Where’s Scott’s Organization? Sign of Weakness Should Encourage the Rogue Supporters
eb3-fka-ernie-boch-iii | Tue, Oct 2, 2012 4:56 PM EST
I think this is a good question. The Democratic party has a very impressive door-knocking operation underway. Anything comparable from Bob Maginn? Hello? Bueller? - promoted by david
Maybe that’s what caused the anxiety in his voice last night. He saw Scott Brown signs tied to fences. Not in hands like the scores of Warren sign holders.
Where are the fans from two years ago? What the hell is happening here? He’s a U.S. Senator and he can’t turn out the bodies for a simple pre-debate sign holding. Tim Murray could do this blind folded.
Where are the headquarters overflowing with volunteers. What about the canvassing and phone calls? What happened? What’s changed in two years? Why can’t Scott get it going?
There’s More… :: Discuss: 11 |
Before attempting to respond to the cerulæan nobility and gentry on their own elevated plane, Dr. Bones, allow me to wonder exactly whom His Blueship has in mind when he speaks of "Rogue Supporters."
Presumably H.B. does not mean us to think of the little lady from the BIG UNIVERSITY as any sort of roguess. But then, if Fabulous Fernie’s Charlie McCarthy be the ‘rogue’ in question, Eye and Paddy somehow got the impressin that His Blueship doesn’t think there are a whole lot of ’em to be found.
But that is by the way,
[0] This is he latest fresh addition to His Excellency’s formal style an’ neotitulary, which grows more
et cætera-worthy with every day that passes.
[1] All really SEVERE neocomradologists and Kremlinologists agree on that, I think, but there are free-lance amateurs with different notions. Over to
The Fehrnstrom Fishwrap, for example, of Louisedayhicksville-by-the-Sea in Massachusetts, kiddiecon journalists who did not care to sign their names took the position yesterday, 22 September 2012, that "Warren did not have a role ... but ... some contend she should have foreseen."
That pretty slice of tripe iillustrates how weekly standardizin’ and ever-a-new-criterium-mongerin’ can go wrong in the hands of less expensively instructed Party neocomrades. The nameless Fishwrappers took no precautions whatever against the obvious question how they themselves, or their Party, or their beloved AEIdeology, would like to be judged by "should have foreseen."
A particularizer might particularize this as follows: ¿May one legitimately deplore the shortsightedness of those who installed George XLIII Bush in 2000 or re-installed in 2004 without awareness that the Crawford Crash of 2008 would come of it? No tonsured slave of Fehrnstrom or lay denizen of LDHV will agree to that, needless to say, but if she is to maintain with any scrap of plausibility that failure to foresee, F2F, is O.K. when serviles an conserviles an neoserviles an Republicanines do it, -- "Hey, ¡give us a break!, nobody’s perfect." -- is nevertheless an unpardonable deficiency in liberals an democrats an "the Democrat Party." Also an above all in H*rv*rds.
[2] Cranbrook an’/or the H*rv*rd Victory School are scarcely likely to notice, let alone complain of, our flagrant barbarism. The trouble is that there seems not to be any obvious Attic word for the sort of verbal thing in which Demosthenes specialized:
rhetôrike is the name of the technique with which he did it, but the thing itself was nothing more notable than only another
logos. One cannot simply English that L-word, of course, because ’-ology’ is firmly established in our vernacular with a mening that has pretty well ceased to have any special connection with the oral-aural sphere.
*Cryptorator and *cryptoratoric(al) and *crytoration are about as campy as *camp can be. Which means that they are kinda fun as well as revoltingly spinachoid to every polished palate.
[3] His firstlordship bein’ a teatotalitarian personally, to call it that especially delights us who are SEVERELY hostile to NapkinThink.
Unfortunately most glossators of the Secret Speech have passed over the neococktail party as if it is not there. An honorable exception is
Mother Jones, she to whom the loot was fenced. In a list of
7 Highlights You Missed From the Romney Video the comradess mentions
Predicting easy dividends from his anticipated electoral victory: "…if we win on November 6th there will be a great deal of optimism about the future of this country. We’ll see capital come back, and we’ll see—without actually doing anything—we’ll actually get a boost in the economy."
There is a bit more to it than that, but MJ did at least catch that little self-exuberance, unlike the rest of the press pack.
Ideally, she should have gone on to point out how "without actually doing anything" reduces His Excellency’s hired handlers’ principal campaign strategy to nonsense. One does not need to go out and dig up a H*rv*rd Victory School MBA ’75 an’ Baincapper Extraordinaire in order to -- not actually do anythin’. (¡!) The late Perfesser Gangrenerich, or the Rev. Santorum, even Michele Baron Bachmaness itself, could undoubtedly manage a perfectly adequate King Log impersonation. If one is not interested to some extent in the King Stork side of Mittens, there is no good reason to be interested in him at all, unless maybe you are a relative or employee of the Serene House of Romneycare.
Moreover, His Excellency did not merely propose to DO nothin’ much. In a passage everybooby without exception seems to have overlooked, H. E. piously abstained from makin’ any of them risky predictions about the future: "If the president gets reelected, I don’t know what will happen. I can never predict what the markets will do. Sometimes it does the exact opposite of what I would have expected."
It appears that if one but pays the outrageous full tuition required by the former Allston (Massachusetts) Academy of Chirurgy and Haircut Science, one can master not only the art of "without really doing anythin" but also that of "I don’t know what will happen. I can never predict." Not a bargain to be refused lightly, that one.
Between this latest etch-a-sketch of Mittens the Economic Taoist, and the lingering economic consequences of Dubya (also HVS MBA ’75 -- ’twas a bumper crop that year), and the ineffable effusions of Niall Freelaird Fergusson, to name the Victory School personnel most in the public eye, HVS has quite a lot to be modest about just at present. No doubt American D*cl*ne Syndrome (Pat. Pend.) would be afflicting us in any case, but this sort of thing could lead to nasty rumours that the 02134 Victorians are actually in
favour of ADS(PP), doin’ their level (?) best to push us out the Window of Opportunity lest perchance we decide to try not to jump after all.
But it is still there, ¿is it not?, Senator Fehrnstrom’s organization?
(( fold here ))
Why, as you can see,
(( your massage will appear here ))
¡Paddy just [10/03/2012 03:43] linked to it meself with no trouble at all!
But seriously, Fabulous Fernie does seem to be campaignin as if The Fehrnstrom Fishwrap customer base were all his fair-haired little laddie needed, a preach-to-the-choir strategy which compels one at last to think that maybe Fernie is not quite as bestembright as he looked. In retrospect, one sees that natural, in context, comparisons with the Friends of Senator Coakley up on their Great Blue Hill, hard by the Palace of Public Tubavision, will have made Citizen Fehrnstrom look more like Nicky Mach or Thurlow Weed
(( Masters of Mass. Manipulation ))
than is strictly warrantable.
Dear Dr. Bones,
Paddy and Eye just spotted what must be the Pluperfect Warrenite, that is to say, a Blue Blazer in love with the little lady from the Big University
for precisely everything that makes her so cringeworthy, all the way down to le scientisme prétendu sociale. ¡"Affect Heuristic," for Pete's sake!
New poll has Warren up 43-38
oceandreams | Sun, Sep 30, 2012 9:06 AM EST
"MORE CHEROKEE" JUST SHOOK UP THE RACE. Or not. At least not yet. - promoted by charley-on-the-mta
Boston Globe poll conducted by University of NH shows Elizabeth Warren leading Scott Brown 43 to 38. Survey was conducted Sept. 21-27, so this was post-debate for all respondents but NOT post Tomahawk chop video for all respondents.
Oddly, the story on Boston.com calls this within the +/- 4.4% margin of error, even though they’re reporting a 5 percentage point difference. |
A Obama+Brown vote is basically nullification(3+ / 1-) View voters
A.) You support President Obama and you like most of his ideas and you would like to see Congress pass legislation he backs.
B.) You vote for a guy who wants to obstruct and block most of the legislation at the top of the President’s agenda.
So you want your Senator to work to nullify the good stuff the President that you support wants to pass? W.T.F. is the point?
tblade @ Sun 30 Sep 10:49 AM |
Tblade,(2+ / 0-) View voters
Without thinking it through some voters seem to have a “balance” fetish. They deliberately split their tickets because they consider themselves moderate because they fear our government will lurch too far to the left or right if Democrats or Republicans respectively hold all the power. Unfortunately, recent experience seems to show they might be right about Republicans, but Democrats tend to balance themselves out just fine. This theory of voting also assumes, erroneously these days, that both parties are interested in working together in good faith. Senator Brown has not proven himself to be the cure for this as he is too much a follower and not enough leader. His ad featuring Worcester Councilor Connie Lukes has her saying, “We need more Scott Browns” and theoretically that might work and voters I think long for that. Maybe things would be different if Scott Brown rather than Mitch McConnell were Senate Republican Leader, but alas for better or worse that is not the case.
christopher @ Sun 30 Sep 11:59 AM> |
Affect Heuristic(0+ / 0-) View voters
I am going to say basically what you said but in a different way.
People so strongly want to believe that they are politically “independent” and look down on people who tend to vote across party lines.
“I am an independent” > Scott Brown is an independent (his commercials and campaign repeatedly tell me so > I will vote for Scott Brown to prove my independence! > I will vote for both President Obama and Scott Brown to further reinforce in my own mind that I am independent.
The funny thing is that these types of “independent” voters seem to the same affect heuristic method that many people who identify as “Democratic” or “Conservative” use to pick their preferred candidates.
tblade @ Sun 30 Sep 2:24 PM |
Ad quos responduisset Patricius McTammany
One must hope, no doubt in vain, that "the Defect Heuristic" . . .
(( fold here ))
. . . happens whenever the epigones of Herr Prof. Dok. Talcott von Parsons undertake to settle the hash of volks not unlike themselves who get a major kick out of (ostensibly or ostentatiously) not looking down on othervolks.
Social Scientism being wertlos, I daresay they can do no other. Possibly, though, ¿They might occasionally stay home and do nothing at all? They could play canasta, perhaps, or charades, on Election Day with some of those self-thwarting heurists.
As Eye and Paddy should have expected, but culpably did not, Big LEW is a sucker for gunk like "heuristic affect." Not only do the Learnèd Elders of Wiki manage to expound the grand Begriff without the faintest hint of a snicker, they expound it as if it grows on trees, untouched by human thought. Certainly NOT invented or discovered by anybooby in particular at a particular time or place. "¡No history, please, we are self-scientisers!"
We who are not notice with delight (A) that High Prussian is the only other language in which LEW attempts to move this veddy, veddy up-market ideoproduct, and (B) even better, that before the paragraph wherein die Affektheuristik is defined winds, not especially weary, to the sea, the earnest customer has learned that Der Begriff und die grundlegenden Untersuchungen stammen von Paul Slovic. Who turns out to be only a Tert. Ed. Yank, but then, ¿What else could he be, flogging a horse like this one?
In any case, those who think in German rather than in HolyHomeland™ic are presumed to be geschichtefähig even by the nerdocracy. As with us Pseltic Tigers in non-academic matters, there is ag reat deal to be said for knowing FOR SURE that one belongs to an inferior subset.
Happy days.
_____
[1] (( notes ))
|
(( Concluding unscientific postscripts ))
Happy days.
--JHM
Title -- shortlink -- 09/30/2012 16:35 (( should be commented out ))
Dear Dr. Bones,
Should you ever feel tempted to think too highly of us human racists, sir, a quick look at Twitter ought to set you straight:
| At least 7 Warren signs stolen from yards in Scituate last night. Not just cowardly, also illegal.
|
Ad quem responduisset Patricius McTammany
‘Qui pauca considerat, facile pronuntiat’
(( fold here ))
The much-esteemed Blue Blazer gets far, far ahead of himself [1], and that on two fronts:
(A) Like many others of the nobility and gentry, and like pretty well everybody without exception down amongst the plebes and proles, His Worship supposes that the virtue of Courage to be somehow connected with thinking Worshipful thoughts, meaning that his political enemies need not apply. H. W. has presumably no idea WHO borrowed his like-minded neighbors ideological lawn decorations, all he knows for sure is WHY -- and even that conjecture could be mistaken, though this is admittedly most unlikely.
I daresay His Worship figures he can drag Lady Virtus into his partisanship on the basis that the danger of such a borrowing being interfered with either by the householders in person or by such secret- or public-sector police as the householders have engaged seems slight. Scituate being Scituate--$108,138.00 (2010)--the perps could rationally bet they would not collide with a huddle of trigger-happy gunclingers.
Had they been deliberately intendin to give their intrepidity a workoout, they could have stayed home at (let’s guess) Louisedayhicksville an amused themselves by prowlin the mean-spirited streets to collect mementoes of S. Philip Fratboy’s re-election campaign. Betcha the LDHV householders an/or Boston’s Finest would soon have put a stop to that caper!
It would not do formally to define virtus in a way that specifically invokes the Heroes in Blue [2] Nevertheless, anybooby who knows that her project might easily lead to a run-in with them is not to lightly diagnosed as a craven. The merits of the project have, of course, nothing to do with the case. Eye and Paddy doubt that even the Worshipful Nobility and Gentry would venture to insist on the contrary in the seminar room of a Prussian-style graduate school. Standards slip, however, when our Betters start thinking mostly with their thumbs.
One hopes, by the way, that H*rv*rd, at least, has banned nifty electronic playthings from the aforesaid seminar rooms. Tert. Ed. would do better to insist strictly on the technology of Century VIII-XV-LII-- the master to read out of his book and each student to listen attentively and wriite down her very own ktêma eis aiei, from which, eventually, her students . . . .--than to succumb to most of the more recent whizbangery. Paddy McTammany would draw the line right after the invention of the Xerox, though I am willing to haggle a little.
B. So much for ‘cowardly’. His Worship’s deployment of ‘illegal’ cannot be attacked root and branch, but it does displease a little at the margin.
One trouble is that what these perps did could very easily be represented, by your stick-at-nothing D*rsh*w*tz breed of defense shyster, as a form of ‘expression’ to which protection under Amendment I of the Fedguv Constitution ought to be extended at least as a courtesy, and preferably by a split decision from the Five of Nine. The slippery slope here is obvious enough: next thing you know, Paddy and Eye will be nabbed ‘borrowing’ goodvolks’ garden gnomes and idolatrous bathtubs under the pretext of engaging in Kulturkritik. Probably the best thing is to leave all that to the Zoning Board. But though that is easy to say, it is not easy at all to advise the august Zoners exactly how to proceed.
Worse, His Worship could be (but probably is not) deploying ‘illegal’ in the witless Planet Dilbert fashion: whatever the householders of Scituate or LDHV or Wherever Centre "do with their own property" is "nobody’s business but their own." They possess that absolute whight to "use, abuse and destroy" that Pipes Major attributed or misattributed to the mediæval civilians. To anybody who is at least as liberal and democratic as the late Comrade J. S. Mill this will be obvious tripe and baloney. To call it "self-regarding" when the neighbors of His Tweetship put up propaganda for Citizeness Warren in their front gardens that can be seen from a hundred metres off would be plumb dotty. They could have hung the damned things in the basement if their own private æsthetic appreciation had been the object of the exercise. Whatever taking them way may be, erecting them definitely was ‘expression’ under Amendment I. Even if D*rsh*w*tz, Esq., says so too, ¡Expression was it!
By Paddy’s lights, then, what the self-expressers have an absolute whight to is mostly contradiction. Trespassing is as illegal as petty larceny, but it might pass with us as legitimate civil disobedience to climb over the invisible fence and risk it with Fido the pitbull to (say) paint a moustache on the mug of the little lady from the Big University. Or, indeed, a feathered headdress.
Happy days.
____
[1] Our irrandomly chosen specimen of twattle comes from "Chris Matthews ?@chrismatth," whom we tentatively take to be an entirely different personage from the notorious MacL@@han-T@@ba virtuoso.
(( Might be kinda fun, though, if His Tweetship were only partially diferent from somebooby else. ))
|
Vice-Chair, Scituate Dems | Accountant/Organizer/Operative | Opinions here are my own, and a retweet is not an endorsement.
South Shore, MA · http://ChrisMatth.com
|
| [2] A different shade of blue, obviously, from that which identifies the Worshipful Nobility and Gentry, unjoo-bito, who dwell above the clouds on the upper slopes of the Great Blue Hill, hard by the Palace of Public Tubavision on Market Street in Bestembrighton MA 02135.
|
(( Concluding unscientific postscript goes here ))
Happy days.
--JHM
Dear Dr. Bones,
In the second most ever-immortal Secret Speech delivered since 1945,
(( fold here ))
Mittius Coriolanus Pompo, Demander of Apologies, Despiser of the Apologetic, Master of Seamus, Stepmaster to Rafalca,
(( Baincapper Extraordinaire, ))
Idiot Nephew of Nikita [0], &c. &c. &c. &c. &c., was both like unto and unlike his Bolshevik intellectual uncle. The great similarity, obviously, is that there was nothing really ’secret’ involved. Every elitist in the Party audiences at both Moscow and Hooverville knew more or less all about it before the cryptorhetor opened his mouth. The fresh revelation, such as it was, is that now high Party cadres were permitted to actually say what they had long thought.
To the assembled Hoovervillains, Nephew ’Mittens’ expounded what their freelordships had always thought, taking ’always’ in a political rather than astronomical sense. Uncle Nikita addressed insider ideobuddies who cannot, of course, have known about the crimes of the late Dzugashvili much before the late Dz. had got around to committing them. [1] But then the Party neocomrades’ daddies an’ grandaddies would not have been afraid to bark out boldly before the early 1930’s. In a rough an’ rugged-individualist way, the Great American Economic Adjustment of 1929-1941 and its sputnik, the Lesser Economic Adjustment of 2007-2XXX, might be paralleled with the sins of ’Stalin’. Beyond question, these two are the matters of record which neocomrades and comrades would most prefer to hush up in the path of their respective Parties. In both cases there was a time before any up-hushing was necessary. Not a recent time, yet not absolutely outside the memory of man either.
In both cases the prime motive for up-hushing amounts to "¡Please don’t anybody blame us innocent lambs who honcho the surviving Party!" The Greed of Gecko and the Purges of Dzugashvili were somebody else’s fault altogether. ¡Nothing to do AT ALL with the New Management Team! Of course in both cases the neomanagement is not significantly different in its personnel from the bad, or at least bad-looking, old palæomanagement. And in neither case is the remoter past disavowed: by what is presumably mere coincidence, Uncle Nikita and Nephew Mittens can even agree on a date for When Everything Went Wrong and History Turned into Bunk. The Great Readjusment began in October 1929; "Bukharin (sc., the last Old Bolshevik obstacle to le dzughachvilisme dans un seul pays) was ejected from the Politburo in November 1929."
Small world, ¿innit?
That date, however, is the wrong end of the shtyk for our purposes, being the far or trailin’ edge of the world’s bunkiness. More to our point is when the wrongness supposedly ended, when it became possible to make secret speeches about the wrongness but not yet desirable to thunder against it outside the Secret Sector and in particular the hire ranks of the Party. Uncle Nikita works from exactly 5 March 1953, naturally, secretspeechwise.
With Nephew Mittens, no such precision is possible. Pretty well everythin that has taken place in WhightGuard circles over the last degeneration has pointed towards His Mass. Excellency’s wickedly betrayed cryptoratorical exercise. [2] Moreover, America’s Otherparty did have its brief lucid or Early Reagan period, when what was "voodoo economics" both before an afterwards could be frankly avowed without too much risk of self-embarrassment. For the cryptoration of M. Coriolanus Pompo is what one might, if hostile, describe as "a speech writ on cocktail napkins." [3]
Happy days.
--JHM
|
|
In the second most ever-immortal Secret Speech delivered since 1945,
(( fold here ))
Mittius Coriolanus Pompo, Idiot Nephew of Nikita [0], Demander of Apologies, Despiser of the Apologetic, Master of Seamus, Stepmaster to Rafalca, Baincapper Extraordinaire, &c. &c. &c. &c. &c.
was both like unto and unlike his Bolshevik intellectual uncle. The great similarity, obviously, is that there was nothing really ’secret’ involved. Every elitist in the Party audiences at both Moscow and Hooverville knew more or less all about it before the cryptorhetor opened his mouth. The fresh revelation, such as it was, is that now high Party cadres were permitted to actually say what they had long thought.
To the assembled Hoovervillains, Nephew ’Mittens’ expounded what their freelordships had ALWAYS thought, taking ’always’ in a political rather than astronomical sense. Uncle Nikita addressed insider ideobuddies who cannot, of course, have known about the crimes of the late Dzugashvili much before Dz. had got around to committing them. [1] But then the Party neocomrades’ daddies an’ grandaddies would not have been afraid to bark out boldly before the early 1930’s. In a rough an’ rugged-individualist way, the Great American Economic Adjustment of 1929-1941 and its sputnik, the Lesser Economic Adjustment of 2007-2XXX, might be paralleled with the sins of ’Stalin’. Beyond question, these two are the matters of record which neocomrades and comrades would most prefer to hush up in the path of their respective Parties. In both cases there was a time before any up-hushing was necessary. Not a recent time, yet not absolutely outside the memory of man either.
In both cases the prime motive for up-hushing amounts to "¡Please don’t anybody blame us innocent lambs who honcho the surviving Party!" The Greed of Gecko and the Purges of Dzugashvili were somebody else’s fault altogether. ¡Nothing to do AT ALL with the New Management Team! Of course in both cases the neomanagement is not significantly different in its personnel from the bad, or at least bad-looking, old palæomanagement. And in neither case is the remoter past disavowed: by what is presumably mere coincidence, Uncle Nikita and Nephew Mittens can even agree on a date for When Everything Went Wrong and History Turned into Bunk. The Great Readjusment began in October 1929; "Bukharin (sc., the last Old Bolshevik obstacle to le dzughachvilisme dans un seul pays) was ejected from the Politburo in November 1929."
Small world, ¿innit?
That date, however, is the wrong end of the shtyk for our purposes, being the far or trailin’ edge of the world’s bunkiness. More to our point is when the wrongness supposedly ended, when it became possible to make secret speeches about the wrongness but not yet desirable to thunder against it outside the Secret Sector and in particular the hire ranks of the Party. Uncle Nikita works from exactly 5 March 1953, naturally, secretspeechwise.
With Nephew Mittens, no such precision is possible. Pretty well everythin that has taken place in WhightGuard circles over the last degeneration has pointed towards His Mass. Excellency’s wickedly betrayed cryptoratorical exercise. [2] Moreover, America’s Otherparty did have its brief lucid or Early Reagan period, when what was "voodoo economics" both before an afterwards could be frankly avowed without too much risk of self-embarrassment. For the cryptoration of M. Coriolanus Pompo is what one might, if hostile, describe as "a speech writ on cocktail napkins." [3]
Happy days.
--JHM
|
[0] This is he latest fresh addition to His Excellency’s formal style an’ neotitulary, which grows more
et cætera-worthy with every day that passes.
[1] All really SEVERE neocomradologists and Kremlinologists agree on that, I think, but there are free-lance amateurs with different notions. Over to
The Fehrnstrom Fishwrap, for example, of Louisedayhicksville-by-the-Sea in Massachusetts, kiddiecon journalists who did not care to sign their names took the position yesterday, 22 September 2012, that "Warren did not have a role ... but ... some contend she should have foreseen."
That pretty slice of tripe iillustrates how weekly standardizin’ and ever-a-new-criterium-mongerin’ can go wrong in the hands of less expensively instructed Party neocomrades. The nameless Fishwrappers took no precautions whatever against the obvious question how they themselves, or their Party, or their beloved AEIdeology, would like to be judged by "should have foreseen."
A particularizer might particularize this as follows: ¿May one legitimately deplore the shortsightedness of those who installed George XLIII Bush in 2000 or re-installed in 2004 without awareness that the Crawford Crash of 2008 would come of it? No tonsured slave of Fehrnstrom or lay denizen of LDHV will agree to that, needless to say, but if she is to maintain with any scrap of plausibility that failure to foresee, F2F, is O.K. when serviles an conserviles an neoserviles an Republicanines do it, -- "Hey, ¡give us a break!, nobody’s perfect." -- is nevertheless an unpardonable deficiency in liberals an democrats an "the Democrat Party." Also an above all in H*rv*rds.
[2] Cranbrook an’/or the H*rv*rd Victory School are scarcely likely to notice, let alone complain of, our flagrant barbarism. The trouble is that there seems not to be any obvious Attic word for the sort of verbal thing in which Demosthenes specialized:
rhetôrike is the name of the technique with which he did it, but the thing itself was nothing more notable than only another
logos. One cannot simply English that L-word, of course, because ’-ology’ is firmly established in our vernacular with a mening that has pretty well ceased to have any special connection with the oral-aural sphere.
*Cryptorator and *cryptoratoric(al) and *crytoration are about as campy as *camp can be. Which means that they are kinda fun as well as revoltingly spinachoid to every polished palate.
[3] His firstlordship bein’ a teatotalitarian personally, to call it that especially delights us who are SEVERELY hostile to NapkinThink.
Unfortunately most glossators of the Secret Speech have passed over the neococktail party as if it is not there. An honorable exception is
Mother Jones, she to whom the loot was fenced. In a list of
7 Highlights You Missed From the Romney Video the comradess mentions
Predicting easy dividends from his anticipated electoral victory: "…if we win on November 6th there will be a great deal of optimism about the future of this country. We’ll see capital come back, and we’ll see—without actually doing anything—we’ll actually get a boost in the economy."
There is a more to it than that, but MJ did at least catch that little self-exuberance, unlike the rest of the press pack.
Ideally, she should have pointed out how "without actually doing anything" reduces His Excellency’s hired handlers’ principal campaign strategy to nonsense. One does not need to go out and dig up a H*rv*rd Victory School MBA ’75 an’ Baincapper Extraordinaire in order to -- not actually do anythin’. (¡!) The late Perfesser Gangrenerich, or the Rev. Santorum, even Michelle Baron Bachmaness itself, could undoubtedly manage a perfectly adequate King Log impersonation. If one is not interested to some extent in the King Stork side of Mittens, there is no good reason to be interested in him at all, unless maybe you are a relative or employee of the Serene House of Romneycare.
Moreover, His Excellency did not merely propose to DO nothin’ much. In a passage everybooby without exception seems to have overlooked, H. E. piously abstained from makin’ any of them risky predictions about the future: "If the president gets reelected, I don’t know what will happen. I can never predict what the markets will do. Sometimes it does the exact opposite of what I would have expected."
It appears that if one but pays the outrageous full tuition required by the former Allston (Massachusetts) Academy of Chirurgy and Haircut Science, one can master not only the art of "without really doing anythin" but also that of "I don’t know what will happen. I can never predict." Not a bargain to be refused lightly, that one.
Between this etch-a-sketch of Mittens the Taoist, an’ the economic consequences of Dubya (also HVS MBA ’75 -- a bumper crop that year), an’ the ineffable effusions of Niall Freelaird Fergusson, as its personnel most in the public eye, the H*rv*rd Victory School has quite a lot to be modest about just at present. No doubt American D*cl*ne Syndrome (Pat. Pend.) would be happening in any case, but this sort of thing could lead to nasty rumours that the 02134 Victorians are actually in
favour of ADS(PP), doin’ their level (?) best to push us out the Window of Opportunity lest perchance we decide to try not to jump after all.
