Sunday, January 22, 2017

Sunday Night Radio Drama - Arch Oboler - The Family Nagachi



Right after the war when Arch Oboler wrote and produced this play for the first of his series of plays, the internment of Americans of Japanese ancestry was not a popular topic.  Arch Oboler stood just over five feet tall but he had more courage than the bully boys all put together. Again, the theme is appropriate to the beginning of the Trump regime.  



Arch Oboler's Plays


If he were writing today, I would imagine he would be addressing the rampant racism, neo-fascism and neo-Nazism that was put in the ascendant by the Trump regime.   I can imagine him tearing Kellyanne and Reince to ribbons. 

This site gives what I assume is the cast, though it would appear not one of them is Asian, that's something I would guess would be different if he were doing it today. 
As I am typing this NPR has on some jerk saying that Black Lives Matter is the equivalent of the neo-Nazi =, KKK "alt-right".   I believe it's the Wall Street Journal "My Share of Plutocrat Money Matters" figurehead, Jason Riley, saying it.    The guy is scum. 

NPR deserves to die.  I'd rather have local public stations going back to editing their own news reporting to be broadcast between long stretches of classical music disc jockeying.  

Update:  And now they've got neo-Nazi, white supremacist Pat Buchanan on.  And now he's promoting Trump's puppet master, the greatest sponsor of neo-Nazism in the world, Putin. NPR deserves to die. 

The Unspeakable Truth

There is no chance for egalitarian democracy to recover or even survive as long as the law of the United States - as imposed by the Supreme Court, not by legislation  - refuses to say that lies are not to be protected, that refuses to admit that lies are a danger to freedom and democracy and that a democratic country has an interest in their suppression and that the truth, not lies, are what deserve the kind of protection mentioned in the tragically truncated First Amendment.  

Democracy will always be endangered when ideological groups which deny the political equality of all people, which rank people on a scale of value, that calls for the dehumanization of some people, the denial of the existence of the rights of some people, which advocates the violent oppression and even destruction of entire groups of people are treated the same way, by law, as the most benevolent of egalitarian groups which promote equality, democracy and a peaceful decent life.   The idiocy that refuses to make that distinction and which allows the spread of those anti-democratic ideologies through media amplified hate-talk - again, mostly permitted by the courts, not legislatures - has been what has driven the United States into the arms of Vladimir Putin in the form of the most overt hate-talker ever allowed to occupy the presidency by our defective Constitution in our modern history.   You have to go back to the worst days of Jim Crow, genocide against the Native population of North America to find this kind of a horror show as our chief executive.  

Our Constitution, especially as twisted by the Supreme Court at its frequent worst, is in basic need of major revision to protect the possibility of egalitarian democracy - egalitarian democracy being the only kind that deserves to use that word.  Just because someone wins the most votes in the disgusting Electoral College con job, that doesn't mean the results are democratic, as we saw last November, it has a number of times meant the opposite.  

Saturday, January 21, 2017

Extra-Feature - Arch Oboler - The Bathysphere



Another classic from one of the best of the original generation of radio dramatists.  Originally a play in response to the megalomaniac dictators of the 30s and 40s.   Here's one online description of the original production of the play.

Aired on Arch Oboler's Plays soon after World War II broke out in Europe. Two outstanding acting performances (Hans Conried and George Zucco) lend crucial believability to a contrived premise in which the oppressed is allowed to confront the oppressor (a favorite device of Oboler's propaganda plays), clarifying their opposing views in the process.

This is a production from 1964.  

It's another one appropriate to the megalomaniacal  Trump regime we are going into.  

Second Feature - From A Story By George G. Toudouze adapted by James Poe - Three Skeleton Key



Vincent Price
John Dehner  
Ben Wright 

Not sure exactly why this seems to be such an appropriate story for the beginning of the Trump Pretendency, their paranoia, certainly, the absurdity of the merely plausible sense of fear it creates in its intended audience....

Anyway, it's considered a classic of radio drama, it was produced at least five times in different productions for radio,  I think Vincent Price was involved with most of them.  

Here's an earlier one that some people like better from 1950. 

Saturday Evening Radio Drama - Harold Pinter - Victoria Station



Paul Rogers - Controller 
Martin Jarvis - Driver


I'm Sure You've Seen The Difference In Size Between Barack Obama's Inaugural And Trumps, Trumps Is The One With Lots of White Showing

Marxism Is As Dead As The Static Universe Theory

Someone apparently read one of my several archived posts in which I point out that not even the biggest Communist party in the world bothers to pretend it believes in Marxism anymore as China replaced it with Victorian era capitalism on steroids and more central planning.  Though I'm not sure that central planning component is what it's supposed to be, either.

It was said by some old scholars of the Soviet Union that by the regime of Leonid Brezhnev no one except the stupidest and most fanatical among the Soviet elite believed in any kind of Communism, anymore.  It was like American democracy here, under the Trump regime, something that is pretended by the guys who want to maintain their power through keeping such forms as the "peaceful transfer of power" under our system which legitimates the illegitimate.

About the only people I know of who pretend to believe in Marxism are idiot scholars and other such boobs who maintain that pose because it's way too late for them to start a whole new career, so they pretend it's scientifically inevitable.  Though there are some who maintain that as part of their febrile atheism, as well.  The "scientific" content of Marx is like that of natural selection, it's based in what is now obviously an absurd over-extension of claims of scientific method way past where it can be reliably applied, on grotesquely inadequate and often quite flimsy data available to the originator of the ideologies and maintained primarily for ideological and secondarily professional interests.  And, again, to those who maintain it out of a supposed utility for their primary interest, their faith of scientistic materialist atheism.

If 19th century physics and even early 20th century physics could maintain a theory as now clearly wrong as the belief that our universe was static and eternal, dealing with observable, reliably measured objects and reliably tested demonstrations of proposals about it, 19th and even present day alleged "science" dealing with things far more complex, impossible to observe and measure and, at every turn, vulnerable to the misunderstanding and, far worse, wishful thinking of those with an interest in a particular point of view stands a practically infinite chance of getting things entirely wrong.   I have no doubt that if we survive long enough and science is still being done, sometime in the future the present ubiquitous belief in natural selection will seem as quaint as a belief in spontaneous generation* does to us today.

We've already reached that stage with Marxism which, by, um......... "virtue" of its known effect of generating tens of millions of murders, slavery, oppression, denial of freedom of speech and, it would wish, thought, is a known and absolutely proven failure and, when insisted on by academic and political hacks, a  fraud.  Those well groomed, clean, even manicured and white collared Marxists are no less snake oil salesmen than Kellyanne Conway, Steve Bannon, Chuck Todd and Lou Dobbs.  Marxism lies close on any honest mapping of political ideology with fascism and Nazism because they end up in the same place.  Those dear old lefties who pushed it even as Lenin, Stalin, Mao and even Pol Pot were murdering millions are no dearer than those dear old Nazis who pushed their brand were.  I say to hell with them all.

*  The alleged ally of natural selection, abiogenesis is all about spontaneous generation, much of it even more absurd than the old fashioned kind.  At least the people who believed that had actual organisms that they could see, most of abiogenesis is pure imaginary hooey.

Resisting The Agenda of Pretender Trump and His Republican-Fascists In The Congress

I don't think I've suggested that you read the pamphlet put out by Democratic congressional staffers about how to effectively pressure your members of Congress, House and Senate to not push the Trump-McConnel-Ryan fascist agenda.   If you haven't seen it yet, it is called 

Friday, January 20, 2017

Things We Have To Wonder About Now

Reading Dahlia Lithwick's piece about Pretender Trump's speech made me wonder if we might see some strategic assassinations of journalists such as those that Trump's puppet master used to gain control of Russia.  A few strange deaths among journalists critical of Trump would probably send most of them scurrying to the hem of his garment to kiss it so as not to get on some imagined list of those to off.   Frankly, there is almost no one whose face you see on TV who, if that kind of assassination became a thing who I can imagine standing up and calling it out. Maybe Rachel, or Chris or Bill Moyers.   But, then, maybe I'm wrong about that.  The standing up part, there's good reason to suspect Putin would do such things.   

Would Putin, having pulled off the coup of all coups in putting his puppet in the American Presidency tolerate some American journalists who might threaten to undo it?   I don't know.  He had Alexander Litvinenko murdered in London, in what was a not at all subtle assassination using methods available to the Russian terror police.  Among the reasons for that assassination was the accusation by him and other former members of the Russian secret police that Putin was behind the assassination of Boris Berezovsky, also when he was out of Russia.  If Litvinenko was right, he used terror and assassination in Russia to gain control and I don't see any reason to not suspect it was the case that he'd go after Americans who threatened his major asset in the United States.  

I think it would be a really good idea for some of Trump's critics to be very careful about their personal security, if they aren't all ready.  Putin is just one possible source of danger, his domestic, neo-fascist and neo-Nazi supporters, not to mention those in the FBI, have a history of violence.  
Considering how he imposed Trump on the United States, Putin should be called 


.Vlad The Installer

Update:  OK, how about Vlad the Imposer of Trump the Imposter?

It Is A Sin And An Act Of Real Treason To Lend This Pretender Any Pretended Legitimacy

Trump is not a legitimate president, he was installed by a foreign despot working with the Fascist Bureau of Inquisition and the lying corporate media.

No one, from now on, who doesn't win the popular vote or, really, a majority of the real vote should be accepted by The People as a legitimate president.  

A government is only legitimate if it has the just consent of the governed, if that's not true we should be governed by the Brit government because the Declaration of Independence is founded on a lie.

Trump is a pretender, not a president.  

Charles Ives - An Election



It strikes me that
some men and women got tired of a big job; but, over there our men did not quit.
They fought and died that better things might be!
Perhaps some who stayed at home are beginning to forget and to quit.
The pocketbook and certain little things talked loud and noble, and got in the way;
too many readers go by the headlines, party men will muddle up the facts,
so a good many citizens voted as grandpa always did,
or thought a change for the sake of change seemed natural enough.
“It’s raining, let’s throw out the weatherman, kick him out! Kick him out! Kick him out! Kick him out! Kick him!”
Prejudice and politics, and the stand-patters came in strong, and yelled, “slide back! Now you’re safe, that’s the easy way!”
Then the timid smiled and looked relieved, “We’ve got enough to eat, to hell with ideals!”
All the old women, male and female, had their day today,
and the hog-heart came out of his hole; but he won’t stay out long,
God always drives him back!
Oh Captain, my Captain! A heritage we’ve thrown away;
but we’ll find it again, my Captain, Captain, oh my Captain!

Free Us From All Evil


Stravinsky, Our Father
Cambridge Singers
 John Rutter, Director

Thursday, January 19, 2017

The Founders Cemented Slavery And Oppression Into Place Those Idols Should Be Knocked Off Their Plinths

A little remembered incident of the First Congress is as good an illustration as any as to how the Founders went from their pious declarations that "all men are Created Equal" to cementing even overt slavery into place through the Constitution is the handling of the petition Benjamin Franklin submitted for the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery.  You don't have to take my word for the role that the idolized Constitution played in that, you can read it in the very excuse of the First Congress, peopled with Founders and their allies gave to not even consider that petition.  First what the U. S. Archives say about the documents.

Franklin did not publicly speak out against slavery until very late in his life. As a young man he owned slaves, and he carried advertisements for the sale of slaves in his newspaper, the Pennsylvania Gazette. At the same time, however, he published numerous Quaker pamphlets against slavery and condemned the practice of slavery in his private correspondence. It was after the ratification of the United States Constitution that he became an outspoken opponent of slavery. In 1789 he wrote and published several essays supporting the abolition of slavery and his last public act was to send to Congress a petition on behalf of the Society asking for the abolition of slavery and an end to the slave trade. The petition, signed on February 3, 1790, asked the first Congress, then meeting in New York City, to "devise means for removing the Inconsistency from the Character of the American People," and to "promote mercy and justice toward this distressed Race."

The petition was introduced to the House on February 12 and to the Senate on February 15, 1790. It was immediately denounced by pro-slavery congressmen and sparked a heated debate in both the House and the Senate. The Senate took no action on the petition, and the House referred it to a select committee for further consideration. The committee reported on March 5, 1790 claiming that the Constitution restrains The committee reported on March 5, 1790 claiming that the Constitution restrains Congress from prohibiting the importation or emancipation of slaves until 1808 and then tabled the petition. On April 17, 1790, just two months later, Franklin died in Philadelphia at the age of 84.

First, well, better late than never for Dr. Franklin.  He, at least, made that much progress as Thomas Jefferson,  the author of that promise of equality was increasing his practice of slavery with the minutely sedulous scientific analysis.  I will also point out that it as those largely at the agitation of those pesky Quakers that he likely came that far, though they were hardly the only religious abolitionists of the time, many of whom were free Black People and Black People who were held in slavery.

If you want to read the report of the House Special Committe which disposed of the abolitionist petition, in that congress of Founders, you can read it in its depraved specificity, noting that the Constitution, itself, provided them with an excuse not to act for the next eighteen years.  Future congresses would resort to other provisions and the building body of slave-enabling law that was compiled by the judiciary at the same time.   Notice what Congress was forbidden by the Constitution from doing.

That Congress have no authority to interfere in the internal regulations of particular States, relative to the instruction of slaves in the principles of morality and religion*, to their comfortable clothing, accommodations and substance; to the regulation of their marriages, and the prevention of the violation of rights therefore, or to the separation of children from their parents; to a comfortable provision in cases of sickness, age, or infirmity; or to the seizure, transportation, or sale of free negroes; but have the fullest confidence in the wisdom and humanity of the Legislatures of the several States, that they will revise their laws, from time to time, when necessary, and promote the objects mentioned in the memorials, and every other measure that may tend to the happiness of slaves.

Considering that all of those things were things that States among the several States most certainly didn't regulate for the "happiness of slaves" which was the very reason they were brought up by abolitionists, the mealy-mouthed, lying hypocrisy of that House committee couldn't have been more obvious.  And their giving the object of our present day idolatry, the stinking, hypocritical Constitution as the reason for doing no more than lying about what was going on.

A few years back, I asked my very, very old mother and several of the other very old people I knew who were well read and who had always followed current events if they ever heard people going on and on about the "founders" and the Constitution when they were young.  All of them said they didn't remember it until about the time of the backlash against the civil rights agitation in the 1950s and 60s and on.  That was what I suspected, the cult of the Founders and the Constitution is part and parcel of the neo-Confederate reaction to equal rights.  Though, it should be noted, that most of the Northern States were also slave state during the First Congress and many of them would remain so.  I believe the "Mr. Foster" who issued that report was Abiel Foster, of New Hampshire, a member of the First Congress and, indeed, to the Continental Congress.   Though I can't find more documentation of that Special Committee on such short notice.  I would love to know what the gods of that idolatry might have said about it or the provision in the Constitution at the time it was adopted.

*  You can contrast the current de-religionized myth to what the early Black anti-Slavery agitator, David Walker said, mentioning the hypocritical Jefferson by name.   It is clear that slave holders didn't want slaves being exposed to the scriptures because the idea of slaves being freed is central to the entire thing.  They certainly didn't want them to learn to read so they could read such radical commandments of justice for themselves.


Update:  Oh, no.  No, no, no, no, no.  I don't mean that we should come out and attack the friggin' Founders and the corrupt anti-democratic Constitution by name.  We have to get rid of those by a more gradual process that shows people how they got suckered into deifying those in the first place. But the first step in that is for people who claim to be liberals and on the left to stop pushing that crap, themselves.  Even the ones who do it in Founders drag on stage.

I'd urge people to take up what Ishmael Reed and those he cited raised as a tacit challenge, to truthfully do with real abolitionists, Black people, people like Harriet Tubman (read what it said about her in the article I linked to from Reed), David Walker, Ida  Wells, who are real heroines and heroes what was done untruthfully for Hamilton.   Let's see if the friggin' New York Times would promote such a show into a $700 friggin' dollars a friggin' ticket show if it told the truth.  Openly challenge them to do it or to be considered the racist institution it is.  The NYT needs to be knocked off a plinth, too.

Hate Mail - I'm Not Sure Which Founders You're Upset With Me Dissing Those Slaver Crooks Or Lin-Manuel Miranda

If it's the distorter of history in that stupid musical, I can't say it better than Ishmael Reed did. 

If it's the others, my recent analysis is that they suckered a bunch of poor and what would now be called working class guys to fight their revolution for them so they'd be free to steal, pillage and enslave without getting taxed by the Brits.  The bait and switch that they pulled, going from the egalitarian claims of the Declaration of Independence to, once the poor and working class demanded what they got promised, endangering the wealth of the Founders class, to pulling the anti-democratic Constitution out of their foundations and foisting that on them.  
The "Hamilton" that is getting danced and rapped on stage, covering up his and the ruling classes' white faces with dark ones is a total distortion of history.   When you look at the fat, pasty white face of Trump under his troll-doll coif being saluted and celebrated by d-list talent tomorrow, you got him because of the real Hamilton and his buddies.  

You know, it's amazing how many college educated folk in the TV addled age don't understand that theater, the movies, etc. aren't real.  It's gotten so bad that they believe musical comedy is real. 

It's Time For Real Liberals To Stop Calling Ourselves "Liberals"

In my recent posts pointing out the two, incompatible things that get called "liberalism" I was saying that the ones I used to call "liberalish-libertarians" but have recently decided were better called "private-sector fascists" are the ones who have destroyed real liberalism.  The ideas of that liberalish-libertarianism are responsible for the privileging of lies, the idiotic and, to them,thrilling idea that the most proven of evil groups should not be prevented from spreading their intellectual and moral poison to gain influence, they were the ones behind the campaign to discredit the religion that was the strongest force and source of the genuine liberalism contained in the radical economic and social egalitarianism of the Mosaic Law and the Gospel of Jesus.  I could add a myriad of other, subsidiary idiocies and evils that flowed from their 18th century alleged-enlightenment wisdom.   Much of it was based in ideology, though a lot of it was due to the kind of stupid grand-standing and attention getting that seems to go with that kind of stuff.

The political identity that should have comprised liberalism is based in a non-negotiable and absolute belief in equality of all people, perhaps its most radical form ever expressed is found in the economic content of the Mosaic Law.  It has a non-negotiable belief that the truth is to be valued above lies and that lies should never be privileged, for reasons I've pointed out endlessly.  Among the greatest reasons for that is that there is nothing more destructive of an attempt to establish equal justice than for lies to gain widespread or even merely effective influence - that is the meaning of American history over the past fifty years of attacks on what was won in the Civil Rights and Voting Rights acts, the Great Society was an attempt to achieve that equal justice in reality instead of merely in courtrooms and intellectual abstraction and what is now an unfashionable pose in journalism.  It was destroyed through the "free speech-free press" absolutism which elevated lying to the supremacy it has risen to in 2016.

I think it is probably a good idea for people who believe that is to stop calling them and their political side "liberals" and "liberalism".  The word was burdened with such confusion by liberals and turned into a term of effective vilification under their regime of "free-speech, free-press" that it's a liability, anyway.  "Leftist" is hardly helpful either since it is associated with the Marxism, British style and French pseudo-socialism, anarchism and another bunch of junk that is really an even more obvious member of the fascism family.  That use of it has not only robbed the word of its clear meaning, it has associated it with some of the most murderous, oppressive figures in recent history and the ideas that led, inevitably, to those tens, even hundreds of millions of murders.   As an aside, I think here, safe in a quasi-democracy where they were under little to no real danger from those ideologies,  it was for the safe thrill of public display championing  of those thrillingly forbiden and violent Marxists among rich and connected pseudo-liberals that a lot of the "free-speech, free-press" junk arose.  There has been entirely more pose behind the pose of liberalish libertarianism than was ever good for doing actual good.  That it was their ideological cousins, American fascists, who benefited the most and triumphed under from that stupidity doesn't dissuade me into thinking I'm wrong.

I propose we find a new name for our politics, naming it with what it really is, egalitarian absolutism, fairness, monotheistic morality,  I would favor something that can't be divorced from that morality because, as the post-Marxist thinker Jurgen Habermas was forced to conclude by his decades of careful study and thought, there really is nothing else that nourishes it and its holdings, even today.   Atheism, especially the scientistic, Britatheism that has held so much influence on the alleged left, is poison to it.  You can study the British left to see the truth of that, as I have suggested before, look at the writings of the Fabians, including their star George Bernard Shaw who remained a Fabian in good standing even as he advocated the lethal chamber for the unproductive, unfit decades before Hitler and Hess began their program of applied science.

There is no more potent weapon for the political program to enact radical egalitarianism than the fact that the most widely held religion of Americans, Europeans and, I believe, Muslims, contains the belief that radical equality and, in many ways, the economic policies that would produce that equality are the will of God.  I've come to really believe that to be successful, to really overcome the worst in us with the best in us, nothing else can do it.  People have to really believe they are to do unto others as we would have them do unto us is what God wants them to do and that to not do that will have the kind of real, consequences of the kind we are about to see in the Trump-Republican-fascist governance of the United States.  To give that up for Brit style atheism, Marxism, Fabianism, and a host of other isms on the say so of decadent intellectuals was one of the stupidest things done by so many alleged liberals, most of it done out of the basest snobbery.  People who have either wisely rejected that from the start or who, like me, late in life have seen through the lies and poses should let them have the word, it's a meaningless term now, anyway.

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Trump Will Be Impeachable As Soon As His Hand Leaves The Bible If Not Before It Does*

"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

It will be his first act of perjury as president.

* Though one suspects he'll be sworn in on a copy of The Art of the Deal. 

Paul LePage Is A Piece of Crap, No Less Is The "Moderate" Susan Collins

The SHAME OF MAINE, the racist, lying scumbag, Republican-fascist "Trump before Trump" governor of Maine is again bringing shame to my state by lecturing John Lewis on the history of civil rights, claiming for the party which has made winning with racism one of its central pillars was .... well, here's what the lying scumbag, Paul LePage said:

"You know, I will just say this. John Lewis ought to look at history. It was Abraham Lincoln that freed the slaves.  It was Rutherford B. Hayes and Ulysses S. Grant that fought against Jim Crow laws. A simple ‘thank you’ would suffice.”

As others have pointed out,  Rutherford B. Hayes was the president who made a corrupt deal with the defeated Confederates to end the brief period when black people could vote in the former Confederacy, hold office and pursue equality.  It was under Hayes that Jim Crow started and got cemented into place until the 1950s, it was Republicans who used Lyndon Johnson forcing through the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, to rally racists to join the Republican Party, by then the party of racism, reaction, and scum like Paul LePage.   

For the flaming racist, asshole, Paul LePage to presume to lecture John Lewis on the history of Jim Crow which he struggled to end is one of the most repulsive things that piece of slime has done as governor and the SHAME OF MAINE.  

There is no Party of Lincoln left, any Republicans like that left the party long ago.  A "Party of Lincoln" wouldn't have such scum in it like LePage and McConnell and pretty much the entire Republican caucus in the Congress.  It would not have elected the floridly racist Donald Trump.  Now you've got phonies like Susan Collins - a LePage supporter - who will go along with the racist Trump agenda because she wants to be Governor of Maine and the Republicans will probably recruit a millionaire egomaniac to run a spoiler campaign to put the piece of crap in the governorship.

If you think I am pissed off over this, I am because I just got done hearing this story on the Maine media which has done so much to give us both LePage and who have sold Collins to the gullible Maine voters as a "moderate" of the kind that doesn't exist anymore.  

The Liars This Time And The Buyers Who Bought Those Lies

A member of my family sent me a recent incident online of a guy who was going on and on about how he couldn't wait for them to repeal Obamacare.  Someone asked him what he had against the ACA.  He said he wasn't against the ACA he was against Obamacare.  When it was pointed out that they were the same thing he said, Nuh-uh, I got ACA and it isn't Obamacare.

I suspect the racism the Republican-fascists used against a lot of people to sucker them into total control is going to blow up when they find out that inconvenient fact.

I don't doubt that the Republicans are going to kill it, either outright or by destroying it.  They might listen to the health insurance industry and other industries which will face the financial disaster that doing either will cause,  they might, after they have an election disaster, listen to the people they suckered, but they won't do the latter before they destroy it and throw thirty-million people off of health insurance.   I think the resultant catastrophic failure to reimburse hospitals, emergency rooms, clinics, etc. will be a huge disaster but if there's one thing that Republicans have proven, beyond any possible denial, it is that they are willing to hurtle the country into a wall or off a cliff.  Remember, they're going to get rid of the things put into place to keep the banksters from doing what they did less than a decade ago, too.

Will we pull out of it in the Age of Lies our best and brightest have brought us to?   I don't know, I tend to doubt it.  Look how fast the media lied Obama into a fatally weakened president - with his help - and on into the disaster they are trying to acclimate the TV addled American attention span to accepting, passively.

Will reality override their propaganda?  It's hard to make bricks from the mud the media flings without the straw of truth and those who have to try to make it can't cut enough for the job.   The lies elected Republicans over and over again and alleged liberals haven't even been brave enough to face the necessity of ending those.  They think the best people won't think well of them if they do.  I'm as disgusted with such "liberals" as I am with the people conservatives suckered.  They're all cowards.

We were saved from outright, European style fascism by a rare combination of good luck and the residual wisdom of a decisive margin of the voters.  I'm not confident that's there anymore after a generation has been brought up on the lies of the media.  I hope I'm wrong but I don't think I am this morning.