Diegetics

Newt Gingrich in front of

His Stepford wife is creepy.

creepy?

yout want creepy?

try a guy who brings divorce papers

to his wife undergoing cancer surgery

in lieu of flowers...

supercreep in g minor

.

Family values ? ?

American politics majority ruled by crooks, with few exceptions, about that seems 2B majority consensus

Question only is why ?

Reason is, American politics is part of show business .. unlike Europe where carrier diplomat climb the ladder for many many yrs to become political leaders.

American political scene very similar to going to movie .. once is John Wayne (Reagan) next comes Passion of Christ (Carter) and next time Humphrey Bogart in Cazablanca ..

Well ..

.

Hopefully he receives enough ridicule during his "exploration" that he realizes that he doesn't have a chance. Newt is an idea man, so he may still justify his running in the primaries as contributing to the debate and pushing the actual nominee in a stronger direction. But other than that, he'll blemish the process with constant references to his shortcomings, much to the delight of Democrats and their media apparatus.

Just put the word unrest in a google news search.

You will see thousands and thousands of entries all over the world.

Of course anyone suffering unrest is insane.It's a term George Orwell would be proud of.
It's so much nicer than revolt or riots, unrest's synonyms.

Why,someone might think the selfless leaders were monsters if you used the term riot or revolt and you see it occurring globally.
Someone might think globalism is a outright failure if the people of the world were rioting and revolting.
They might see their"leaders"as revolting,and like in a living organism barf the leaders up and out.

If the hot babes and the corporate contrivers who have control of the Mega Phoney media used an ugly word like worldwide revolt someone might think there is something wrong with the "smart"growth of the global governance that is cooked up at the very legitimate meetings of the IMF,WTO,and G 20 who come up with all the policies that never cause unrest.

Thats why they have the nice policy enforcers outside the meeting wearing ski masks to hide their identities complimenting their teenage mutant ninja turtle riot gear.

Unfortunately the global leaders haven't yet rebranded riot gear as Unrest Gear.

As we all know the unrest is the fault of the unwashed masses who just can't recognize a good thing when they see it.

When will the global leaders and their interdependent governments just execute everyone displaying "unrest"?
That's the answer.

Those suffering the mental illness known as civil unrest would get cured really fast of this psychological condition.
You have to wonder about anyone who would defy their benevolent leaders
who have to make the hard choices to give the unwashed masses a better life.

What is wrong with these people?

Can't they see that governments worldwide are working day and night making daily sacrifices to bring the rabble a smart future.

What ingrates.

Have you met Alph ?

DONT KNOW ALPH

DONT EVEN KNOW HOW TO GET US OUT OF THE HANDBASKET WE'RE IN....




Charlie Sheen Beats Obama, Palin In Presidential Poll



Charlie Sheen for President? He may just need to pick a party and, he'd be, duh, winning.

The headline grabbing, now former sitcom star was placed in hypothetical election match ups with President Obama and former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin by Public Policy Polling, on behalf of the Wall Street Journal. Whether it says more about the partisan divide or the public's fondness for Sheen, the star had some resounding success in the polls.

When given the choice between Palin and Sheen, Democratic voters choose the Sober Valley Lodge over Wasilla, Alaska; Sheen defeats Palin 44-24 amongst Dems. Similarly, in an Obama vs. Sheen election, Republicans would take the actor 37-28.

Most remarkably, it's not just partisan in some cases; Sheen defeats Palin amongst political independents, 41-36.

Still, given Sheen's unfavorable rating -- 10/67 -- he falls in general elections to both Palin and Obama. Goes to show that all the publicity -- radio interviews, television tell-alls, being fired by the biggest show on television -- doesn't always make for a good platform.

That being said, Sheen will be going on an extended campaign soon, as he's extended his sold out tour with more nationwide dates, and even some in Canada. Call it diplomacy.

Side note: a Sheen presidency would be the first with two porn star first ladies.

west hollywood or east village?

dont forget to invite steele...

he could bring hillary.

Skyhook,

Let's talk unrest. There are, broadly speaking, two kinds of unrest. Let's call one kind Whig unrest and the other kind bread unrest. Bread unrest is caused by a fundamental breakdown of civilization that is always due to external forces. Either the ruling class is messing everything up, the area has been conquered and pillaged, natural disasters or plague are destroying the civilization, or something else of the sort is going on. There is some bread unrest going on, but only some. (The Tea Party is bread unrest. The food riots in the Middle East were Bread unrest.) There used to be lots of Bread unrest movements, but people are mostly too rich to really face the sort of 'fight or flight' situation required to generate this in Western nations.

The other kind of unrest is Whig unrest. It is far more common today, in this age of plenty. The US counterculture movement was Whig unrest. The reign of terror in France was Whig unrest. Neither had anything to do with the incompetence of the local ruling class. (The US counterculture movement was rebelling against the most competent government regime ever to stand in all of history, an organization that was, through education and modernization, making profound advances in research and causing greater and more rapid productivity growth over a large area of the world than any group before or after ever has. And for all the glories of the storming of the Bastille for bread... there was no food because the revolutionaries had been burning down all the granaries.) This is political unrest generated for political purposes and not incompetence of government purposes, like the Summer of Love, Woodstock, and the Wisconsin Teacher's Union protests. These are all being generated, on purpose, by political agitators for political gain. They do not represent any actual suffering, but adopt the appearance of suffering for political purposes.

You can tell the difference by the results. Do they produce political policy while reducing goods or services or do they produce more goods and services while reducing political policy? Palestine is a permanent Whig unrest activity. It produces political policy and imports goods and services to consume doing so. Green agitation is Whig unrest. It produces political policy and consumes goods and services to do so. The overthrow of the USSR was Bread unrest. It produced goods or services and 'spent' (which is to say reduced) political policy. The Tea Party wants to reduce political policy to produce goods and services.

So, back to your point. Is the huge unrest a sign that the people running the world are evil? Yes. Is it a sign that they are incompetent? No. Quite the opposite. The Whig unrest serves their purposes, and their purposes are simple: Prevent unrest. Sounds odd, doesn't it? But it is their primary goal, because they are the people who lose when the revolution comes. In other words, those in power first seek to maintain their power. So the reason why Whig unrest happens is that, in short, it is 'socially acceptable revolutionary sentiment' that distracts people from carrying out any actually revolutionary activities. In other words, it is a fake unrest substitute in exactly the same fashion as a vaccine is a fake virus substitute. They're both the same to the body (or the body politic) except that one almost never makes you sick, and in any case certainly not as sick as the real thing. This is why today's advanced cultures have a permanent revolution going on through things like Democratic Elections. It is, though not without terrible costs, an extremely stabilizing force in the short run. If the college students were not so busy protesting the harsh treatment of Native American Women under our patriarchal culture and mean and nasty government, which is to say channeling their young adulthood into something trivial and actually pro-government, who knows what destructive sorts of real, non-approved Bread unrest style revolutionary sentiments they might start backing? Sure, your government becomes increasingly inefficient as it is pulled off into madness by each successive wave of tempered revolution. But the system is extraordinarily stable. And this is the choice that has been made because this is the choice that the people made and continue to make every single day.

ALPH


VERY THOUGHTFUL AND INCISIVE .

YOU THINK THINGS THROUGH.

And I certainly do not think the minds behind the curtain are incompetent.

The opposite is true as you pointed out.

Pleasure perusing your thoughts sir.

From the sublime to the . . .

Pilgrimage, I like Azari, I like.

2012 REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP DEFICIT ON DISPLAY




Earlier this month, former Speaker of the House and current presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich was hammering President Obama for not intervening in Libya. Asked, “what would you do about Libya?” Gingrich responded:

Exercise a no-fly zone this evening. … We don’t need to have the United Nations. All we have to say is that we think that slaughtering your own citizens is unacceptable and that we’re intervening.

During appearances that same day, Gingrich also said that he would provide help to the Libyan rebels on top of the no-fly zone: “This is a moment to get rid of him. Do it. Get it over with.” He later mocked Obama for filling out an NCAA bracket while France took the lead on intervention.

Now that Obama has initiated a no-fly zone over Libya, Gingrich has completely reversed his position with no apparent explanation. He told Politico over the weekend — less than 24 hours after Obama took action — that “it is impossible to make sense of the standard for intervention in Libya except opportunism and news media publicity.” This morning on the Today Show, he said plainly, “I would not have intervened....

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/23/gin ... flip-flop/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Uh oh Obama.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/52208.html

President Barack Obama’s approval rating and prospects for reelection have plunged to all-time lows in a Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday.

Half of the registered voters surveyed for the poll think that the president does not deserve a second term in office, while 41 percent say he does. In another Quinnipiac poll released just four weeks ago, 45 percent said the president did not deserve reelection, while 47 percent said he did.

Alph is right. Unless people nearly starve, they should not complain about anything.