Tuesday, July 19, 2011

The Iceman Cometh....

As I read today's and yesterday's headlines I'm reminded of Eugene O'Neill's play The Iceman Cometh.  It's been at least 30 years since I read it and I scarcely recall the plot. However,  I do recall that the cast of characters were dark, disillusioned, and despairing. They follow the advise of their Messiah figure (a traveling salesman) and give up their empty dreams only to fall deeper into depression, despair and ruin. In fact the piped piper, traveling salesman, messiah figure is arrested in the end for murder (why on earth was I reading this in high school?).

As I watched the incredibly annoyingly infamous Quasi-Socialist Progressive Fundamentalist Racism Chaser Sheila Jackson Lee reduce the debate over the impending and perilous debt ceiling increase to a case of racial discrimination against Obama.....


I could help thinking...the iceman cometh....

Here is why....

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies.  Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better." ~ Senator Barack Obama  (March 16,2006)

Yes, you read that correctly!!!! The words above were spoken by none other than Barack Hussein Obama!!!! I couldn't find video of the momentous proclaimation for those who will call me a liar but I found something better... the actual transcript on the Library of Congress website: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?r109:./temp/~r109OqI6wR page S2237.  I must concede that I never thought that anything Obama said was original, intelligent, cogent, thoughtful, insightful or accurate until I read that congressional record with my very own eyes. However, he clearly isn't thinking so lucidly these days as he is on the opposite end of the spectrum...you know the side President Bush was on in 2006. I wonder where Sheila McKinney stood on the issue on March 16, 2006? No wonder the globalist want to shut down the internet! Exposing their disgustingly debauched hypocrisy is just too easy!  Yet....The Iceman Cometh....

Charles Hugh Smith and  the video that follows provide even more reasons why I'm of the opinion that The Iceman Cometh....

The Shape of Things To Come
(July 8, 2011)


The Great Reset could take many forms. The only certain thing is that today's profound political disunity and our destabilizing financial Plutocracy will force a crisis. Yesterday I laid out why the U.S. will inevitably experience The Great Reset. What comes after that systemic devolution/crisis is unknown, but we can speculate on the shape of things to come.
Though we cannot know the outcome, we can certainbly discern the outlines of the crisis itself. These destabilizing conditions will force a crisis at some point and will be resolved one way or another:
1. Profound political disunity. As I noted in Survival+, this was a key feature of the Roman Empire in its final slide to collapse. The shared values and consensus which had held the Empire's core together dissolved, leaving petty fiefdoms to war among themselves for what power and swag remained.
Today we have several types of political disunity. Superficially, the two "political theater" wings of the Demopublicans stage a bitter partisan war over whose vision of the U.S. as a "Plutocracy, but with benefits" holds an increasingly enfeebled political power.
But this is all theater and artifice. Neither wing has any vision or values of substance; each slavshly serves their masters, the corporate cartels and financial Oligarchy, while feeding their vast constituencies in the Savior State great gobs of borrowed treasure to maintain the "Plutocracy, but with benefits."
The real disunity is between a doomed Status Quo and those willing to deal with reality. Right now those willing to deal with reality are few, but they have the distinct advantage of reality on their side, while the Status Quo has only propaganda, artifice, phony political theater and empty promises.
The disunity stems from the public's innate desire to hold onto the empty promises and cling to the hope offered by the Status Quo that these grandiose, impossible promises will be met, despite the abundant factual evidence to the contrary.
Every attempt to lead the public toward the realization that the present is unsustainable will be crushed by a frantic assault of the fiefdoms, cartels and players who will lose power and profits when the Status Quo crumbles under its own weight.
Promises always sound better than reality until a crisis punctures the promises. But the anger generated by this deflation of "too good to be true" promises threatens both rationality and stability.
2. A dearth of leadership. The weakness of what passes for "leadership" today is not just a matter of bad luck but of the corruption of politics to the point that it only attracts sycophants, moral midgets and sociopaths. It's easy to blame those attracted to the game for this, but the real cause is the American people, who reject honesty in favor of artifice and promises. The American public is child-like, self-centered, myopic, ill-informed and ultimately uncaring about anything but getting their share of the swag.
Thus anyone who promises that their share of the swag will remain untouched wins, and anyone who suggests the swag is unsustainable is rejected as "judgmental" or "negative." To the degree a nation gets the leadership it demands, then the U.S. is in trouble. We're now a nation of spoiled teens who get to elect their parents. No surprise, the 'rents who never enforce any rules, never challenge their own bosses (the kleptocrats) and who dole out the most allowance win every time.
Thus we get leaders who refuse to challenge the Financial Power Elites, cartels and fiefdoms because the Status Quo would devote all its stupendous wealth and influence to defeating a challenger, and we get leaders who refuse to be honest with the American people because that honesty is rejected as unwelcome.
Ideally, a leader persuades the public to grow up rather than pander to their basest desires, but such a leader would only have one term of office.
3. The unstable double-bind of rule by Financial Plutocracy. A funny thing happens when a nation allows itself to be ruled by kleptocrats: such rule is intrinsically destabilizing, as there is no longer any center to bind the nation together. The public sees the value system at the top is "I, Me, Mine" greed fed by complicity/corruption, and they follow suit by pursuing whatever petty frauds and corruptions are within reach: tax avoidance, cheating on entrance exams, gaming disability, lying on mortgage and job applications, and so on.
Meanwhile, the diverting of national income into a few power centers is also destabilizing, as Central Planning and Market Manipulation (TM, Federal Reserve, all rights reserved worldwide) are intrinsically unstable as price can no longer be discovered by unfettered markets. As a result, imbalances grow until some seemingly tiny incident or disruption triggers a cascading collapse.
The double-bind is two-fold: the Power Elites can't bear to part with any of their power or wealth, so their resistance guarantees systemic collapse. The political "leadership" cannot challenge the Power Elites' grip on the nation's throat because the entire Status Quo has been co-opted/sold out and is now wedded to the Oligarchy as their guarantor of financial security.
What this leads to is a Status Quo committed to a sinking ship. The very imbalances created by a Financial Elite and the enabling Central State Central Planning doom the system, but since everyone within the Status Quo depends on it for their own slice of wealth and power, then no one dares speak up in favor of reality. Complicity is the order of the day, but complicity can't stop the ship from sinking.
4. The political corruption of religion. Jesus did not say, "Go forth and lobby the Roman Senate, to make laws which impose your interpretations on others." Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.” (John 18:36)
Although it is unpopular to say so, some aspects of religion in the U.S. have been corrupted by a desire for wealth and a focus on acquiring it, and by a desire for political power masquerading as morality.
Very few (I know of none) commentators, mainstream or independent, see the potential for a Great Awakening, a spiritual, non-denominational renewal of faith not as some political force in the greasy halls of power but as a motivator of personal responsibility and resolve. I may be alone in this, but American history is replete with examples not only of political upheaval but of broad-based spiritual renewals that reject the earthly excesses in favor of a renewed moral center.
Such movements need not be associated with any one religion or denomination; they tend to be cultural in nature, drawing inspiration from religious faith but extending beyond the confines of the church.
Complicity and dependence erode the soul; political or financial "fixes" alone can't fix the rot. In a fundamentally corrupt, complicit society, rules and laws are routinely evaded, bypassed, undermined or simply ignored. Making more rules fixes nothing if the rules are merely for show, or only for the bottom 99%.
The resolution of these brewing instabilities could be orderly or disorderly. In an orderly scenario, a new Constitutional Convention is convened, and a leadership backed by an enlightened public hammers out a consensus to limit the political and financial dominance of Financial Power Elites and corporate cartels. The new consensus reorients the Central State to its original purpose of limiting predation of the citizenry by Elites and criminals, defending the nation and imposing the rule of law as defined by the Constitution. The Savior State would be dismantled in an orderly process.
In a disorderly resolution, the Status Quo and the public both refuse to deal with reality and instead cling to the Titanic, demanding magical solutions that will keep the doomed ship from sinking. There is no such magic, of course, and so the ship will go down, and disorder will reign.
It might take the shape of a financial crisis such as a devaluation or hyperinflation, or it might take a political crisis such as a "Quiet Coup" by Elites or an outbreak of resistance to the heavy-handed Central State.
At the outer boundaries of such disorder, then the nation could split apart, along the lines of the book The Nine Nations of North America, or into permutations of civil war as invisioned by author/blogger Chris Sullins in his novel series Operation SERF.
The salient feature of instability is its unpredictability. The longer the nation waits to deal with unwelcome realities, the greater the eventual destabilization. What happens as a result of that inevitable destabilization will be up to us.  (Source)









 



10 comments:

Black Diaspora said...

When I read your "ABOUT" statement, I was left with the impression that you were one of the few enlightened people on the planet, and then I read this:

"I must concede that I never thought that anything Obama said was original, intelligent, cogent, thoughtful, insightful or accurate until I read that congressional record with my very own eyes."

You, I'm afraid, are predisposed to disliking Obama. And that's okay, but why do it under the guise of paying him a complement. If you favored something he said, say so. Don't attempt to score cheap political points at the same time, as that dilutes your message, and reveals your true intentions.

"However, he clearly isn't thinking so lucidly these days as he is on the opposite end of the spectrum...you know the side President Bush was on in 2006."

There's a dog whistle in your statement somewhere, but it's clearly lost on me.

I see no contradiction in President Obama's 2006 statement and his performance today.

Tell me: Other than a figment in your mind, how does President Obama's actions today contradict what he said then?

We have three branches of government, each with its own leaders, and leadership. In an autocratic regime, leadership becomes a piece of cake.

Under our Republic, leadership is a shared responsibility.

President Obama can take the lead as Commander-in-Chief, but, without leadership from congress, and congressional leaders, his lead is bound to fail, despite the best of intentions.

Following five days of tense debt negotiations with congressional leaders, President Obama said today that there is still time to agree on a $4 trillion “big deal” to reduce the deficit and avoid default before the August 2 deadline to raise the nation’s $14.3 debt ceiling.

“We have a unique opportunity to do something big,” Obama said at a White House press conference today, noting “we are obviously running out of time.”

After roughly eight hours of negotiations this week failed to produce a deal, the president has given congressional leaders till Saturday morning to decide if they can compromise on a package to reduce the deficit or opt to simply raise the debt ceiling and avoid default. [...]

“I'm hopeful that over the next couple of days, we'll see… this logjam broken, because the American people, I think understandably, want to see Washington do its job,” Obama said at his second White House press conference of the week.

Conservative Black Woman said...

@Black Diaspora~I thought you were one of the few enlightened ones as well. However you allowed your predisposition towards favoring Obama preclude you from gleening the meat of the message found in the article I posted by Charles Hughes Smith.

The "dog whisle" you missed because you allowed my "cheap political points" which I refer to as snark piss you off is that Bush=puppet \ Obama=puppet.
I'm not going to get into a back and forth debate with you defending the Bush or the Republicans against the democrat party because it's all just a bread and circus dog and pony show.

But you are right, I have no love for Obama and if that dilutes the message for you than I can live with that. The point is that we live in a fundamentally corrupt, financial plutocracy and most don't realize it and therefore the criminals who run are government are going to bring this nation to it's knees! That message would be the same even if I adored Barack Obama.

Black Diaspora said...

@CBW: "However you allowed your predisposition towards favoring Obama...."

I "favor" no man, or woman, as much as I favor honesty, truth, and fairness. That, and only that, is my "predisposition."

Were we all so inclined, this country wouldn't be in decline.

"[T]herefore the criminals who run are government are going to bring this nation to it's knees!"

Had "this nation" spent more time on its knees, than pursuing foreign adventures, overseeing the self-serving activities of the government, than wearing ideological blinders, perhaps we might have done our job better, and Poor Robin might still have a few feathers to cover his butt.

"The 'dog whisle' you missed 'because you allowed my "cheap political points' which I refer to as snark piss you off is that Bush=puppet \ Obama=puppet."

I hate to disappoint, but your "snark" didn't piss me off; it merely disappointed.

Presidents as puppets, and governments as puppets is as old as this country. Those who founded this country did so, so that the propertied class wouldn't lose their wealth to the envious, and voiceless rabble.

From that perspective little, if anything, has changed.

"[I]t's all just a bread and circus dog and pony show."

It wouldn't be, if the populace didn't favor diversion and entertainment to the unvarnished truth.

Wasn't it said once: "[We] can't handle the truth." That, too, was entertainment, but with a little truth thrown in, just for fun.

"But you are right, I have no love for Obama and if that dilutes the message for you than I can live with that."

It dilutes, only if Obama's the whipping boy, and Bush gets a pass. Only if Nancy Pelosi's the whipping girl, and John Boehner gets a pass. Only if Harry Reid's the whipping boy and Mitch McConnell gets a pass.

Perhaps I'm wrong--and I stand to be corrected--but I don't remember you subjecting Bush, when he was president, to the same "no love."

And there was a great deal about Bush's policies not to love!

"That message would be the same even if I adored Barack Obama." Or Bush, or Clinton, or Reagan.

Conservative Black Woman said...

@Black Diaspora~You write:
Had "this nation" spent more time on its knees, than pursuing foreign adventures, overseeing the self-serving activities of the government, than wearing ideological blinders, perhaps we might have done our job better, and Poor Robin might still have a few feathers to cover his butt."

Now that's the beautiful truth!

Listen, I have no hidden agenda. I can't stand Barack Obama. I detest him and I rarely do I miss an opportunity to exhibit my disdain towards him. You are right I didn't write about Bush when he was President because I was still under the illusion that we lived in a free country and that our government worked towards the best interests of American citizens.

No Obama is not the whipping boy and Bush, Pelosi, Reid, Boehner and McConnell get no pass. The game is rigged and I know this. The difference with Obama is Black folk's inane defense of him. I'm not sure what I abhor more -- him or the invariable racial defense posturing invoked by every criticism of him.

Black Diaspora said...

@CBW: "I can't stand Barack Obama. I detest him and I rarely do I miss an opportunity to exhibit my disdain towards him."

I honor your right to believe and feel as you choose. For my part, I can't bring that level of antipathy toward anyone, not Bush, whose polices--which the American people mostly subscribed to--have deeply wounded this nation, a wound that will continue to fester in the years ahead.

Detestation and disdain is a luxury I can't afford.

"The difference with Obama is Black folk's inane defense of him. I'm not sure what I abhor more -- him or the invariable racial defense posturing invoked by every criticism of him."

Unfortunately, we don't all evolve at the same pace. Just as you don't recognize the you that was you a few years back, we must all wait patiently for others to catch up.

How defensive would you have been, in that other time--as you labored under your previous mindset--had someone attacked your sacred cows, or gored your favorite bull?

They, too, deserve the patience that you would have hoped for, when you enunciated statements that roiled those who stood where you are standing today: "I was still under the illusion that we lived in a free country and that our government worked towards the best interests of American citizens."

You characterize black folk's response to Obama criticism as "racial defense posturing." I wouldn't characterized it in those terms. But let's say you're right. Still, their behavior shouldn't come as a surprise--blacks are doing what all ethnic groups have done, circle their own during times of social, and political upheaval.

President Obama represents a first, just as did Jackie Robinson, and many other blacks before him. Unless he exhibits behavior that would get him kicked out of church on Sunday morning, blacks will continue to support him.

It's only natural, as it would be were he Asian, or Mexican American, or some other ethnicity, to garner the support of those from his tribe--at least, most of them.

Frankly, it's a matter of proportionality. If you attack President Obama's character, his personhood, or his mental acumen, rather than specific policies, you're all but assured of a counterattack.

My prescription: You should get out more often. I have, on my blog, criticized Obama for many things, without eliciting a counterattack, and will continue to do so, but I will struggle mightily to do it fairly, truthfully, and honestly.

Despite being black, President Obama has acquitted himself no worse than many of his predecessors, all of whom were called upon to navigate a corrupt system, and who, at times, helped advance that corruption.

My beef is with the American people, who, once they have done their civic duty of voting in a representative, sit back and think that their work is done.

It's not. It has only begun.

After casting their vote, the hard work is ahead of voters, not behind them. And the governance of the people by the people for the people should be seen in that light.

ar (Alan) said...

And I thought whites were not ready for a "black" pResident. Where have our minds gone off to but swallowing the bile of this present lie.

Coined as pResident, a mouthpiece for the coffers of coin for the Crown, the piracy continues unseen, denied; still lost in color, blind to the Lie to the lie to the lie.

Where is the Constitutional Republic but lost to "democracy" for the lies that no one sees nor want to see?

Everyday another day of lies and when will justice prevail? Does no one see Tyranny at hand? Do we not see for the blinders forced upon us?

Two-hundred fifty years to blind a nation when six, seven, eight hundred years would do.

Horseshit under foot, overhead and all around is all the same color, my brother, sister. Wake up. This is not America any longer.

ar (Alan) said...

Changes Destroying Our Nation That Few of us Know About

Read more: http://www.skinnymoose.com/bbb/2011/07/21/changes-destroying-our-nation-that-few-of-us-know-about/#ixzz1SmGN34mi

Conservative Black Woman said...

@AR~As usual you are on point and the links are much appreciated.

@Black Diaspora~I spent some time on your blog yesterday and there is a whole lot of Obama sympathy present -- which is absolutely your prerogative, your blog, your opinion.

That being said, I understand that everyone has been deliberately "miseducated" in our society blacks and whites and so in that respect I have patience for those who have not come to a place where they can accept the cold hard reality of the times in which we live. I can also understand people being inspired by Obama's accomplishments (I don't get the tears but I get the inspiration) however it stops there. I also get that I scarcely have room to criticize anyone wearing political blinders since I wore them ever so long and still from time to time struggle with removing them. But inspiration and political blinders aside there must come a time in one's life especially if they possess any personal or intellectual integrity that one admits the truth. It is undeniable that supposedly reasonable, intelligent, and accomplished black folks refuse to even consider the possibility that criticism and critical assessment of Barack Obama is anything other than racism or "uncletomism". I have no tolerance for that.

Black Diaspora said...

@Black Diaspora~I spent some time on your blog yesterday and there is a whole lot of Obama sympathy present...."

Glad you stopped by. Thanks. I've never pretended that I don't sympathize with liberal policies that put people's welfare ahead of corporate welfare, and that Obama's ascension to the presidency will inspire future generations of blacks to aspire to be greater than they've ever imagined.

Nevertheless, the revelations that I make in the comment section offer a more reliable glimpse of my worldview than my blog entries, which merely serve as a springboard from which to share those views.

Yet, I'm not in sympathy with any one person, or persons, any one political party, or any set of ideologies.

My sympathies, instead, are with people, all people--the whole of humankind, indeed with life itself, and all things that affirm it.

You see: I live from a unique vantage point. I've been privileged to see the "big picture," and, for that reason, I've been called a liberal, and sometimes a progressive.

If I were to niche myself, a humanist would best describe me--that is, without the anti-religious overtones, because I don't reject people's religious beliefs.

And even that description is woefully inaccurate, because I'm far more than the definition of "humanism" can provide.

Because I put humans first, I put life first, and all that supports life. Yet, life suggests more than merely existing. Life is both freedom and love, for without the glue of love connecting all of life, total chaos would be our lot. And where chaos exists, freedom is sacrificed, and life shrivels on the vine of indifference.

Humans indulge too much indifference to life, and toward those elements in life that give life its life-affirming impetus. It's this impetus that is leading us toward something grander and greater than our present human minds can fathom, or hold all at once.

"It is undeniable that supposedly reasonable, intelligent, and accomplished black folks refuse to even consider the possibility that criticism and critical assessment of Barack Obama is anything other than racism or 'uncletomism'. I have no tolerance for that."

If that's been your experience, then I commiserate with you, for no one, or anything, is above or beyond a criticism that's fairly leveled, and honestly applied--given with as much adherence to the facts as is humanly possible.

We have shared our thoughts before, and it was an amicable sharing.

I blog, not just to offer another opinion, but to offer another perspective. Occasionally, I slip in a thought that I hope will start a chain reaction of thoughts, thoughts that will, hopefully, challenge long-held beliefs about our life on this planet, and our place in the greater scheme of things.

For if I were to speak, just from my experience alone, with complete openness, and disclosure, it would close ears, rather than open them; shut eyes, rather than give them new vistas upon which to feast.

It's not that my message is bad or evil, but just the opposite--it would be seen as too good to be true.

ar (Alan) said...

We have been forced into a New Age thinking that mimics communism. This comes from the French Revolution with the term HUMANISM, man's laws in place of God's law.

Pharoah was a Humanist. Remember the Exodus, like the Flood - same dates, same theme.