Friday, October 4, 2013
Another Parable of a Madman
THE MADMAN----Have you not heard of that madman who logged into Blogger in the bright morning hours, clicked over to Lem's, and cried incessantly: "I seek GOP! I seek GOP!"---As many of those who believed in GOP were hanging around just then, he provoked much laughter. Has GOP gotten lost? wrote one. Has he fallen ill without insurance? snarked another. Or is he cowering in Washington, D.C.? Is he afraid of us? Has he gone on a Cruz? immigrated?---Thus they snarked and laughed...
The madman posted into their midst and stared at them with his shiny black eyes. "Whither is GOP?" he cried; "I will tell you. You have killed him---you. All of you are his murderers. But how did you do this? How could you usurp half the political bandwidth? Who gave you the satellites to rule the entire heavens? What were you doing when money unchained from its value? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving? Away from the nation's original sin? Are we not plunging into guilt and debt continually? Backward, collaterally, forward, in all directions? Is there still any left or right? Are we not now straying, as through an infinite nothingness? Do we not feel the breath of empty black space? Has it not become colder? Is not the dark knight continually closing in on us? Cold grinding grizzly bear jaws hot on her heels? Do we hear nothing as yet of the noise of the golddiggers who are barrying GOP? Do we smell nothing as yet of the divine decomposition? Parties, too, decompose. GOP is dead. GOP remains dead. And you have drowned him in your Tea Pee."
"How shall you comfort yourselves, ye white murderers of all murderers? What was highest and mightiest of all nations that the world has yet seen is bleeding to debt under those knaves: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What new festivals of solstice, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this guilt too great for us? Must we ourselves not become GOP's simply to appear worthy of it? There has never been a greater debt; and whoever is born after us -- for the sake of this guilt -- he will belong to a higher history than all history hitherto."
Here the madman fell silent and refreshed his page again looking for responses; but they, too, were silent and stared at their screens in astonishment. Silence. At last he threw his mouse on the ground, and it cracked into pieces and shorted out. "I have come too early," he wanted to say to them; "my time is not yet. This tremendous event is still on its way, still wandering; it has not yet reached their ears. Even electrons and photons require time to travel wires and optical fiber; the light of hip-hop stars requires time; deeds, though done, still require time to be seen and heard. This deed is still more distant from them than most distant Hip-hop stars---and yet they have done it themselves.
It has been related further that on the same day the madman forced his way into several LDS tabernacles and there struck up his requiem aeternam deo. Led out and called to account, he is said always to have replied nothing but: "What after all are these churches now if they are not the tombs and sepulchers of GOP?"
Labels:
Crack Emcee,
EPR,
Here's looking at you crack,
Nietzsche,
Parody
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
44 comments:
I don't know this Gop person, but Vo Nguyen Giap died recently. I don't think I killed him, though. I'm pretty sure it was the 102 years behind him.
Also, I'd love to know how ling you've been sitting on this piece, waiting to drop it into the mix.
Gop was sold out for 20 pieces of EBT.
@Icepick: Guess my favorite line.
Sheesh, Pollo, way to put me on the spot. I'd probably go with "It has been related further that on the same day the madman forced his way into several LDS tabernacles and there struck up his requiem aeternam deo." But I'm probably choosing that because of comments made last night.
But this is also for choice:
Cold grinding grizzly bear jaws hot on her heels?
Bingo to which one? I cheated and guessed twice.
Door #2
You know, one of the most fascinating aspects of cults - close-minded little buggers that they are - is that anyone who challenges their view of things isn't introducing another perspective - they're Trouble with a capital "T" - and all attempts are made to ridicule them, etc..
It's nice to see you guys got this started.
Nice to know what I'm dealing with,...
all attempts are made to ridicule them, etc
They laughed at Pasteur! They laughed at Gandhi! They laughed at Einstein!
Then again, they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
Then again, they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
Some of them ran screaming from Bozo the Clown.
Some of them ran screaming from Bozo the Clown.
Gasp! My mom swore she got rid of those birthday pictures!
Crack ... from your remarks yesterday, I'm afraid I agree with you more than I should as a respectable urban white boy.
One thing for sure: The "GOP" has had no strategy of late, just hectic tactics. You nailed it.
So, agree with Crack on everything, or know that you're in a cult. May as well join the Mormons, I guess....
I suspect I agree with Crack on this issue for rather different reasons. Tell me one thing, just one thing...did you or anyone else here really think the Republicans could win anything but publicity with the their CR tactics?
I am absolutely certain, due to on the job experience and education, that when I hear and read Obama, Reid, R. Paul, and Cruz all calling the CR a "budget" literally that none of them know what the fuck they are talking about. A CR is NOT a "budget." Can't be. Won't be. Ever.
Let me elucidate one more time on this CR thing. A CR is a temporary device, with a firm start date and equally firm end date. In other words anything and everything in any CR is totally moot at the end date, flat out ceases to apply...which in HJ Res. 59's case will be 15 December 2013. ON 16 December nothing stipulated in HJR 59 applies any longer.
How does one "defund" diddly squat with that framework?
One more thing...I would have held my nose and voted for Romney. I would have voted for a garden slug instead of Obama. However, among his credentials of actual accomplishments is his health care fandango in Massachusetts.
This all feels like treading water while the wind picks up and the chop increases causing one to be submerged periodically by wave action alone.
"Treading water?"
Didn't they teach you in Red Cross swimming classes how to take of your pants, tie the legs, raise them in the air, bringing them down to the water rapidly to cause them to fill with air then tie the waist off and use as a floatation device?
Shame on you, Aridog! Bad BoyScout you!
You presume I was wearing pants.
No matter, in three foot chop you get covered with water regularly anyway.
"This all feels like treading water while the wind picks up and the chop increases causing one to be submerged periodically by wave action alone."
Yes, Romney was about the same as Obama, i.e., neoliberal.
Aridog,
Crack ... from your remarks yesterday, I'm afraid I agree with you more than I should as a respectable urban white boy.
One thing for sure: The "GOP" has had no strategy of late, just hectic tactics. You nailed it.
Thanks, Aridog. I wish communicating online was like doing so in person, but it ain't. Assumptions are made, then they have to be defeated, you get off track, etc. From my perspective, people just don't think - or try to:
Icepick,
So, agree with Crack on everything, or know that you're in a cult. May as well join the Mormons, I guess....
It's as simple as that.
Thanks again, Ari,...
Crack, it is as simple as that. You keep saying everyone here that doesn't agree with you is part of a mono-culture, which is bullshit. I am usually arguing with both edutcher and El Pollo about what should be done and how, for example. Which usually puts me in opposition with most of the regulars here. I don't go whining about it afterwards, though, complaining that everyone opposed to me is stupid or in a cult.
But you can't and won't see it, because it interferes with the narrative you have to maintain.
Icepick,
You can't and won't see it, because it interferes with the narrative you have to maintain.
Ice, you have as much insight into my view of things as most here, and that ain't much. (I'm a madman, right?) You guys brag that you don't read my shit, so why pose you understand it?
Yesterday started off with a charge that I'd sold out to Obama and was now a "communist" (that word was actually used) sucking his dick. And you bought it. So please don't come to me now, barking about how you're not influenced by the nonsense:
it's all I've heard from you since I visited - and it's people like you who insure A) I only visit, and B) our side will lose everything because (just like a cultist) you won't snap out of it of your own volition.
I'm exhausted with fools.
Do your worst, man, because that's all you've got,...
Crack, go read Troop's new reap what you sow post on his blog and ask yourself a few questions.
Ari, I'm well aware that this is a CR and not a budget. But defunding ObamaCare is no longer what the Republicans are seaking. Instead they're seeking to lift the Congressional exemptions (and perhaps the subsidies?) and they're looking for a one year delay on the individual mandate, to go with the one year delay on the employer mandate. Given that the Administration has turned the roll-out into a cluster-fuck, despite waiving so many of the provisions, this is a position that is defensible on grounds of both policy and politics.
Furthermore, the circumstances of the CR make it more imperative to fight. The Democratic Congress refused to pass a budget in 2010, despite having the votes. It was clearly a move to try and shield themselves from the political fallout of a deficit that was going to once again top one trillion dollars, when the deficit hawks were already having a field day running against them. As it turned out it wasn't enough to save Congressional Democrats control of the House.
Since then, the Dems have realized that by controlling two thirds of the process, they can get everything they want by pitching a hissy fit whenever the Republicans do NOT cave in completely. Thus we have had more than three years of government by crisis, and the Dems have no interest in ever passing a budget again. Why would they, when the Republicans in the House ALWAYS cave in and give the Dems everything they want?
In some ways, this is even better for the Democratic Party as a whole, since they're getting what they want and can then say that the reason everything isn't working is because of Republican obstructionism, even when it hasn't actually happened.
So it is time for the Republicans in Congress to actually make a stand. And they've chosen, pretty much by accident, a good position from which to fight: They're attacking unpopular provisions in an unpopular law, at a point in time when it is becoming apparent to everyone that isn't a lickspittle Democrat that this whole thing has been handled with an almost maximal amount of incompetence.
And if the Republicans aren't going to fight about this, what will they fight about, and when? Obama won the Presidency, but each of those Republican Congresshumanoids won their own elections, presumably to actually stand in some sort of opposition to Obama. It's time they did what they said they'd do, what they were ELECTED to do.
Finally, if the Republicans hold the line, then they can finally win SOMETHING. For the life of me, I am having trouble thinking of one important policy dispute they have won since winning back the House in 2010 and making Boehner Speaker. If they're not actually going to try and win, if they're not even going to force the Democrats to compromise on something where the Republicans have majority opinion on their side, then what good are they?
Ultimately, the only way to end this cycle of government by crisis is for the Republicans to actually win one of these fights instead of rolling over and playing dead on command. A return to an actual budget demands that Democrats have a reason to do so, and as long as they always win, they have no reason to do so. Win these two battles in the CR this time, and the next time this comes up, just supporting the status quo favors Republicans on at least two counts. Consequences of inaction can then start forcing all parties back to an actual budgeting process.
Crack, I came to the opinion that you're running a false flag operation on my own. And I've come to it much later than many other here have.
For the life of me I can't think of you ever writing anything positive about any Republican that isn't a RINO. (I include George W. Bush as a RINO, given his beliefs in an ever expanding government financed with ever increasing amounts of debt.) Perhaps it's just that you yourself are a RINO, but given your angry black man persona, I just don't buy it anymore. Seriously, blacks just don't vote for conservative.
And I have tried to read your blog from time to time. The white on black primary font, along with the endless array of pictures and changes in font-style, and especially the center justification (who does that for prose?) make it a very unpleasant reading experience.
But don't act like that's the only thing you write. I've been reading your comments on Althouse for years, and here since you showed up. It's not like you are an unknown quantity.
But both of those things seem like courtesies that I needn't have bothered with. You apparently aren't reading my comments here, at Althouse, or at any of the blogs I've written for over the years. (That would be one personal blog in two iterations, and three group blogs, as well as an abortive refugee camp for Althouse regulars, prior to everyone gathering at Lem's oasis. And thank God Lem got stuck being the popular kid!)
On all of those blogs, through all of those hundreds of thousands of words written, the only people who have ever accused me of being a Republican Party hack have been people who NEVER disagree with the Democratic party about anything, with two possible exceptions. One of those was Internet Ronin, aka Randy, who once got overly angry when, for a change, I was actually defending the Republican party on some issue. I'll assume that he was at least sincere in that belief in the heat of the moment, if not otherwise. He's dead now, so I can't ask where he stands on the isue now. You would be the other.
And in the last two years you seem to agree with the Democratic Party a helluva lot more than you agree with any Republican. So, that also weighs on my position regarding the sincerity of your stated beliefs. As foes the fact that you seem to be in complete agreement at the moment with ARM, phx, Ritmo and Inga that the only possible good thing the Republican Party can do right now is surrender to Obama on every issue, and then pick someone who can't possibly win any social conservative or small government conservative votes in 2016.
So, I can accept the fact that you are a Republican as you claim, or I can go with the weight of evidence and believe that you are a party-line Democrat, like at least 96% of blacks in the country. (I'm willing to bet that the few that don't vote party-line Democrat are mostly immigrants from places like the Bahamas.)
So at this point, I'm just assuming that you are completely insincere in your stated positions, because they make no sense otherwise.
it's all I've heard from you since I visited - and it's people like you who insure A) I only visit
No, it would be Lem who insures that you only visit. You're either a contributor, or a visitor. Everyone who isn't named
Pastafarian
Lem
Synova
deborah
Paddy O
Freeman Hunt
El Pollo Raylan
Palladian
Chip Ahoy
is a visitor.
...prior to everyone gathering at Lem's oasis.
Lem's place is like a caravanserai for weary travelers on their way someplace else. Lem is just the amiable innkeeper. Spinelli is the bounty hunter; Inga plays Maria Muldour.
Crack, go read Troop's new reap what you sow post on his blog and ask yourself a few questions.
Won't happen.
For all the accusations I get for being angry all the time, it's pretty easy to find stuf from me (both blog posts and comments) that isn't angry. I can't remember the last time I didn't get the angry black man treatment from reading Crack's comments, though surely such things exist.
He's not going to consider any other approach.
...
Incidentally, Crack was complaining about not getting the outflow of sympathy and cash that Palladian and Trooper got. Well, what has he ever shown anyone in return? I kicked in some money to the Trooper B'day/Get Well/Don't Die on Us fund. I did so because through the years Trooper has shown me kindness and some measure of regard. (He's also mocked me to the point of tears, but hey, he's from Brooklyn and doesn't understand us sensitive Florida boys.) I was looking for something out of an old post of mine the other day, the post I actually consider my best, and there was Trooper's name, first in the comment section. This was from 2008, and Trooper didn't know me all that well (not that we really know each other well now), but he took the time to read and comment on a post near and dear to my liver. (There was a lot of bile in that post.) He's been there for me, the least I could do was reciprocate.
It's one of many kind and generous gestures I've received online through the years. Some of them have been a bit overwhelming (I won't mention names, but if you're reading this you've made two such offers in the last year, and you were recently meeting with a mutual friend), offers that moved me deeply. Offers of friendship have been accepted and cherished. (I'm hoping to meet Annie Gottlieb again this winter, and RcommaI is another I hope to meet someday, preferably sooner rather than latter. I count both as friends in the real world.)
But Sweet Jesus, what has Crack ever offered to anyone other than vitriol? And I say that as someone with a reputation for being angry.
Well, the DOUR part is right, Chick.
Damn, I do get wordy when tired. (Been up since 4:30 this morning.)
It is incredible to me that Crack's views are considered beyond the pale, so to speak, on this web site. Crack is a lot closer to the thinking of mainstream Republican voters than most of his critics.
He is exactly the the kind of guy who should be welcomed with open arms into the party. He is definitely not a Democrat. The solipsism on display here is getting to be self-defeating.
"In the last two years you seem to agree with the Democratic Party a helluva lot more than you agree with any Republican."
Because I'm supposed to follow YOU over a cliff? What planet was Mitt Romney going to give me for that?
Why can't you admit you've been a fool "in the last two years" and no one with a brain would dare go with you? Look at you now:
You're cheering being at a Dead End!
Can it get any more delusional than that? My studies say "Yes!" You're just getting started! You will destroy every thing, and every one, as long as they're in arm's length. Sorry, but I won't stand by you.
You reap what you sow.
For me, it goes like this:
My Country and Party - that's me and you. If you don't want to play along, we'll watch the Party die together.
My people - that's me and blacks. And it's non-negotiable because (whoops!) sometimes you don't want to play along, and (whoops!) you're not too discriminate when you discriminate and I own a mirror.
Plus there's that whole Rap thing - I can't get enough of it.
Anyways, if that's too much for you to comprehend - as a Republican slave-freer - then there's not much I can do for you. Like Obama said, to much hilarious (white) confusion, I don't care about style points.
We will just have to watch the Party die together.
The country will survive without you - that's been it's unfulfilled promise to me for a long, long time.
Then I can listen to Rap in peace - with my friends.
I'll teach Aridog all the words,...
It is incredible to me that Crack's views are considered beyond the pale, so to speak, on this web site.
It's incredible to me that all the Dems here agree with Crack, and can't understand why conservatives find that repulsive. Seriously, no space between Crack and ARM at the moment.
He is exactly the the kind of guy who should be welcomed with open arms into the party. He is definitely not a Democrat. The solipsism on display here is getting to be self-defeating.
Thank you for your continuing concern.
Seriously, no space between Crack and ARM at the moment.
Isn't there an Urban Dictionary term for that? "reacharound"? "rusty trombone"? I don't keep up. Trooper knows all these terms.
El Pollo Raylan said...
Thank you for your continuing concern.
Just trying to be helpful ;)
We are all comrades here.
Icepick,
Okay, you stupid piece of horseshit, I've had enough of this.
Ah - these are the "negotiations" Obama is supposed to agree to, finally. Yeah, he's down for that.
I was very critical of Romney all through the election season last year, and have been critical of his positions HERE, on this site, in just the last couple of weeks. (To the point of El Pollo, for one, refusing to speak with me about politics.)
And how wrong can you get? The problem during the election wasn't Romney - it was the party being dumb enough to A) nominate him, and ) actually convincing themselves he could win. 100% magical thinking.
And now, you've been against Romney "in just the last couple of weeks"? That couldn't be because he's been calling this last move totally fruitcake, could it? (Being called a fruitcake, by a fruitcake, has to hurt.)
Did you really think you could float THAT ONE by me? I'm a news junkie, fool.
The fact that you can't get that, or refuse to get that, convinces me of your utter bad faith. So fuck you, Democrat. Have fun wrecking the country.
Yep, if we don't do exactly as you say - with your outstanding political track record in the last TWO YEARS - it'll be a catastrophe.
And again - these are the kind of "negotiations" you want, right?
And you seriously think ANYONE expects Obama to sit down for it? Really?
It's almost like YOU work for the Democratic Party now,...
Yep, if we don't do exactly as you say - with your outstanding political track record in the last TWO YEARS - it'll be a catastrophe.
Darrell Issa is my Congressman and he has gained exposure and increasing clout over the the last two years. He's a positive on the republican side.
LOL, there used to be a clown at Althouse who reminded me of ARM (Dead Julius?) because he relied on dead Greeks for avatar gravitas.
He thought I worked for Issa.
El Pollo Raylan said...
Darrell Issa is my Congressman and he has gained exposure and increasing clout over the the last two years.
You are pretty deep in the bubble on this one. Issa is broadly viewed as an incompetent joke. He certainly isn't viewed with terror by anyone on the left.
He certainly isn't viewed with terror by anyone on the left.
Glad to hear that because the left has become awfully glib in their use of "terror" and "terrorist" lately.
Icepick said...
Ari, I'm well aware that this is a CR and not a budget ... Instead they're seeking to lift the Congressional exemptions (and perhaps the subsidies?) and they're looking for a one year delay on the individual mandate, to go with the one year delay on the employer mandate.
As someone else said to me recently here, "I understand your frustration." However, a Continuing Resolution (CR), with a sunset date of 15 December, will accomplish none of those things. Not one of them.
I've tried in prior comments to explain the "detail" why of all this, more than once, here and elsewhere. I am too tired of the issue to do so again. Suffice it to say that it involves the Anti-Deficiency Act and obligations created, authorized by law, with prior appropriation, in place, for current and future delivery, prior to a new fiscal period.
I don't like the PPACA and want it gone. If there is consensus on providing subsidiized coverage to the indigent or even just stipulating pre-existing conditions cannot be exclusionary, then a new bill needs to be enacted after the PPACA is rescinded for the parts of it than can be, given that some contractural commitments are already in place...thus would require careful excision.
I support those in Congress who gave it the attention it should have gotten long ago, but I don't jump on flaming wagons as they roll off the cliff. The CR was going down in flames because the situation is what it is, period.
A good tactic, if they had a strategy at all, would have been to kick up a fuss, as they did, then without publicity, have shot that third CR back to the Senate clean as a whistle with gobbligook meaningless ammendments. Just shut their mouths and send it up...there is a chance Harry Reid might have just blocked it anyway out of habit or intrasigence. Then when discovered, the blame would clearly be on him.
Aridog,
"Just shut their mouths"
That's the thing - even doing nothing now would've been strategically bette, or even brilliant, because ObamaCare is such a mess. After (what has it been now?) 3/4 of a year of Republican made-up nonsense, grasping at any straw to wave in O's face - the "phony" scandals - we had him, finally, free and clear of doubts, and what do they do? Screw the pooch.
They didn't understand a simple rule of war:
When your enemy is falling down, get out of the way.
So, after FBP (two terms, BTW - thanks, Mitt) and "free" healthcare, now, WE have increases his stature even more in the history books, because they will add "slayed the Tea Party" to his list of accomplishments when this is over.
Quite the showing,...
The Republicans are terrified. Maybe I should stop there because that sums them up. In terms of this statist budget they are a party to, they're on board with the killing of sequestration because they are terrified to the point of paralysis at being smeared by the MSM as the bad guys should they stand there ground and bring on another government shutdown. So they surrender again in advance rather than fight.
Post a Comment