assume that she tailored her remarks to her audience, and also that, with the honorarium check not yet transacted, she did not glower at the assembled arbitrageurs and snarl, “As for you filthy bloodsuckers, I’m going to have the tumbrels lined up three deep all along Wall Street come January, and then I’ll personally drive the first bulldozer that pushes your mutilated carcasses en masse into an EPA Superfund site.” I imagine she probably told them that it was a pity that that mean old socialist from Vermont was saying bad things about them, that it was greatly to be regretted that their contributions to American prosperity were not better understood and appreciated, that she trusted nevertheless that they would soldier nobly on, et cetera. Quelle surprise!

You seem to have fastened onto the idea that I and Another_Scott have clambered ardently aboard the Clinton bandwagon. I won’t presume to speak for Scott, but I my own support of HRC, while increasingly solid, has little enthusiasm to it. I could wish for better political chops and for more evidence of contemplated caution in the conduct of foreign affairs. I also hold her surname against her, a bit, because I think it unhealthy in a democracy that executive power should be passed back and forth between a couple of families over the course of a few decades (strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government), although this is but one symptom of a complex of maladies at present assailing us. It would be pleasant to have a better class of candidates to choose among, and to have a ruling class more far-seeing and less madly avaricious to underwrite the roster made available, and for that matter to have an electorate less desperate, depraved and ill-informed. And I want a goddamn pony while we're at it.

So I will vote for Mrs. Clinton, if she is the nominee, in November (or for Senator Sanders, if it be he; against any conceivable Republican nominee I would even vote for, say, Jim Webb were a deadlocked Philadelphia convention to nominate him, although in that event I would depart the polling place with every molar a shattered stump) because I recognize that the alternatives would be worse by far. Roy Edroso, he of the admirable alicublog, relates how, in advance of the 2008 election, an associate warned that Obama would inevitably disappoint him. “Disappointment,” he replied, “will be a welcome change after eight years of daily shame and horror.” Knowing as we know now how modest was the change as measured against the hope, would the voters who turned out for this president in 2008 have done better to cast their ballots for Ralph Nader, that selfless character capering again beneath the banner of the Greens that year, and so exonerating themselves from any complicity in stepped-up drone warfare, in expanded NSA surveillance, in the failure to close Guantanamo or to pass single-payer? And had these high principles tipped the results so that the team of Johnny Walnuts and Princess Dumbass of the North Woods had prevailed, wouldn’t that have, like, been a totally cool way to heighten the contradictions? Heck, I’ll bet we’d have had our workers’ soviets up and running years ago. We might even be ginning up the show trials by now.

No, the perfect is the enemy of the good. Get the perfect if you can, but settle for the good. If the good isn’t available, settle for the lousy if the other alternative is the lethal. That’s my approach to this year’s election, but it doesn’t make me a “shill” for Clinton. As you have observed, you live in benighted Indiana, which will almost certainly put its electoral votes in the service of a man with freakishly tiny hands late in the year (and with your help!), so you may take comfort in knowing in the likely event of a Clinton victory that your own hands, which I have no doubt are well within the range of normal adult male dimensions, will remain spotless and unsullied.

cordially,
Collapse Edited by rcareaga May 2, 2016, 04:55:19 PM EDT
Reality and its tethers
Since we’ve been discussing the likely outcome of the 2016 election, which you are predicting will result in a Trump victory and I am predicting a Clinton victory, the November results will demonstrate whether your feet or mine were planted on more substantial ground. If the contest is close, which I do not rule out, your prediction will appear less droll than it does today, and if the short-fingered vulgarian prevails, I will make certain that one of the last things I do before mixing up and downing that Drano cocktail will be to post a handsome tribute here to your perspicacity.

Am I troubled “that Hillary will not allow the American People to know what she said to the bankster class behind closed doors?” Since you ask, not particularly. I assume that she tailored her remarks to her audience, and also that, with the honorarium check not yet transacted, she did not glower at the assembled arbitrageurs and snarl, “As for you filthy bloodsuckers, I’m going to have the tumbrels lined up three deep all along Wall Street come January, and then I’ll personally drive the first bulldozer that pushes your mutilated carcasses en masse into an EPA Superfund site.” I imagine she probably told them that it as a pity that that mean old socialist from Vermont was saying bad things about them, that it was greatly to be regretted that their contributions to American prosperity were not better understood and appreciated, that she trusted nevertheless that they would soldier nobly on, et cetera. Quelle surprise!

You seem to have fastened onto the idea that I and Another_Scott have clambered ardently aboard the Clinton bandwagon. I won’t presume to speak for Scott, but I my own support of HRC, while increasingly solid, has little enthusiasm to it. I could wish for better political chops and for more evidence of contemplated caution in the conduct of foreign affairs. I also hold her surname against her, a bit, because I think it unhealthy in a democracy that executive power should be passed back and forth between a couple of families over the course of a few decades (strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government), although this is but one symptom of a complex of maladies at present assailing us. It would be pleasant to have a better class of candidates to choose among, and to have a ruling class more far-seeing and less madly avaricious to underwrite the roster made available, and for that matter to have an electorate less desperate, depraved and ill-informed. And I want a goddamn pony while we're at it.

So I will vote for Mrs. Clinton, if she is the nominee, in November (or for Senator Sanders, if it be he; against any conceivable Republican nominee I would even vote for, say, Jim Webb were a deadlocked Philadelphia convention to nominate him, although in that event I would depart the polling place with every molar a shattered stump) because I recognize that the alternatives would be worse by far. Roy Edroso, he of the admirable alicublog, relates how, in advance of the 2008 election, an associate warned that Obama would inevitably disappoint him. “Disappointment,” he replied, “will be a welcome change after eight years of daily shame and horror.” Knowing what we know now how modest was the change as measured against the hope, would the voters who turned out for this president in 2008 have done better to cast their ballots for Ralph Nader, that selfless character capering again beneath the banner of the Greens, and so exonerating themselves from any complicity in stepped-up drone warfare, in expanded NSA surveillance, in the failure to close Guantanamo or to pass single-payer? And had these high principles tipped the results so that the team of Johnny Walnuts and Princess Dumbass of the North Woods had prevailed, wouldn’t that have, like, been a totally cool way to heighten the contradictions? Heck, I’ll bet we’d have had our workers’ soviets up and running years ago. We might even be ginning up the show trials by now.

No, the perfect is the enemy of the good. Get the perfect if you can, but settle for the good. If the good isn’t available, settle for the lousy if the other alternative is the lethal. That’s my approach to this year’s election, but it doesn’t make me a “shill” for Clinton. As you have observed, you live in benighted Indiana, which will almost certainly put its electoral votes in the service of a man with freakishly tiny hands late in the year (and with your help!), so you may take comfort in knowing in the likely event of a Clinton victory that your own hands, which I have no doubt are well within the range of normal adult male dimensions, will remain spotless and unsullied.

cordially,
     One for MM: Drum - Why I never warmed to Bernie - (Another Scott) - (39)
         Substitute Sanders for McMurphy - (dmcarls) - (2)
             Who's Chief Bromden? Hillary? ;-) -NT - (Another Scott) - (1)
                 I have met the late Will Sampson, Hillary is no chief, although she could play for charleston -NT - (boxley)
         Should be titled, "Establishment Asshat Doesn't Like to be Reminded of Democratic Principles" - (mmoffitt) - (34)
             "Shills"? - (pwhysall) - (2)
                 Good $DEITY. - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                     That's one way to answer the question. -NT - (pwhysall)
             How often do people bother to change their party registration? - (Another Scott) - (30)
                 Heh. I lost the only bet I ever made on an election. - (mmoffitt) - (29)
                     Yet you're convinced they agree with you about Hillary vs Donnie? >:-) -NT - (Another Scott) - (28)
                         I don't think they agree with me. - (mmoffitt) - (27)
                             Eh? - (Another Scott) - (24)
                                 Not much difference that I can see. - (mmoffitt) - (23)
                                     Oh well. - (Another Scott) - (4)
                                         How many Independents are there today? How many closed primaries? - (mmoffitt)
                                         And Bernie did get Hillary to adopt a lot of his policies. - (mmoffitt) - (2)
                                             vote for bernie, that race is in a statistical dead heat, the greasy rat wont win -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                                                 Thanks, will do. -NT - (mmoffitt)
                                     Your predictions are duly noted - (rcareaga) - (17)
                                         Two things. - (mmoffitt) - (16)
                                             "Should be" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there... - (Another Scott) - (3)
                                                 my brother in law worked will hillary back in the day on the original plan - (boxley) - (2)
                                                     People are afraid of change, especially when politicians ramp up irrational fears. - (Another Scott)
                                                     Yep, she's evolved. - (mmoffitt)
                                             No deal - (rcareaga) - (11)
                                                 "Untethered from reality"? - (mmoffitt) - (10)
                                                     Reality and its tethers - (rcareaga)
                                                     Re: "Untethered from reality"? - (Another Scott) - (8)
                                                         she got $275k per speech just because? She wasn't running for anything? cmon Man :-) - (boxley) - (2)
                                                             I thought it was $20B per speech. - (Another Scott) - (1)
                                                                 that is what GS gets after she is elected -NT - (boxley)
                                                         Unreasonable demands? - (mmoffitt) - (4)
                                                             She . was . a . private . citizen . at . the . time. - (Another Scott) - (3)
                                                                 Dude, I don't care about her speeches to workers. - (mmoffitt) - (2)
                                                                     Glass Steagal didn't apply to AIG, CountryWide, Lehman, etc. - (Another Scott) - (1)
                                                                         Good $DEITY. Now we're down to old Clinton Campaign nonsense. - (mmoffitt)
                             Wait a minute here . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (1)
                                 At first I thought he would bring a revolution. - (mmoffitt)
         this is clinton's america, special interest buy you! -NT - (boxley)

Hate to have a typo or spelling error made immortal by the LRPD.
100 ms