The Joy of Beck. Via Media Matters:
The Joy of Beck. Via Media Matters:
Mark LeVine writes at Al Jazeera:
A most modern and insane revolt
The following description, I believe, sums up what Egypt faces today as well as, if not better, than most:
“It is not a revolution, not in the literal sense of the term, not a way of standing up and straightening things out. It is the insurrection of men with bare hands who want to lift the fearful weight, the weight of the entire world order that bears down on each of us — but more specifically on them, these … workers and peasants at the frontiers of empires. It is perhaps the first great insurrection against global systems, the form of revolt that is the most modern and the most insane.
One can understand the difficulties facing the politicians. They outline solutions, which are easier to find than people say … All of them are based on the elimination of the [president].
All of Egypt was at fever pitch in anticipation that President Hosni Mubarak would resign in a televised speech this evening. Instead he refused to move and set himself up for massive conflict with a broad mass of Egyptians who want a real democracy in this large, civilized, educated but desperately poor country. What happens next is anyone’s guess. Al Jazeera continues to have the best coverage of any media service; here’s their latest report:
Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president, has refused to step down from his post, saying that he will not bow to “foreign pressure” in a televised address to the nation.
Mubarak announced that he had put into place a framework that would lead to the amendment of six constitutional articles in the address late on Thursday night.
“I can not and will not accept to be dictated orders from outside, no matter what the source is,” Mubarak said.
Reality telling-vision ‘talent’ shows, aside from being another hastily buffed facet of the bread and circus, alpha-wave inducing media trivio-sphere, also, I believe, serve to substantiate and maintain an ugly and inevitably destructive cultural and social paradigm.
The Celebritocrats lean over us from their polished pedestals, purporting to be our salvation, overseeing the next chosen one’s ascent into their domain, casting aside all those deemed unworthy to be stood before their vapid (pay no heed to the man behond the mirror) visage. How easily the discomforting pornography of schadenfreude that parades in the initial stages of these shows, seems forgotten; contestants disposed of, ‘deleted’, mercilessly and without recourse, culturally guillotined whilst the baying hoardes jeer and mock.
The first myth that these events promulgate is that of audience (electorate) participation in outcome, that is bolstered by the temporary feeling of belonging that comes from a large (in this case discomfortingly vicarious) social event.… Read the rest
Eric Cantona first achieved fame playing soccer for Manchester United and France. He was an extremely talented striker, but perhaps is best known for his flying kung fu-style kick at a heckling fan. That’s all in the past though, and Cantona has a new career as a budding indie film star. Apparently he’s also quite conscious of the fact that there’s not much liberté, égalité or fraternité in France or the rest of the world these days, and he knows just how to bring about another revolution: everyone should go to their bank and withdraw all their cash. The system would crash and, voilà, la Révolution! Here he is in an October interview explaining how it works:
Sharron Angle isn’t the only one talking about Second Amendment remedies. Ted Rall, author of The Anti-American Manifesto, appeared on MSNBC’s The Dylan Ratigan Show on Monday to talk about the need for radical change in order to turn the United States around. He said, “In The Anti-American Manifesto, I argue that violence is a last case scenario…. In terms of passive resistance, the American left has been very peaceful since the early ’60s and where has it gotten us?”
Profiled by Jane Mayer in the August 30 New Yorker, brothers Charles and David Koch are two libertarian billionaires who have been quietly funding the Tea Party and other anti-Obama campaigns:
“The Kochs operate oil refineries in Alaska, Texas, and Minnesota, and control some four thousand miles of pipeline. Koch Industries owns Brawny paper towels, Dixie cups, Georgia-Pacific lumber, Stainmaster carpet, and Lycra, among other products. Forbes ranks it as the second-largest private company in the country, after Cargill, and its consistent profitability has made David and Charles Koch—who, years ago, bought out two other brothers—among the richest men in America. Their combined fortune of thirty-five billion dollars is exceeded only by those of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett.
“The Kochs are longtime libertarians who believe in drastically lower personal and corporate taxes, minimal social services for the needy, and much less oversight of industry—especially environmental regulation. These views dovetail with the brothers’ corporate interests.
At least that’s what mega-bear Paul B. Farrell says, adding that it’s going to cost us a whole lot more than we’ve already lost, writing at Marketwatch:
“What’s distinctive about the Tea Party is its anarchist streak — its antagonism toward any authority, its belligerent self-expression, and its lack of any coherent program or alternative to the policies it condemns,” warns Jacob Weisberg in Newsweek. But why not three cheers for the Tea Party Express?
Admit it, something historic is brewing. And yes, it’s good for America, even the anarchy. Revolution is renewal. Tea-baggers want to take on both parties, “restore honor” and “take back the country.” Bring it on, the feeling’s mutual.
OK, maybe most Americans just silently mimic the words, “we’re mad as hell, won’t take it any more.” But watch out: After November the campaign’s shrill rhetoric explodes into action.
Tea-baggers are kicking the revolution into high gear.
This 12,000-word essay by Angelo Codevilla, “The Ruling Class–And the Perils of Revolution,” published in the conservative magazine American Spectator, has been so popular that Al Regnery is getting back into publishing to turn it into a full-length book (Regnery founded but no longer runs his eponymous and very successful right wing political imprint).
As over-leveraged investment houses began to fail in September 2008, the leaders of the Republican and Democratic parties, of major corporations, and opinion leaders stretching from the National Review magazine (and the Wall Street Journal) on the right to the Nation magazine on the left, agreed that spending some $700 billion to buy the investors’ “toxic assets” was the only alternative to the U.S. economy’s “systemic collapse.” In this, President George W. Bush and his would-be Republican successor John McCain agreed with the Democratic candidate, Barack Obama. Many, if not most, people around them also agreed upon the eventual commitment of some 10 trillion nonexistent dollars in ways unprecedented in America.
This article below is a sequel to my essay, “Defeating the New World Order and Creating a New Society That Allows Capitalists and Communists to Live Together in Peace After Establishing a New Constitution,” posted previously to disinfo.com.
Thomas Jefferson stated in the Declaration of Independence, “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government … to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
If you look at the Constitution of the United States, there is only one paragraph (Article V) that tells how we can change our government. But Article V only discusses how to propose and then ratify amendments. It does not say anything about the procedures to rewrite the entire Constitution. At their website, an organization called Friends of the Article V Convention has verified that there have been over 700 petitions for a constitutional convention from state legislatures, but Congress refuses to grant that right, which is an inherent right of “The People.” 
The Friends of the Article V Convention insist that the constitutional convention that is now demanded by the states, based on Article V, can be only for proposing amendments, not about rewriting the US Constitution. They want a constitutional convention to discuss any amendment issues (like requiring a balanced budget, term limits, and so forth) as they are submitted by the states–amendments which later must be ratified by ¾ of the states. Read the quote below from their website:
“Constitutional scholars agree that an Article V Convention is limited strictly and exclusively to proposing amendments to the Constitution, which must then be ratified by three-fourths of the states before taking effect. The Convention itself possesses no legislative or taxing authority: it can only debate, formulate, and propose amendments.”
Chief Justice Warren Burger  is a constitutional scholar who does not agree with the constitutional scholars above:
“…The convention could make its own rules and set its own agenda. Congress might try to limit the convention to one amendment or to one issue, but there is no way to assure that the convention would obey. After a convention is convened, it will be too late to stop the convention if we don’t like its agenda. The meeting in 1787 ignored the limit placed by the confederation Congress ‘for the sole and express purpose’.”
Organizations like the John Birch Society , the American Policy Center , and no doubt millions of other individuals, on the right, left, and in the middle are very fearful of a constitutional convention which has never been tried since the first one in 1787. Conservatives are sounding the alarm that a constitutional convention would take away the Bill of Rights (especially their gun rights), encourage abortions and euthanasia. Radicals on the left are also apprehensive about what conservatives might do at a constitutional convention. And apparently, for different reasons, the US Congress also dreads a constitutional convention, and refuses to turn over any power to the various states to either amend or abolish the constitution. Here is what the Constitution itself states:
Article 5.… Read the rest