11/02/2011
Photos That Are a Nice Start:
Look, the general strike called by Occupy Oakland could have been bigger. It could have involved more union members. It could have shut shit down. Instead, a few thousand people marched, supported by sympathy marches around the country.
Some banks closed and bus lines were disrupted. 13% of the area's teachers joined in. But the port did not close, as was rumored early on. And not many of the longshoremen joined in. It was a solid protest, not a true general strike.
What the Oakland action does is provide a template for future actions. We live in a nation that hasn't seen a true general strike since 1946 in, well, Oakland, and a nation that hasn't seen a massively disruptive strike since, perhaps the UPS strike in 1997. Workers need to understand once again that the strike is a legitimate tool of dissent. And as the rank and file of the Occupy movement grows, so will the sympathy for a larger action.
That march up there is fine. It is the advance team of the people really taking back the nation.
Look, the general strike called by Occupy Oakland could have been bigger. It could have involved more union members. It could have shut shit down. Instead, a few thousand people marched, supported by sympathy marches around the country.
Some banks closed and bus lines were disrupted. 13% of the area's teachers joined in. But the port did not close, as was rumored early on. And not many of the longshoremen joined in. It was a solid protest, not a true general strike.
What the Oakland action does is provide a template for future actions. We live in a nation that hasn't seen a true general strike since 1946 in, well, Oakland, and a nation that hasn't seen a massively disruptive strike since, perhaps the UPS strike in 1997. Workers need to understand once again that the strike is a legitimate tool of dissent. And as the rank and file of the Occupy movement grows, so will the sympathy for a larger action.
That march up there is fine. It is the advance team of the people really taking back the nation.
Late Post Today, But Jump on the Blanket the Earth Train:
Let's keep the momentum going here for the Rude Pundit's idea for bringing warmth to the Occupy Wall Streeters all over the U.S., if not the world.
The deal again: On Friday, November 25, a group meets at a designated location in each city where there's an OWS encampment. We bring blankets, socks, hand warmers, and more. They can be bought or secondhand. The donation will then become a show of support from those of us not camped out, a way of saying, "You keep going. We need you."
Let's organize more on the Twitter and Facebook machines.
More info soon. And feel free to make suggestions about this effort.
Back later with more ignoble rudeness.
Let's keep the momentum going here for the Rude Pundit's idea for bringing warmth to the Occupy Wall Streeters all over the U.S., if not the world.
The deal again: On Friday, November 25, a group meets at a designated location in each city where there's an OWS encampment. We bring blankets, socks, hand warmers, and more. They can be bought or secondhand. The donation will then become a show of support from those of us not camped out, a way of saying, "You keep going. We need you."
Let's organize more on the Twitter and Facebook machines.
More info soon. And feel free to make suggestions about this effort.
Back later with more ignoble rudeness.
11/01/2011
Yes, Liberals Are Totally Responsible for the Herman Cain Sexual Harassment Story:
You know on thing that's really hilarious about conservatives? How they preach the "personal responsibility" dogma and then, when they're caught doing something wrong or fucking up, it's always someone else's fault. Asked something in a debate that makes 'em give an answer that reveals how batshit or stupid they are? It's a "gotcha" question. It's discovered that a leading presidential candidate settled a pair of sexual harassment claims against him? He's now "a prominent Conservative targeted by liberals simply because they disagree with his politics."
Sean Hannity went full conspiracy theory on the Cain harassment story on his Fox "news" show, comparing Cain to Clarence Thomas and his whiny "high-tech lynching" remarks. Ann Coulter and Dick Morris joined in for a hideous three-way that involved mouth-to-ass action followed by a comparison of their shit-eating grins, which looked that way because they had actually eaten shit. The right-wing practitioners of bloggery also tried to get in on the action.
Now, a liberal could get pretty goddamn upset and sputter, "No..fuck you...After what you did to Bill Clinton? And you're gonna accuse us of anything? Blow a rhino dick, you fuckers."
But screw it. The jig is up. They caught us. Again. You're right, you smart smarty conservatives. This is totally the work of the same liberal cabal that faked Obama's birth certificate and made Larry Craig like to get his cock sucked in men's rooms.
Here's how we did it:
See, back in the late 1990s, while Clinton was still in office, we knew that America was going to be begging to elect an executive from junk food restaurants to be president, probably once we triggered the Obama option that we'd been working on since 1961. Knowing that the most likely candidate would be Herman Cain, when he became the head of the National Restaurant Association, we went into action. We had oppo research that Cain liked to tell dirty jokes and talk and ask questions about the sexuality of the people around him. We got two of our female operatives to get into a position to be close to him at the workplace, and when he acted as expected, they brought accusations of inappropriate behavior against Cain.
The most insidious part of our liberal plot was that we couldn't have it come out then or it would have ruined our chance to disgrace Cain over a decade later. So our operatives took the settlements they coerced Cain into offering in order to bury the story, only to create an online news journal named "Politico," filling it with reporters who criticize Obama for cover, and then using it for the specific purpose of revealing the Cain story.
Our timing was impeccable: Wait until one of the most unelectable, insane figures to ever be in contention for a party nomination to be riding a crest of public interest even though there is not a chance in hell that he'd ever win in a general election and then hit him with allegations that don't even involve actual sex. Yes, we were sure that the same people who believe in his idiotic economic plan, who think that killing people trying to cross the border is a good idea, who want a president who thinks that his ignorance of world leaders is an asset, who has shifted his opinion on abortion, who blames people who were fired from their jobs for being poor during the worst economy since the Great Depression, yes, yes, we were sure that what would turn people against Herman Cain is the idea that he flirted with a couple of anonymous women who worked for him. We really thought that his followers would say, "You know, I agree with Cain that Planned Parenthood exists in order to kill black babies, but his asking 'personal questions of a sexually suggestive nature' to his employees is just too crazy for me."
Oh, how we thought we had enough layers for plausible deniability, not to mention the obvious alibi that it was either the Romney or Perry campaigns, but Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh were just too damn smart for us.
You know on thing that's really hilarious about conservatives? How they preach the "personal responsibility" dogma and then, when they're caught doing something wrong or fucking up, it's always someone else's fault. Asked something in a debate that makes 'em give an answer that reveals how batshit or stupid they are? It's a "gotcha" question. It's discovered that a leading presidential candidate settled a pair of sexual harassment claims against him? He's now "a prominent Conservative targeted by liberals simply because they disagree with his politics."
Sean Hannity went full conspiracy theory on the Cain harassment story on his Fox "news" show, comparing Cain to Clarence Thomas and his whiny "high-tech lynching" remarks. Ann Coulter and Dick Morris joined in for a hideous three-way that involved mouth-to-ass action followed by a comparison of their shit-eating grins, which looked that way because they had actually eaten shit. The right-wing practitioners of bloggery also tried to get in on the action.
Now, a liberal could get pretty goddamn upset and sputter, "No..fuck you...After what you did to Bill Clinton? And you're gonna accuse us of anything? Blow a rhino dick, you fuckers."
But screw it. The jig is up. They caught us. Again. You're right, you smart smarty conservatives. This is totally the work of the same liberal cabal that faked Obama's birth certificate and made Larry Craig like to get his cock sucked in men's rooms.
Here's how we did it:
See, back in the late 1990s, while Clinton was still in office, we knew that America was going to be begging to elect an executive from junk food restaurants to be president, probably once we triggered the Obama option that we'd been working on since 1961. Knowing that the most likely candidate would be Herman Cain, when he became the head of the National Restaurant Association, we went into action. We had oppo research that Cain liked to tell dirty jokes and talk and ask questions about the sexuality of the people around him. We got two of our female operatives to get into a position to be close to him at the workplace, and when he acted as expected, they brought accusations of inappropriate behavior against Cain.
The most insidious part of our liberal plot was that we couldn't have it come out then or it would have ruined our chance to disgrace Cain over a decade later. So our operatives took the settlements they coerced Cain into offering in order to bury the story, only to create an online news journal named "Politico," filling it with reporters who criticize Obama for cover, and then using it for the specific purpose of revealing the Cain story.
Our timing was impeccable: Wait until one of the most unelectable, insane figures to ever be in contention for a party nomination to be riding a crest of public interest even though there is not a chance in hell that he'd ever win in a general election and then hit him with allegations that don't even involve actual sex. Yes, we were sure that the same people who believe in his idiotic economic plan, who think that killing people trying to cross the border is a good idea, who want a president who thinks that his ignorance of world leaders is an asset, who has shifted his opinion on abortion, who blames people who were fired from their jobs for being poor during the worst economy since the Great Depression, yes, yes, we were sure that what would turn people against Herman Cain is the idea that he flirted with a couple of anonymous women who worked for him. We really thought that his followers would say, "You know, I agree with Cain that Planned Parenthood exists in order to kill black babies, but his asking 'personal questions of a sexually suggestive nature' to his employees is just too crazy for me."
Oh, how we thought we had enough layers for plausible deniability, not to mention the obvious alibi that it was either the Romney or Perry campaigns, but Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh were just too damn smart for us.
10/31/2011
Let's Actually Do Something: Blanket the Occupiers:
So out here in Left Blogsylvania, we have offered as much moral and rhetorical support as we perhaps can to the Occupy Wall Street movement, with a good many of us actually going down to the various occupations and reporting and/or taking part (not being NPR-labeled "journalists" allows us to do so). But winter's coming, fast up here in the Northeast. And while the Rude Pundit is convinced that the true flourishing of the Occupy movement will occur next spring (and into the awful summer and awfuller fall of an election year), there's a core of the protesters who are gonna stay, no matter what.
Here's what the Rude Pundit proposes, an action in the spirit of OWS:
On Friday, November 25, the day after Thanksgiving, Black Friday, the biggest shopping day of the year, as marketers force us to know, let's give to our local Occupy encampments what they need to stay warm for the winter.
The deal: check out your local Occupy website. There's a list of all the things they need in order to flat out survive into the spring.
Bring stuff to keep 'em all warm through the cold nights since they are doing the hard, hard work of creating the foundation for genuinely forcing change in the political dialogue and the economic stratification of the United States (and around the world).
On November 25th, as a show of general support, we'll meet to give as large a donation as possible in person at the occupation areas (or where the supplies are kept). Each city could have a meeting place and time for the donors.
Speaking of marketing, we could call this "Blanket the Earth." We could organize this on, say, a Facebook page or perhaps a Twitter feed or a hastag.
The Rude Pundit's gonna see if he can get some of his blogging friends and others involved. And you should do the same. It's a simple gesture, an inexpensive one (a pair of socks would be awesome or even the donation of secondhand stuff), and one that opposes the hyper-materialism of the date.
There was an old saying from back in the days of when labor union members would be jailed for striking. It was a chant from the rank and file of unions and their families, in response to the chants of the jailed: "Remember you're inside for us while we're out here for you." The idea was to keep the work of protest and activism going.
Let's keep that spirit alive. So, yes, do donate throughout the next month (and if you can't be there on that Friday).
But a large show of support on a single day would be a powerful message that we're here for the occupiers.
So out here in Left Blogsylvania, we have offered as much moral and rhetorical support as we perhaps can to the Occupy Wall Street movement, with a good many of us actually going down to the various occupations and reporting and/or taking part (not being NPR-labeled "journalists" allows us to do so). But winter's coming, fast up here in the Northeast. And while the Rude Pundit is convinced that the true flourishing of the Occupy movement will occur next spring (and into the awful summer and awfuller fall of an election year), there's a core of the protesters who are gonna stay, no matter what.
Here's what the Rude Pundit proposes, an action in the spirit of OWS:
On Friday, November 25, the day after Thanksgiving, Black Friday, the biggest shopping day of the year, as marketers force us to know, let's give to our local Occupy encampments what they need to stay warm for the winter.
The deal: check out your local Occupy website. There's a list of all the things they need in order to flat out survive into the spring.
Bring stuff to keep 'em all warm through the cold nights since they are doing the hard, hard work of creating the foundation for genuinely forcing change in the political dialogue and the economic stratification of the United States (and around the world).
On November 25th, as a show of general support, we'll meet to give as large a donation as possible in person at the occupation areas (or where the supplies are kept). Each city could have a meeting place and time for the donors.
Speaking of marketing, we could call this "Blanket the Earth." We could organize this on, say, a Facebook page or perhaps a Twitter feed or a hastag.
The Rude Pundit's gonna see if he can get some of his blogging friends and others involved. And you should do the same. It's a simple gesture, an inexpensive one (a pair of socks would be awesome or even the donation of secondhand stuff), and one that opposes the hyper-materialism of the date.
There was an old saying from back in the days of when labor union members would be jailed for striking. It was a chant from the rank and file of unions and their families, in response to the chants of the jailed: "Remember you're inside for us while we're out here for you." The idea was to keep the work of protest and activism going.
Let's keep that spirit alive. So, yes, do donate throughout the next month (and if you can't be there on that Friday).
But a large show of support on a single day would be a powerful message that we're here for the occupiers.
10/28/2011
Taking Some Comp Time, Boss:
Hey, wow, aren't those Republicans assholes? (See? That's Quality Bloggery right there.)
The Rude Pundit's taking a long-ass drive today because sometimes a man's just gotta burn some fossil fuels to teach that atmosphere a lesson. (And he's gotta get to a thing.)
So he's taking a day here. He'll post some audio treats later.
Choose your final line:
Oh, and suck bird balls, Rangers.
Oh, and fuck you, Cards.
Hey, wow, aren't those Republicans assholes? (See? That's Quality Bloggery right there.)
The Rude Pundit's taking a long-ass drive today because sometimes a man's just gotta burn some fossil fuels to teach that atmosphere a lesson. (And he's gotta get to a thing.)
So he's taking a day here. He'll post some audio treats later.
Choose your final line:
Oh, and suck bird balls, Rangers.
Oh, and fuck you, Cards.
10/27/2011
The Occupy Movement and the Unruly Reclamation of Public Spaces:
Let's get pseudo-intellectual here for a moment:
Back in the old days that conservatives like to get all nostalgic about, people slept in the parks. In the days before air conditioning, when it got too hot for fans and windows to do the trick, people just brought their families to the parks and camped out. Here's how the New York Times wrote about it during a July 1904 heat wave: "On the east side last night the heat in the big tenements was unbearable, and the residents there vacated their homes early in the evening. The small parks were overrun, and many of the people went to the recreation piers. In the parks the people disregarded the 'Keep off the grass' signs, and many stretched out on the green lawns to spend the night there." Poor people violating the law in order to survive. That's not an overstatement. People were dying or going to the hospital because of the 95 degree weather.
Imagine that: as an ordinary event, thousands of impoverished people, many of them immigrants, the polyglot of languages, the smell of sweat and food, all gathering in public spaces. Yes, there were ordinances that were violated, but the times called for the restrictions to be eased. During the heat wave of August 1938, hundreds of thousands of people slept on beaches and in parks in New York City. When police arrested 60 men for sleeping in parks, the magistrate they were brought before released them and said, "I think we can all show a little leniency in these days of record-breaking heat." The city said that people could sleep outside until the heat broke.
Perhaps the greatest triumph of capitalist materialism in the United States has been to isolate us and keep us out of the public spaces for any purpose but those that are sanctioned by the Law and that have consumption as a purpose. In other words, recreation and leisure is fine - go to the park with your kids, go to a football game - but anything that is remotely challenging to the approbation of those with power (not just the 1%, but those who defend their interests all around us) must be condemned and confronted.
(An aside: This actually points up the major difference between the Tea Party and OWS: the Tea Party exists to give aid and comfort to the powerful, so, of course, it is met with mostly head-patting approval by officials and businesses.)
Public spaces, and parks especially, have meaning beyond just being play areas and homeless zoos. When all those poor people gathered in the heat in the early 20th century, they were merely doing what they knew. See, when conservatives talk about the way "neighbors" relied on each other, they forget that, minus TV, minus smart phones, minus the myriad alienating distractions that have been foisted upon us, and that we embrace, those same people would also talk politics, face to face, a great deal more than we do now. That's how movements started.
The genius (yes, genius) of OWS is that it's not being done online. Honestly, who gives a damn how many people sign an internet petition? Or how many people have signed up for MoveOn.org's stream of email? The Rude Pundit has done both, but he felt as if he had done almost nothing for a cause because he had. Down at Liberty Plaza, despite the wifi connectivity, everything is done in an affirming, low-tech way, and not just the human microphone. The schedule for the day is written up on a marker board. There's a library with actual books. People handout flyers. Artists work on signs. Others use stencils and spray paint to create t-shirt designs. And everyone talks. Any time the Rude Pundit has been there, either to interview people or just to take part, he has been able to simply enter into conversation, about the occupation, about the economic disparity in America, about what can be done.
What's frustrating for a media (and a citizenry) so used to talking points and soundbites is that consensus goals are not the point of OWS. Instead, it is to demonstrate how power can be wielded without money substituting for speech; it is the reclamation of a face-to-face dialogue that has been moderated and regulated and filtered through so many talk shows and Facebook pages and Twitter accounts and, yes, blogs. Those things are necessary, but what's essential, and what OWS has reasserted in a way that hasn't been seen since the early 1970s, is that it occur, in large numbers, in the public space, in an unruly and confrontational way.
Of course the unruly must themselves be confronted violently by those who fear losing their control, who fear the collapse of a system they have fostered for decades. Because the Occupy Movement is engaging in a threatening activity. If they are communing, they are not consuming. If they are not consuming (in a really Marxist sense), they can lose their alienation and isolation.
Here's the kicker, though: The usual methods for regulating and controlling the public spaces aren't working this time. In fact, as it should, the more the powerful attempt to control the unruly in this case, the more the unruly attempt to take over the public space and enforce the "public" part.
Let's get pseudo-intellectual here for a moment:
Back in the old days that conservatives like to get all nostalgic about, people slept in the parks. In the days before air conditioning, when it got too hot for fans and windows to do the trick, people just brought their families to the parks and camped out. Here's how the New York Times wrote about it during a July 1904 heat wave: "On the east side last night the heat in the big tenements was unbearable, and the residents there vacated their homes early in the evening. The small parks were overrun, and many of the people went to the recreation piers. In the parks the people disregarded the 'Keep off the grass' signs, and many stretched out on the green lawns to spend the night there." Poor people violating the law in order to survive. That's not an overstatement. People were dying or going to the hospital because of the 95 degree weather.
Imagine that: as an ordinary event, thousands of impoverished people, many of them immigrants, the polyglot of languages, the smell of sweat and food, all gathering in public spaces. Yes, there were ordinances that were violated, but the times called for the restrictions to be eased. During the heat wave of August 1938, hundreds of thousands of people slept on beaches and in parks in New York City. When police arrested 60 men for sleeping in parks, the magistrate they were brought before released them and said, "I think we can all show a little leniency in these days of record-breaking heat." The city said that people could sleep outside until the heat broke.
Perhaps the greatest triumph of capitalist materialism in the United States has been to isolate us and keep us out of the public spaces for any purpose but those that are sanctioned by the Law and that have consumption as a purpose. In other words, recreation and leisure is fine - go to the park with your kids, go to a football game - but anything that is remotely challenging to the approbation of those with power (not just the 1%, but those who defend their interests all around us) must be condemned and confronted.
(An aside: This actually points up the major difference between the Tea Party and OWS: the Tea Party exists to give aid and comfort to the powerful, so, of course, it is met with mostly head-patting approval by officials and businesses.)
Public spaces, and parks especially, have meaning beyond just being play areas and homeless zoos. When all those poor people gathered in the heat in the early 20th century, they were merely doing what they knew. See, when conservatives talk about the way "neighbors" relied on each other, they forget that, minus TV, minus smart phones, minus the myriad alienating distractions that have been foisted upon us, and that we embrace, those same people would also talk politics, face to face, a great deal more than we do now. That's how movements started.
The genius (yes, genius) of OWS is that it's not being done online. Honestly, who gives a damn how many people sign an internet petition? Or how many people have signed up for MoveOn.org's stream of email? The Rude Pundit has done both, but he felt as if he had done almost nothing for a cause because he had. Down at Liberty Plaza, despite the wifi connectivity, everything is done in an affirming, low-tech way, and not just the human microphone. The schedule for the day is written up on a marker board. There's a library with actual books. People handout flyers. Artists work on signs. Others use stencils and spray paint to create t-shirt designs. And everyone talks. Any time the Rude Pundit has been there, either to interview people or just to take part, he has been able to simply enter into conversation, about the occupation, about the economic disparity in America, about what can be done.
What's frustrating for a media (and a citizenry) so used to talking points and soundbites is that consensus goals are not the point of OWS. Instead, it is to demonstrate how power can be wielded without money substituting for speech; it is the reclamation of a face-to-face dialogue that has been moderated and regulated and filtered through so many talk shows and Facebook pages and Twitter accounts and, yes, blogs. Those things are necessary, but what's essential, and what OWS has reasserted in a way that hasn't been seen since the early 1970s, is that it occur, in large numbers, in the public space, in an unruly and confrontational way.
Of course the unruly must themselves be confronted violently by those who fear losing their control, who fear the collapse of a system they have fostered for decades. Because the Occupy Movement is engaging in a threatening activity. If they are communing, they are not consuming. If they are not consuming (in a really Marxist sense), they can lose their alienation and isolation.
Here's the kicker, though: The usual methods for regulating and controlling the public spaces aren't working this time. In fact, as it should, the more the powerful attempt to control the unruly in this case, the more the unruly attempt to take over the public space and enforce the "public" part.
10/26/2011
Note to the Oakland Police Union: You Could Probably Use the Protesters' Help:
You know, the Oakland cops could probably use the support of large numbers of protesters. At the end of 2010, Police Chief Anthony Batts said that "Oakland needs a minimum of 925 police officers. Starting next month, however, Oakland city officials say there is only enough money to pay for 637 positions, the lowest rank-and-file number since 1987, and the department is quickly reaching that level." This is not to mention "the department should have a minimum of 420 officers assigned to the patrol division," and it has only 350.
"I’ll be clear to you. I do not have enough police officers," Batts, who stepped down this year, said in December 2010. July 2010 had seen the layoff of 80 cops for budget reasons. The final budget numbers in 2011: "The police department will be budgeted for 636 officers this year and 588 next year." This July, in contract negotiations, the police union agreed that its members would pay 9% of their pensions in exchange for a promise for no more layoffs until 2015.
The cops went all apeshit on the Occupy Oakland protesters, who were not nearly as organized as Occupy Wall Street. Still, even if there were rats and sanitation problems, it sure seems like the cops went in with the intent to kick some ass and were baiting the exhausted and "paranoid" occupiers with an absurdly massive show of force in the middle of the night. You watch the videos of the raid on Ogawa Plaza, and you want to say, "Umm, you realize that these are unarmed civilians most of whom committed the crime of trespassing, right? No? You're just gonna go all stormtrooper on their hippie asses?" The action passed "overkill" at the point that the first tear gas canister hit the air.
In other words, working with cops from other areas, the Oakland PD committed a large amount of its minimal force to execute an eviction notice. It must have been a good night to be a drug dealer or thief or murderer in Oakland.
Quick note to a scattered few protesters: Don't throw shit at the cops. Don't give 'em an excuse to gas you. Non-violence works only if you actually don't get violent. You wanna win the revolution? Get the police on your side. The rank and file actually want a reason to support you.
You know, the Oakland cops could probably use the support of large numbers of protesters. At the end of 2010, Police Chief Anthony Batts said that "Oakland needs a minimum of 925 police officers. Starting next month, however, Oakland city officials say there is only enough money to pay for 637 positions, the lowest rank-and-file number since 1987, and the department is quickly reaching that level." This is not to mention "the department should have a minimum of 420 officers assigned to the patrol division," and it has only 350.
"I’ll be clear to you. I do not have enough police officers," Batts, who stepped down this year, said in December 2010. July 2010 had seen the layoff of 80 cops for budget reasons. The final budget numbers in 2011: "The police department will be budgeted for 636 officers this year and 588 next year." This July, in contract negotiations, the police union agreed that its members would pay 9% of their pensions in exchange for a promise for no more layoffs until 2015.
The cops went all apeshit on the Occupy Oakland protesters, who were not nearly as organized as Occupy Wall Street. Still, even if there were rats and sanitation problems, it sure seems like the cops went in with the intent to kick some ass and were baiting the exhausted and "paranoid" occupiers with an absurdly massive show of force in the middle of the night. You watch the videos of the raid on Ogawa Plaza, and you want to say, "Umm, you realize that these are unarmed civilians most of whom committed the crime of trespassing, right? No? You're just gonna go all stormtrooper on their hippie asses?" The action passed "overkill" at the point that the first tear gas canister hit the air.
In other words, working with cops from other areas, the Oakland PD committed a large amount of its minimal force to execute an eviction notice. It must have been a good night to be a drug dealer or thief or murderer in Oakland.
Quick note to a scattered few protesters: Don't throw shit at the cops. Don't give 'em an excuse to gas you. Non-violence works only if you actually don't get violent. You wanna win the revolution? Get the police on your side. The rank and file actually want a reason to support you.
10/25/2011
A Brief Exegesis of a Herman Cain Campaign Video:
At the opening of "Now is the time," an unlisted video on presidential candidate Herman Cain's YouTube channel, we see the face of a man, a middle-aged white man with glasses and a mustache and silvering hair, and he's speaking very sincerely to us. What does he want? On first blush, we might assume he is about to confess something to us, perhaps an unspeakable lust for young boys for, indeed, he looks as if he knows his way around an illegal chat room or two. But, no. He is the chief of staff for Cain's campaign, and he is imploring us to rally to his man's side. When he is finished speaking, music surges. "I am America," a female voice sings, and we see a close-up of the man as he sucks on a cigarette and then blows smoke out of the corner of his mouth, his eyes staring at us as if we are strippers on a stage, spreading our legs for his inspection. The video ends with Herman Cain looking serious and then slowly, slyly smiling. It is the look of a father about to get pleasure from spanking his own child's bare bottom. In fact, the whole of the ad seems to say: "These men are stalking you, and you will probably need a restraining order in order to survive the weekend."
To be fair-ish, that final creepy smile is featured in several of the videos on Cain's channel and website. If you want three minutes of unadulterated bugfuck insanity, check out "He Carried Yellow Flowers," which takes place on the set of an Old West movie and during which a buck-toothed black cowboy is beaten by a white cowboy in the background as an actor in costume tells us how much we need Herman Cain. This is not to mention the sexy, silent woman holding a chicken, which prompts two "nice chicken" comments (one imagines Cain wanted them to say, "Nice cock," but, you know, he's running for office, for Pete's sake). Then it ends with the Cain slow smirk, except this time it seems to be saying, "The joke's on you."
At least one ad contains a piece of information that probably ought to be included whenever anybody takes seriously his 9-9-9 economic "plan." It is a quote from Cain: "If 10% is good enough for God, then 9% should be just fine for the federal government." It's not an insignificant, throwaway line because it's at the end of his video introducing the plan (the one where he compares a progressive tax code to slavery, which you can be sure that Harriet Tubman would totally agree with).
While everyone is amused at the idea that 9-9-9 may have come from Sim City, perhaps the more relevant questions are whether Cain actually believe that everyone should be giving 10% of their income to churches and if his economic "plan" is actually based on the idea that the government should get less than religious groups.
(Note: None of this means that the Rude Pundit thinks Cain is anything less than a greedy exploiter of idiot Republicans who long for anyone who is not Romney.)
At the opening of "Now is the time," an unlisted video on presidential candidate Herman Cain's YouTube channel, we see the face of a man, a middle-aged white man with glasses and a mustache and silvering hair, and he's speaking very sincerely to us. What does he want? On first blush, we might assume he is about to confess something to us, perhaps an unspeakable lust for young boys for, indeed, he looks as if he knows his way around an illegal chat room or two. But, no. He is the chief of staff for Cain's campaign, and he is imploring us to rally to his man's side. When he is finished speaking, music surges. "I am America," a female voice sings, and we see a close-up of the man as he sucks on a cigarette and then blows smoke out of the corner of his mouth, his eyes staring at us as if we are strippers on a stage, spreading our legs for his inspection. The video ends with Herman Cain looking serious and then slowly, slyly smiling. It is the look of a father about to get pleasure from spanking his own child's bare bottom. In fact, the whole of the ad seems to say: "These men are stalking you, and you will probably need a restraining order in order to survive the weekend."
To be fair-ish, that final creepy smile is featured in several of the videos on Cain's channel and website. If you want three minutes of unadulterated bugfuck insanity, check out "He Carried Yellow Flowers," which takes place on the set of an Old West movie and during which a buck-toothed black cowboy is beaten by a white cowboy in the background as an actor in costume tells us how much we need Herman Cain. This is not to mention the sexy, silent woman holding a chicken, which prompts two "nice chicken" comments (one imagines Cain wanted them to say, "Nice cock," but, you know, he's running for office, for Pete's sake). Then it ends with the Cain slow smirk, except this time it seems to be saying, "The joke's on you."
At least one ad contains a piece of information that probably ought to be included whenever anybody takes seriously his 9-9-9 economic "plan." It is a quote from Cain: "If 10% is good enough for God, then 9% should be just fine for the federal government." It's not an insignificant, throwaway line because it's at the end of his video introducing the plan (the one where he compares a progressive tax code to slavery, which you can be sure that Harriet Tubman would totally agree with).
While everyone is amused at the idea that 9-9-9 may have come from Sim City, perhaps the more relevant questions are whether Cain actually believe that everyone should be giving 10% of their income to churches and if his economic "plan" is actually based on the idea that the government should get less than religious groups.
(Note: None of this means that the Rude Pundit thinks Cain is anything less than a greedy exploiter of idiot Republicans who long for anyone who is not Romney.)
