A skeptical leftist's, or post-capitalist's, or eco-socialist's blog, including skepticism about leftism (and related things under other labels), but even more about other issues of politics. Free of duopoly and minor party ties. Also, a skeptical look at Gnu Atheism, religion, social sciences, more.
Note: Labels can help describe people but should never be used to pin them to an anthill.
As seen at Washington Babylon and other fine establishments
The "3P" agency, which touts the value of private-public partnerships (hence the shorthand) on things like government developed/based/organized construction projects and such, puts out a weekly e-newsletter, "Texas Government Insider."
Well, late last year, it announced that the feds approved Texas' state installment of the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Plan, part of Climatemonger Joe's plan to build out EV charging stations on critical interstate highways across the nation in federal-state partnerships, then expand beyond that to other highways.
Then, after some silence, it had an update mid-summer.
Then, nothing.
Including not telling readership that the 80-20 federal-state match will involve ZERO state dollars. That's from TxDOT's own mouth. The story's linked story about how to apply for state grants (which are replacing direct state dollars) is about an Oct. 13 deadline to apply for grants. (I wrote this piece before then.
Never saw that process mentioned in the initial story. Businesses in smaller counties that are interested might have liked to have known that. I learned that by looking for more info on TxDOT's website about new projects by its Rail Division (and saw no stories); TGI's piece just said "North Texas" without more details.
And, my title, without the screaming all-caps header, is because it was eight months ago that Sy was apparently red-pilled (and trying to red-pill others) half-willingly due to possible ax-grinding, and perhaps that ax-grinding not all his own. And, per a set-up piece a week ago, as Sy showed inwriting about Osama bin Laden and Abbottford, his aa-grinding is nothing new.
As for the details? I still stand by the idea of ax-grinding, and I still think the Navy Seals are Sy's most likely target. That willingness to ax-grind lets him be red-pilled as far as the big picture, and fed enough erroneous information that the #BlueAnon wing of Nat-Sec Nutsacks™ can not only mock him for everything he gets wrong but use it to deny US involvement.
In all likelihood, it just may have been the Seals who did this.
There's no way we've uptrained a Ukrainian team that much; the yacht idea comes off as something else floated out there as a distractor. Russia wouldn't cut its own throat. Germany might be able to pull this off, unlike Ukraine, but wouldn't have actually done so without a US sign-off.
So, that leaves Merikkka, only in a much less complicated way.
Whoever Hersh's source is could have fed him some deliberately contaminated information, knowing he'd run with it, get mocked not only by the Nat-Sec Nutsacks™but the Op-Sec type world in general, even if not nutsacks, and beyond that, leftists like me and Jeff St. Clair for how much he had wrong, thus getting the MSM to laugh and to buy the government line that Russia did it.
Reality? This is yet another case of my non-twosiderism within the left political world. I think transgenderism and transsexualism are not the same, but, at the same time, saw how the Georgia Green Gang was willing to partner with antisemites and others, and I called in 2021 for a pox on both houses. (The GaGP, now the former such, booted me from a dissidents' email list.) At the third time, the "Lavender Greens" are home for full-on nutters like Cynthia BrianKate fulfilling every bad well-known "woke" stereotype and some others not well-known.
No proof of the charge was cited in the tweet, and out in the sticks, I don't follow Denton Greens as they're not on Twitter. And, the state party website has nothing but an advance calendar listing and no discussion of actions taken. Way to keep people informed!
And, I also think Texas Greens, via the national party, sound lackadaisical with the "we have ballot access through 2026."
You had all of three candidates in 2022. For 2024, Cornel West wasn't breaking 2 percent if he was on the GP ballot and of course, he's gone now. Neither is any Green in the US Senate race. No state executive offices will be on the ballot in 2024. That leaves state Supreme Court and CCA races plus a Railroad Commission slot. And, from 2018 on, Greens have been AWOL on judicial runs.
Now that the man is running as an independent (good-bye, good luck, and you're not getting my vote, in all likelihood), what's up for Greens?
At the time of West's announcement, Jill Stein, with full link to long Tweet here,
said she and Ajamu Baraka, her 2016 Veep
candidate, are beating the bushes for more candidates, presumably seeing
the lackluster crop otherwise. (Sorry, but it's true, other Green prez
candidates.) Other former candidates would include Howie Hawkins, I'm
sure. I doubt she will. Maybe Baraka seeks the top spot?
Peter Kalmus, this year's national convention speaker, would be interesting. He's hardcore on climate issues, the GP's original core. But, AFAIK, he's a one-note trumpet. Where's he stand on labor? Russia-Ukraine? Palestine?
Given where she was at in becoming a fuller antivaxxer
even before the start of COVID, and other issues at that link, I hope she doesn't dive deeper in that tank in the candidate hunt.
It would be nice not to have an AccommoGreen (she was, based on the targets of her 2016 recount
and her non-explainer for why she chose those states, contra her
defenders) as his advisor, given that he first considered the MPP, not
Greens. Ditto on not having someone who believed the #Russiagate claim of a rigged election. Or her blowing money on insider lawyers for the recount. (Maybe, per that link, Cornel wants her donor list.) Or the lack of transparency on that.
Riffing on Mark Lause, I thought
the party had pretty much cracked up after 2016. In 2020, with
"libertarian Greens" trying to run Jesse Ventura through the back door
with their stalking horse, Dario Hunter, playing the race card and more,
it probably went the rest of the way there. Here in Tex-ass, if my math
is correct on the calendar and David Bruce Collins' is not, the Greens
have to get signatures if they don't get 2 percent on a statewide race
next year and that ain't happening. And, no, Cornel, don't choose
Margaret Flowers to replace Stein; per Greg AtLast, we need to get
beyond that GP factionalism.
And, indeed, this piece at Salon
notes exactly those problems. And more. As far as lack of local-level
elected candidates, yes, per Greens, a prez candidate draws people and
money. But, a Green-denominated mayor of a California city says he never
hears from Green state- or national-level people. (Other than to put
his name on a website, I'm sure.) This does become a circular problem.
But, as the piece notes, after Stein 2012, the party had a chance to
address some of these issues, with bits of momentum it had. And it
didn't.
For that matter, contra Jeff St. Clair's buzziness about
St. Ralph of Nader, which in 2004 was partially but not entirely true re
the national GP convention, where was Ralph doing more heavy lifting on
national party organization that might trickle down better? And, also
as noted by me, Ralph pledged to run a "safe states" strategy in 2000 — and of course didn't. Maybe some Greens were gun-shy?
Update, Oct. 26: With Daou out as West's campaign manager, citing PTSD over Gaza, some people are asking for him to return to the GP, many insinuating Daou was wrecking his campaign.
First, to that nuttery, I replied:
Actually, Cornel West was, and is, doing a damned good job destroying his own campaign. It was his own idea to leave the GP, after he was dumb enough to start with the Movement for a People's Party.
As for him coming back, or the GP taking him back?
It would be a sign of desperation for Cornel West to go back to the Green Party with Peter Daou out, if his demands weren't met, and a sign of desperation by the Green Party to agree to meet them.
Lufkin Legiscritter Trent Ashby is begging voters to support growth for growth's sake (much of the Texas "economic miracle" along with Ill Eagles and earl), the theology of the cancer cell. Here's what growth for growth's sake does to Texas nature.
The oily Railroad Commission in general and Jim Wright in particular are giving the public one month to comment on rules they've been creating in secret for two years. The REAL problem, per the Trib piece, is there is no federal standard on oilfield waste.
Off the Kuff brings the news about a wingnut freakout over a housing development in Liberty County. (This is part of Strangeabbott's special session call.)
I hate the death penalty, but, re the Observer's story about people seeking clemency for a man on death row, and especially re the headline, what's being Jewish got to do with it? Per the body of the story, what's being religious in general got to do with it?
The Observer then talks about Wallbuilder Joe, but doesn't suggest the possibility of voting Green or Cornel West if he's on the ballot. Actually, it's by Truthout originally, which doesn't talk about voting options nationally. Nor does the story author ask the Center for Biological Diversity spox if THEY have done a duopoly exit. "Shockingly," #BlueAnon Off the Kuff has nothing to say about Wallbuilder Joe.
Nonetheless, Warmonger Joe, and more explicitly, background allies, are of course trying to keep all non-duopoly candidates off the ballot.
(Shades of Hillary clearing the GOP field for Trump in 2016, eh?) More
than Bob Jr. and West, the focus for now is No Labels. Shock me that
Marc Elias is there on law work, or Reid Hoffman on money.
Shingles? Painful but not deadly. TB? Kills more than 1 million a year globally. Shingles? Bothers people without bigger worries in life in the US. TB? If it does kill Americans, they're in the underclass. So, GlaxoSmithKline, with the chance to do right or make more money? Chose to make more money with a shingles vaccine rather than a TB one.
Here's the semifinalists in this year's state fair food competition.
Last week, Independent Political Report ran a piece about former Michigan Congresscritter Justin Amash's announcement that he was removing himself from consideration for the 2024 Libertarian Party presidential nod. (Some people tried to push him for that in 2020, shortly after he announced he was no longer a Republican, but he demurred on grounds that might help Trump. Why he thought it would help Trump instead of Biden, I don't know.)
Anyway, in response to a mix of his first paragraph talking about right-libertarianism and his last graf talking about how the Libertarian Party needs to be "Libertarian-lite," I commented:
Innnteresting, starting with his comments on where he aligns within today’s LP factions or branches, while, at the end, he seems to fully endorse “Libertarian-lite,” as in Gary Johnson. Just a bit self-contradictory?
To which, X (a recent anonymous commenter on another blog post here) said:
Perhaps SG is having difficulty grasping this because he equates right libertarianism with extremist posturing. Actually, libertarianism is not intrinsically left or right, so left and right leaning libertarianism is a separate scale from pragmatism vs extreme posturing. Amash unsurprisingly reveals that he’s a right leaning pragmatist within the LP internal debates. That’s exactly where I expected him to be.
To which I replied:
X, it’s not incumbent on me to mind-read Amash if he doesn’t make himself clearer, especially vis-a-vis Libertarian issues of the last couple of years on certain social issues.
One could also argue, with small “l” vs capital “L” and the US an outlier in general, that whatever the term might mean, there’s a diff between right-libertarianism and right-Libertarianism. Or that, in the US, right-libertarianism may not be the same as right-libertarianism abroad.
And, this post is follow-up to that.
If I were to try to mind-read Amash, I’d venture that he was trying to distinguish right-libertarians from paleo-libertarians, to use normal political science labels and groupings.
Second, I’ll charitably assume X doesn't think that left-libertarians are a significant portion of the Libertarian Party and ditto for Amash. Left-libertarianism *outside the US* is
generally still a non-capitalist, if not even somewhat anti-capitalist,
stance. And, it's not even close to a significant portion of small-l libertarianism in the US, "libertarian Greens" of 2020 trying to nominate Jesse the Body Ventura via a back door aside.
To tie this back to Amash, as an ex-Republican (and per one other commenter on the IPR piece, not a very active Libertarian from 2020 on), he should know that, speaking beyond an LP-only audience, given people who know him as a former Republican, to distinguish carefully.
That said, per point two, per standard political science, yes, libertarianism has a “right” and a “left.” Many Europeans who would be classified as "libertarian" are left-libertarian; even those who are right-libertarian aren't like US libertarians in general, whether LP libertarians or not. In fact, most European libertarians either laugh or sneer at the US version of the political philosophy. (Wikipedia also has a piece on "libertarian socialism," a label I once
considered trying to use to describe myself, but, because of US
libertarianism, and then the "libertarian Greens" reflecting US
libertarianism more than European, I abandoned. Per more recent thought, and reflecting European ideas, "liberal socialism" would fit me somewhat better, but still not perfectly. I may not want to "abolish" capitalism, and I may not be "anti-capitalist," but I do want to be "post-capitalist." Maybe I'm about halfway between the two, but I digress.)
Per point one, paleo-libertarians are clearly socially rightist.
You’re not the first person to say “neither right nor left” or something similar, and I’ve heard that for more than a decade. Nice marketing slogan. But, for marketing slogans to actually sell, they have to be believed by the recipient. And, that slogan has never been believed in these quarters, and for good reason, as listed above.
First, here in the US, it's "amazing" how many librulz who hate Putin also hate Palestinians, as we discuss the Hamas attack. Many of them, like many neocons and the Religious Right, repeat the typical lie that anti-Zionism is antisemitism. They're getting either muted or blocked on Twitter.
Per that story and this from the Guardian, and contra the chuds noted above, this attack was provoked, above all by far-right Zionists deliberately visiting the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound and praying there, in contravention of an agreement. The Guardian also notes increasing violence by Zionist settlers against Palestinians in occupied lands. The Guardian also talks about Egyptian complicity in Gaza's woes, something else that the chuds like to magnify to claim that all Arabs hate Palestinians:
The exact reasons for the attack are not clear, but there has been growing violence for months between Israeli soldiers and settlers and Palestinians in the West Bank. Armed settlers have attacked Palestinian villages; militants in the West Bank have attacked soldiers and settlers, and there have been repeated IDF raids on Palestinian cities.
During the past week, some Jews have prayed inside the compound of al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem’s Old City. The area around the mosque is known to Muslims as Haram al-Sharif and is the third holiest place for Islam after Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia. To Jews, it is known as Temple Mount, and is venerated as the site of the biblical Jewish temple. Jews are not permitted to pray inside al-Aqsa compound; to do so is highly provocative. Hamas has called its current offensive Operation al-Aqsa Deluge.
The longer backdrop is a 16-year blockade of Gaza by Israel and Egypt that has almost destroyed the strip’s internal economy and has caused hardship for the people living there.
There you are.
Second, as for the violence itself, there are no winners.
Contra some far leftists, I oppose Hamas taking child hostages or otherwise targeting children. I don't really "like" adult hostages, but Israel has done the same. And, yes, Israel even targets children at times, too. There, I think it's two wrongs definitely don't make a right; children, especially younger ones, don't have choices. Also, beyond the normal chuddishness, it's bad optics for Hamas.
As for the use of the word "hostages"? Mondoweiss reminds us that captured Israeli soldiers are properly called "prisoners of war," and that the Zion-leaning US mainstream media in this and other ways abuses the use of the word "hostages." It also reminds us that, by Israel arresting Palestinians without charges and keeping them incarcerated without trials, IT is the hostage taker.
As for geopolitical "winners" and "losers"?
Hamas will take punishment from Israel, but, the pushback against Israel will make it a winner of some sort.
Fatah and Abbas? Clear losers.
If other thoughts leaders in Israel agree with Ha'aretz, which squarely blames Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu for both the attack itself and the intelligence failure, then Netanyahu is a clear loser. Can he even form an "emergency coalition," as he is begging Yair Lapid and others, or will he be forced out?
Turkey is a definite winner if Erdogan can get Israel and Hamas to agree to enter negotiations, even if the process is shambolic.
Iran is a winner.
And, the IDF is a clear loser. The attack and the battles show that the Israel Defense Forces aren't almighty. A legend has been shattered, which many like me hadn't believed for years anyway.
As for the chuds? Israel has lied to the United States, and we've willingly swallowed it, for at least 56 years. I'm talking about the USS Liberty, if you don't know. And, per James Bamford, "Russiagate" was really "Israelgate" to some degree, as well as there being a separate Israelgate beyond Israel hijacking Assange and Russia's plans.
Related? American voters continue to be losers as long as they stay inside the duopoly. Noah Berlatsky lumping the Democratic on the street voter with national Dem thought leaders in claiming that Democrats have become more sympathetic to Palestinians in recent years is a form of sheepdogging.
==
Another myth exploded: in reality, Iran was surprised by the attack, which means they didn't plan or organize it.
Gerald Posner, with a strawmanning all-or-nothing that attacks anybody that says Israel was solely responsible, appears to deny that Israel was in any way responsible. (I already knew that Posner, while good on JFK, was an in-the-tank hardcore Zionist.) Yes, Posner, per your header on this post, "words matter" and I just deconstructed you. (He hasn't replied to my comment there, nor has anybody else.)
The person to read on this issue (and also often on Ukraine)? Norman Finkelstein.
Wayne (Not A) Christian, head of the Texas Railroad Commission, is following the decade-plus old steps of former Texas Comptroller Susan Combs and hating on the dunes sagebrush lizard, which, once again, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is considering for Endangered Species Act protection.
That said, beyond his bullshit, I don't know why he's worried.
Back then, Fish and Wildlife, as I reported here in 2015 and again here in 2019, was documented as getting in bed with Combs and the oil and gas business. In fact, FWS was busted in egregious lying. (For those who don't know, Fish and Wildlife in general treats its No. 1 mandate as being working with state parks and wildlife / conservation departments to "improve" hunting and fishing opportunities.)
In the "hating" at the second link, Wayne (Not A) Christian is also a liar about his claims to support the environment, and more specifically, about claims that an ESL listing will hurt oil drilling. Those were demolished more than a decade ago, two years before a federal judge bought Combs' lies. And, within both wingnut and more liberal Christianity, I believe lying, when it brings reputational harm to others, is called "false witness." Center for Biological Diversity et al probably didn't have their legal case helped by the caving of Dear Leader's first Interior Secretary, the oily Ken Salazar, whose department includes FWS. Whether Biden's Interior Secretary, Deb Haaland, will do better, I don't know. FWS has a history of snookering people regularly.
And, (Not A Christian) lies in this second presser letter as well, claiming that Biden "hates" oil and gas drilling in general, when he's approved more federal leases than Trump. And, that includes on federal land in New Mexico, which also harbors dunes sagebrush lizards and is now the second-largest oil state in the nation.
In a bit of good news, Biden vetoed a bill that would have required FWS to withdraw its proposed ESA listing.
Electric vehicles may actually need MORE automotive labor man-hours than internal-combustion engine ones, and the claims the other way appear to be nothing more than urban manufacturing legend, for the most part. Automakers themselves note that if you include EV battery production (which they generally don't do themselves as of now), the game changes. And, the piece adds that some of the carmakers are looking at doing just that. The story adds that a lot of the current battery production is overseas, including China.
As I see it, a carbon tax plus carbon tariff would address onshoring those jobs, as batteries are heavy, and the carbon amount of the shipping involved has to be high.
Ten days ago, I wrote about the planned leak of RFK Jr.'s big announcement for Oct. 9, which is, of course, today, and the leak indicating that he will indeed run as an independent.
Update: It's now official, per his campaign event. Not the best of timing, but he didn't know any more than Bibi Netanyahu, and with far less reason to know than Netanyahu, about the Hamas attack in advance.
Bob Jr., per the story, does have political smarts. He's targeting Georgia, Texas and Florida. The former is definitely a swing state; Bob in the latter two could put them more into play.
With his announcement now official, GOP attacks confirm they're worried.
Update, Oct. 10: Bob Jr.'s Super PAC has already raised $11M, and actually, that was just in the first six hours after the announcement. AND, in a sign that he's definitely more right than left, he (technically, PAC head Tony Lyons) is reportedly courting Smelling Musky, aka Elon Musk, his own self. AND, the majority of American Values money is from Republicans.
I noted, being old enough to remember Ross is Boss Perot's hurdles, and living here in Tex-ass, where ballot access petitioning for third parties or independent candidates is tough, that I still thought he would be better off staying independent rather than seeking the Libertarian nod.
There were three main reasons for that, and I've had thoughts further spurred by this and this post at Independent Political Report.
One is that he would just be seeking the Libertarian nomination, without guarantee of getting it. While hardcore Libertarians considered them Libertarian-lite, former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson and former Georgia Rep. Bob Barr at least reasonably aligned with the LP. RFK has already said he doesn't on some things.
Fracking — and other environmental issues in general — are keystone with him, and of long standing, of longer standing than his antivaxxerism. He'd have to seriously compromise them to run as a Libertarian, and especially with the Mises types, that wouldn't be enough, while the degree of compromise would certainly earn him the Just.Another.Politician.™ label from me and probably many others. (That said, Beto of Boston has set aside his environmentalism before, for good NIMBY reasons that he was doubling down on five years later.)
The second is that, related to that, I think he'll actually run better as an independent. If he DID get the Libertarian nod, the Mises types would probably stay home. Some might openly undercut him. Plus, there's that "brand" issue.
The third is that, yes, it will be tough, but will it be THAT tough?
He's got the money to pay for compensated petition signing work where it's legal, and the name to attract volunteers where it's not. (More on that in a minute.)
He's also surely got experience, from his time running Waterkeepers, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, and other environmental work, about getting initiative-type petitions on the ballot. And, he can also pay for people who will know the by-state calendar and rules.
That said, rules?
Per Ballotpedia, on paying people to get others to sign petitions, it's kind of a mess. Twenty-six states explicitly allow it, nine explicitly ban it, and seventeen, including good old Tex-ass, say nothing one way or the other. (Florida's the biggest "no" state; New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania are the three biggest "unclear" states after Tex-ass.)
Here, because of the tight petition window, and it being a "red" state and by spring 2024, many Tex-ass Rethuglicans realizing that RFK Jr. is a bigger threat to Trump (sit down, other candidates) than to Biden, and with Kenny Boy Paxton the corrupt Trumpist AG, if Kennedy tried to challenge that, he's get legally ensnarled six ways from Sunday. But, he might just challenge it elsewhere.
Joseph, at the first IPR link, ask if paid signature-gatherers can work more than one petition at a time. I don't know, but suspect the answer is yes.
Finally, again, since I voted in a 2022 primary, I can't sign RFK Jr.'s petition. Even though I won't vote for him, I would sign if I could, though, on general principle.
==
Update, Nov. 1: Of interest and possible campaign concern? On Oct. 13, just days after his announcement, Bob Jr. booted Dennis the Menace Kucinich to the curb as his campaign manager, and replaced him with his daughter-in-law, who looks about as wacky as Bob himself. Besides the nepotism issue in general, a campaign that had looked fairly well-oiled up to this point will probably face extra scrutiny on those grounds.
I wonder if Dennis the Menace, wacky enough himself at times, had been some sort of restraining factor on Bob Jr., like on the pro-life stuff, where since then, has touted Auntie Angie's House, which, reading between the lines of this:
Our mission is to eradicate the Black Maternal Health Crisis through research, advocacy, support, education, and awareness.
Presumably believes in the "abortion is Black genocide" trope.
Given that he's grifted on the actual wrongs of the Tuskegee syphilis experiment to target American Samoa, Somali immigrants in Minneapolis and other people of color with his antivaxxerism, Bob Jr. may actually be a self-gaslighter on the "abortion is Black genocide" issue. As a 2-star overall book I just read notes, in 2021, Bob Jr.'s Children's Health Defense released the film "Medical Racism: The New Apartheid." Add in that Bob Jr. has buddied up with Tony Muhammad of the Nation of Islam, and there you are. (How he squares this with blank checks for Israel, I don't know.)
Update, Nov. 8: Bob Jr. is also a Cold War 2.0 Cold Warrior, per this Tweet, getting a boner for the project just like his uncles. And, why is an alleged environmentalist so worries about global oil control rather than talking about wind and solar power to boost electric car usage, or transitioning toward walkable cities, etc.?
Update, May 9, 2024: Bob Jr. is now a fucking BIG OLD GASLIGHTER on abortion! He and Veep nominee Nicole Shanahan were both on Sage Steele's podcast, him some time back, her a bit later. Bob said that abortions should be allowed the full nine months; the podcast was pre-recorded. Steele then asked Shanahan about that when interviewing her. Here's what Bob said, when Sage pushed:
“Even if it’s full-term,” Kennedy said in response to a follow-up question. “I don’t think it’s ever OK,” he added. When Steele said that would allow late-term abortions, Kennedy said, “I think we have to leave it to the women rather than the state.”
And, here's Nicole:
“My understanding with Bobby’s position is that, you know, every abortion is a tragedy, is a loss of life,” Shanahan said. “My understanding is that he absolutely believes in limits on abortion, and we’ve talked about this. I do not think, I don’t know where that came from.”
