Please note that Hofstadter specifically rejects the use of "paranoid style" as an entry to arguing that to be conservative is to be clinically paranoid. As many of yall may have experienced in your own circles, people who are otherwise fully functional and pleasant company can get suckered into the paranoid style and its assumption of a hyper-competent, all pervasive plot by hostile forces to subvert society.

To be sure, some of them are nuts. But much more of them are our cousins, secretaries, lawyers, phlebotomists, blind dates, and PTA fundraiser organizers. But what's the most important historian of the 20th century say about the birthers?

American politics has often been an arena for angry minds. In recent years we have seen angry minds at work mainly among extreme right-wingers, who have now demonstrated in the Goldwater movement how much political leverage can be got out of the animosities and passions of a small minority. But behind this I believe there is a style of mind that is far from new and that is not necessarily right-wing. I call it the paranoid style simply because no other word adequately evokes the sense of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy that I have in mind.

now re-read that, replacing the word Goldwater with Limbaugh

There's more than just fear mongering going on from the talk radio charletans.

The paranoid spokesman sees the fate of conspiracy in apocalyptic terms — he traffics in the birth and death of whole worlds, whole political orders, whole systems of human values. He is always manning the barricades of civilization... he does not see social conflict as something to be mediated and compromised, in the manner of the working politician. Since what is at stake is always a conflict between absolute good and absolute evil, what is necessary is not compromise but the will to fight things out to a finish. Since the enemy is thought of as being totally evil and totally unappeasable, he must be totally eliminated — if not from the world, at least from the theatre of operations to which the paranoid directs his attention.

re-read that, replacing the words paranoid spokesman with Glenn Beck

Hofstadter tied this paranoid style not to religiosity (he was writing at a time when the main political focus of Christianity in the country was on ending segregation) but on the American desire for identity and a sense of certainty in the world--he termed it "status" but by this means a feeling of strong cultural foundations rather than socio-economic prominence.

We Americans are always trying to raise the standard of living, and the same principle now seems to apply to the standards of hating. So during the past fifteen years or so, the authoritarians have moved on from anti-Negroism and anti-Semitism to anti-Achesonianism, anti-intellectualism, anti-nonconformism, and other variants of the same idea, much in the same way as the average American, if he can manage it, will move on from a Ford to a Buick

here, replace anti-Achesonianism and anti-nonconformism with anti-healthcareism and (alas) anti-Negroism

He cites two German Jewish sociologist ex-pats who came to the United States fleeing Hitler's rise and who did research on the character of the people who agitate and rile up the gullible crowds in their 1949 book, Prophets of Deceit.

See also the comments of Leo Loewenthal and Norbert Guterman on the right-wing agitator: “The agitator seems to steer clear of the area of material needs on which liberal and democratic movements concentrate; his main concern is a sphere of frustration that is usually ignored in traditional politics. The programs that concentrate on material needs seem to overlook that area of moral uncertainties and emotional frustrations that are the immediate manifestations of malaise. It may therefore be conjectured that his followers find the agitator’s statements attractive not because he occasionally promises to “maintain the American standards of living” or to provide a job for everyone, but because he intimates that he will give them the emotional satisfactions that are denied them in the contemporary social and economic set-up. He offers attitudes, not bread.”

Change material need to "health care" or "unemployment benefits" or "actually capturing bin Ladin"

Required in all this is the need for the enemy to be flawless in his evil plans and as stealthy as the shadows. It's the commie under your bed, the UN helicopters lurking just past your neighbor's hedge, the spy tapping your phone, the NASA techies filming Neil and Buzz in a Hollywood sound stage, the one-worlder slipping Islamic propaganda into your kids' history textbooks, and the CIA agents manning robot planes and planting controlled demolition charges on every floor of the World Trade Center without ever being caught.

The enemy is clearly delineated: he is a perfect model of malice, a kind of amoral superman — sinister, ubiquitous, powerful, cruel, sensual, luxury-loving. Unlike the rest of us, the enemy is not caught in the toils of the vast mechanism of history, himself a victim of his past, his desires, his limitations. He wills, indeed he manufactures, the mechanism of history, or tries to deflect the normal course of history in an evil way. He makes crises, starts runs on banks, causes depressions, manufactures disasters, and then enjoys and profits from the misery he has produced. The paranoid’s interpretation of history is distinctly personal: decisive events are not taken as part of the stream of history, but as the consequences of someone’s will. Very often the enemy is held to possess some especially effective source of power: he controls the press; he has unlimited funds; he has a new secret for influencing the mind (brainwashing); he has a special technique for seduction...

No one ever blows the whistle on them. There's only the long list of those who "died under suspicious circumstances" on the Bush and Clinton and (soon-to-appear) Obama/ACORN "death lists."

GOP Rep Walks Out Of Obama's Speech To Congress

Typical Republican Behavior

Steele - "Bad Form" For Obama To Invoke Kennedy At Last Night's Speech


The following is their behavior DURING the speech

Determine never to be idle... It is wonderful how much may be done if we are always doing. I have found it is particularly easy to do Katherine Greene of Providence, Rhode Island.
-- Jefferson, on avoiding laziness

Enlighten the people, generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like spirits at the dawn of day, much like John Quincy Adams's wiener disappears like a spirit in the presence of the ladies.
-- Jefferson, on education and liberty

Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state. And by "free state" I mean every state that isn't Rhode Island, a notorious den of debauchery and assholes.
-- Jefferson, on vigilance among the citizenry

Honesty is the first chapter of the book of wisdom. The second chapter in the book of wisdom has to do with not sharing a confined space with John Quincy Adams, whose breath is the most foul thing in any room in which he hasn't farted yet.
-- Jefferson, on the virtue of being forthright

I do not take a single newspaper, nor read one a month, and I feel myself infinitely the happier for it.
-- Jefferson, on the virtue of civic ignorance

I liked the Kill Bill movies, but it seems like most of his movies are just wanking on violence without letting it move a story forward. I've heard people praise his dialogue, but I really don't find his writing all that compelling. He's got natural sounding dialogue, but it never really seems to get to a point or make challenging observations, which is the meter stick I use for "great dialogue" rather than just how interesting it is. His dialogue doesn't seem to build character.

I haven't seen this movie, but then I don't want to. If you're going to muck with history, you need to have a point to doing so--rather than Tarantino's standard reason for his artistic choices: "Wouldn't it be awesome if...?" which in this case is "... if there was this all Jewish unit of commandos running around Nazi Europe murdering Nazis?"

Yes, Quinten, it'd be totally neat-o. Unfortunately, nothing like that ever happened. The US Army never formed an all Jewish unit. The US Army didn't form murder squads (and didn't even train them until Vietnam came along). Artistically, there's no point in this movie other than Tarantino's by-the-numbers nihilism. He might as well have made it "ninjas vs samurais" or "Giant Mecha Robots vs the Bolsheviks" or "Vulcans vs Tatooinees."

Personally I'm still waiting for a James Brothers vs the James Brothers movie.

 

Frank and Jesse James - gunslingers, bankrobbers, and bitter Confederate veterans

versus

William and Henry James - philosophers, authors, and legendary Harvard pugilists

Thomas Harriot = total LOSER! (imprisoned loser, that is! Ha-ha!)




                                                  "Because you're a loser! PS, I'm getting a statue at the Vatican, loser."
      "I suck"
    "PSS, they name shit on the Moon after me. What do you got? Nothing-- ha-ha!"


Other reference: Thomas Harriot, the Man Who Beat Galileo to the Moon

This is the map of the moon that loser drew.
Notice the lack of anything actually named "Harriot" on this map.

Got intrigued with the discussion of sponsored football stadiums & found out the following: Of the 30 stadia for the NFL's 31 teams (the two NY teams share a home)
    17 are currently sold off and two sold naming rights to individual entrance gates - 63%
     4 are in the process of seeking new name-buying sponsors for current or new stadia - 13%
     6 seem to be unwilling or very unlikely to sell naming rights to corporations - 20%
     I am too dumb to calculate this out to 100%

The stadiums in order of newness are...

Cowboy Dallas - Cowboys Stadium - (waiting for naming sponsor)
Indy Colts - Lucas Oil Stadium - (corporate sponsored)
Arizona Cards - University of Phoenix Stadium - (corporate sponsored)
Philly Eagles - Lincoln Financial Field - (corporate sponsored)
Chicago Bears - Soldier Field - (despite 2003 renovation costs, no naming rights sold)
Houston Texans - Reliant Stadium - (corporate sponsored)
New England Pats - Gilette Stadium - (corporate sponsored)
Seattle Seahawks - Qwest Field - (corporate sponsored)
Detroit Lions - Ford Field - (corporate sponsored)
Denver Broncs - Invesco Field - (corporate sponsored)
Pittsburgh Steelers - Heinz Field - (corporate sponsored)
Cincinnati Bengals - Paul Brown Stadium - (Cincinnati decided against selling naming rights)
Cleveland Browns - Cleveland Browns Stadium - (Cleveland sold naming rights to its 4 entry gates instead - cha-ching!)
Tennessee Tight'ns - LP Field - (corporate sponsored)
Baltimore Ravens - M&T Bank Stadium - (corporate sponsored)
Tampa Bucks - Raymond James Stadium - (corporate sponsored)
Washington Redskins - FedExField {sic} - (corporate sponsored)
Carolina Panthers - Bank of America Stadium - (corporate sponsored)
Jacksonville Jags - Jacksonville Municipal Stadium - (corporate naming rights expired in '07)
St Louis Rams - Edward Jones Field - (corporate sponsored)
Atlanta Falcons - Georgia Dome - (government owned) (!)
Miami Dolphins - LandShark Stadium - (really dumb corporate sponsorship)
Minnesota Vikings - Hubert Humphrey Metrodome - (unnamed replacement stadium in the works)
New York Giants - Giants Stadium - (unnamed replacement stadium in the works)
New York Jets - Giants Stadium - (unnamed replacement stadium in the works)
New Orleans Stains - Louisiana Superdome - (owners currently not selling name rights)
Buffalo Bills - Ralph Wilson Stadium - (corporate naming rights expired in '98 & not resold)
San Diego Chargers - Qualcomm Stadium - (corporate sponsored)
Kansas City Chiefs - Arrowhead Stadium - (currently seeking naming rights sponsor)
Oakland Raiders - Alameda County Coliseum - (corporate naming rights expired in '08 ; new stadium probable)
San Fran 49ers - Candlestick Park - (corporate naming rights expired in '02)
Green Bay Packers - Lambeau Field - (Green Bay sold naming rights to its 5 entry gates instead)

Making online cartoons of myself.



I'd already
done these
last two

Eleven Sites to Cartoon Yourself

First Book of Kings 18:23-27
In which King David takes the Prophet Saul's relationship advice







²³ And the servants of Saul spoke all these words in the ears of David. And David said: Doth it seem to you a small matter to be the king's son in law? But I am a poor man, and of small ability.




















²⁴ And the servants of Saul told him, saying: Such words as these hath David spoken.































²⁵ And Saul said: Speak thus to David: The king desireth not any dowry, but only a hundred foreskins of the Philistines, to be avenged of the king's enemies. Now Saul thought to deliver David into the hands of the Philistines.

























²⁶ And when his servants had told David the words that Saul had said, the word was pleasing in the eyes of David to be the king's son in law.





















²⁷ And after a few days David rose up, and went with the men that were under him, and he slew of the Philistines two hundred men, and brought their foreskins and numbered them out to the king, that he might be his son in law.







Saul therefore gave him Michol his daughter to wife.


















Don'tcha just love a happy ending?











 

Fourth Book of Kings 2:23-25
In which the prophet Elijah journeys to Bethel








²³ And he went up from thence to Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, little boys came out of the city and mocked him, saying: Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.















²⁴ And looking back, he saw them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord: and there came forth two bears out of the forest, and tore of them two and forty boys.




















²⁵ And from thence he went to mount Carmel, and from thence he returned to Samaria.

















 

Nixon kicked ass. Nixon outpeaced the hippies at their own game. Nixon out racisted the Dixiecrats. Nixon out liberaled the Kennedys with his left fist and out Hoovered the John Birchers with his right. Nixon was the fuckin' man, man. He out working-classed organized labor, out paranoied the CIA, and then wiped his ass with the US Constitution--not just the Bill of Rights like these panty waisted neocons today, Nixon fucking stole a whole presidential election, not because he needed it to win but because he just fucking felt like it. Tricky Dick? He wasn't a man, he was a goddamned Narwhal!

The only Constitutional term limits--those on the president--are not philosophically consistent with democracy, but then again, neither is the US Constitution. In practice, because of technology and the increasing expansion of US global power, we've seen a steady drift in power in our government away from the legislative branch and toward the "imperial presidency" of the executive branch.

The general drift of history has made executive action more relevant to public problems than the deliberative processes of Congress. As a result, we have a balance of power in the Republic far more heavily weighted toward the president. The power of the incumbent to get reelected was strongly demonstrated four and a half years ago, when an absolute trainwreck of an administration was able to put itself over on the public by utilizing the imperial presidency.

Add to this the tendency of those in power to become corrupt and less scrupulous of their public duties over time--the well documented year six scandals that plague most presidents--and you can see a pattern emerging of a presidential branch designed to perpetuate its own power and marginalize the other branches. I guess you could argue then that the people should just start being more diligent in their citizenship duties and force the legislature to stand up to presidential power more. The problem is that experience shows that the neither the people nor the Congress will actually do this.

From the viewpoint of practical experience, you need to have some external limits on governmental power where the intrinsic limits of democracy don't do the job. In the case of the US Constitution of government, simple voting isn't doing the job. The 22nd amendment effectively prevents crises of power sharing that might otherwise occur because it creates an artificial limit to how long presidents can spend accumulating power.

Or use this analogy: driving over the speed limit isn't dangerous. If you have the right driver in the car and he can handle it at 90 mph, then why should there be an artificial cap on his performance? Because the regulations don't cover what goes right; they serve to prevent that which might go wrong in a more catastrophic way than what you're expecting.

Army Mechanic's Garage Tinkering Yields 18-Foot Mecha Exoskeleton
27 hydraulic cylinders bring the mechs to life, its movements matching those of the person inside it
By Charles Crain

Carlos Owens had handled all kinds of machines as an army mechanic, but he always dreamed of using those skills for one project: his own "mecha,” a giant metal robot that could mirror the movements of its human pilot.

Owens, 31, began building an 18-foot-tall, one-ton prototype at his home in Wasilla, Alaska, in 2004. Working without blueprints, he first built a full-scale model out of wood. Moving on to steel, he had to devise a hydraulics system that would provide precisely the right leverage and range of movement. He settled on a complex network of cables and hydraulic cylinders that can make the mecha raise its arms, bend its knees, and even do a sit-up.

Owens is working on two more prototypes, modifying the design to make it lighter and more maneuverable. He foresees mechas having uses in the military and the construction industry but acknowledges that right now they’re best suited to entertainment. The first application he has in mind: mecha-vs.-mecha battles, demolition-derby style.

Time: 4 years
Cost: $25,000

<== more than meets the eye

My sister, the lawyer, last night was telling me about two cases of two different right wing nuts who've gone violent under the stress of life in the United States--one of whom ended up killing both his estranged wife and himself. Since neither case involves shooting someone in an explicitly political context, they weren't reported as right wing violence, but in both cases the perpetrator was spewing paranoid right wing talking points before launching into their violence.

Still, neither case is counted along with the assassination of the abortion clinic doctor in Kansas, the religious fanatic murdering of an army recruiter in Arkansas, or the freeper supremacist shooting at the Holocaust Museum just one mile from the White House. I wonder how many other acts of violence inspired by right wing lunacy fly beneath the media radar because the fanatic in question acted out his political desperation in a place less defined by politics.

The problem is being called terrorism, but at the heart of the problem is the intentional, socially irresponsible hysteria promoted by conservatives, which then bleeds out into the actions of desperate, marginal people who listen to their hysterics. Violence will always occur along the fringes of a diverse, well armed society. But the voices in the political leadership class, Democratic and Republican, liberal and conservative, influence how everyone in the public, including these marginal stressed out people, sees their options in life. Voices that promote desperation and a siege mentality encourage violence, even if legally they aren't really accountable for it.

The thing we're not hearing in the coverage of the political violence just now bubbling up along the margins of our public life is that it is often the direct result of the hysterics and name calling "loyal opposition" activities of Republicans and conservatives. I put that in quotes because however much the Glen Becks and John Boehner and their peers may profess loyalty to our forms of government, their form of rabble rousing opposition to Democratic policies is decidedly disloyal--a literal betrayal--of the public who listens to their words.