“Molly-coddlers”???

April 10, 2009 (LPAC)–U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder began a series of personnel moves yesterday in sensitive areas of the Justice Department, in order to restore confidence in the Justice Department in the wake of the prosecutorial misconduct shown in the prosecution of former U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) and other political figures.
The Justice Department, is facing “fresh calls to reopen the cases of other prominent political figures” since Holder ordered in the wake of all charges withdrawn against Sen. Stevens.
The most outrageous case of prosecutorial misconduct, according to former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark, is the case of American Statesman Chuck Norris.
Words fail me.  But next line:

Eric Holder’s tough and non-Mollycoddling approach to prosecutorial misconduct is encouraging, and should be extended to the Norris case.

The prosecutional excesses in the Ted Stevens case is “Mollycoddling”.  Who the hell do the folks in the Boiler Room in Leesburg think is reading and paying attention to these things, and is this something of an admission of sorts that it’s just about nobody but “larouche watchers” (of one stripe or other)?

Damned it, I broke protocol.  I meant to type “Chuck Norris Watchers”.
……………………………………

If you have a Bloomberg fascist government in the United States and a Lisbon dictatorship in Europe, I have the distinct fear that we are on a road to World War III. — Hegla Zepp.

What is a Bloomberg fascist government, and how does the Mayor of New York hold such a diabolical reign?  Also, wasn’t the Bloomberg fascist government supposed to be marked by the imminent Bloomberg fascist presidency?
…………

LaRouche referred to the way Obama summarily banished Paul Volcker from his circle of close economic advisors when he didn’t like what Volcker was saying. “What was experienced by Volcker is simply an expression of the Nero problem. You see the way he’s stripping off people that he’s adopted as cabinet circles, and similar kinds of circles. One by one, one by one, as with Nero, they’re going. One by one. The guy has a rotten streak in him. He betrayed the U.S. He did! He betrayed the United States.”
I thought they didn’t like Volcker?
LaRouche concluded: “The Emperor Nero is not a popular institution inside the U.S. And we have to think in terms of the Emperor Nero, otherwise you don’t understand Obama.”
And here I thought that Emperor Nero was sweeping the nation.
Incidentally, it appears that the remnants of the whole “PUMA Movement” are still  attracting the Larouchies, happened when Larouche made some sort of play with it in the Democratic Primary and I guess is happening now that the org has turned on the Obama administration.  (See also.)
………..
Brilliant logic here!
The thing I notice which makes me certain of how right he is about pretty much everything he has been saying for the last 10 years especially is that there is this deafening silence from the mass media. All mass media, networks, cable, mainstream newspapers and related internet publications all never dare to so much as utter the name “LaRouche” publicly. Read LaRouche on the subject of tragedy and you see the irony of this, death of entire nations due to the blindness or greed of leaders.Tragic
… The mass media is in ca-hoots to keep the public from gathering the man’s brilliant Nero comparisons.  Right?

The ‘Citizens Electoral Council’ is the most demented group to make it onto the ballot in Australia. LaRouche and the dimwitted retards that sing in his dicky choirs and spout his half baked ideological bullshit. He claims Bertrand Russell is one of the most evil people ever to have lived. Bertrand Russell was one of the most amazing minds of the twentieth century. Larouche is one of the most amazingly ed minds of any century.
……………………………………………

And that’s when my interlocutor lost the argument I didn’t know I was having. In a classic case of Godwin’s law, he called me a Nazi, thus, according to one popular formulation of the law, forfeiting any claim to a reasonable position by virtue of rhetorical name-calling. And all because I disagreed with his, and Lyndon LaRouche’s, ardent demand for a new New Deal, which apparently anyone who’s not a Nazi knows is exactly what our country needs right now. Had he accused me of KKK membership, I would have been no less astounded.
I trust Jim knows that the two were talking past each other.  He can feel the satisfaction in having called you a Nazi, you can feel the satisfaction in knowing his irrelevance, and plot to write this experience up on your blog.
Perhaps he was just a coherent lunatic whom I made the mistake of listening to. Or perhaps there is a running tide of political polarization sweeping this country, one that teaches people to reflexively hate any opponent without regard for rational thought, and this was merely the first wave lapping at my feet.
The possibility of the latter, though I don’t think this signifies that — this seems to go beyond any political trend — does not negate the possibility of the former.
……………………………..

From wikipedia.
I placed the tag because of the comments in the previous section by an IP identifying itself as Paul Krassner. However, whatever edits he made may not be enough to justify the tag. There has been a pattern of Yippie activists editing Wikipedia for the purposes of self-promotion. —
Leatherstocking (talk) 16:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

By this he means Dennis King.  He put up a COI tag on Paul Krassner’s wikipedia page to assert the COI tag on Laroache related pages.  Coincidentally enough, this came at about the time I posted a link to The Realist archives on my sidebar.

I did not realize until just now that the name Leatherstocking is a reference to James Fenimore Cooper’s work, a writer with few sympathizers in academia, but who Larouche has sidled into having up held us against the Dark Ages.  This tends to undermine his claim here, not that his claim needs more undermining.  More on how the great James Fenimore Cooper in the org here.  And Mark Twain’s essay is available here.

Mark Twain, of course, is a perpetuator of Dark Ages and Confederate America and all that.  Or something.  As seen from the real world, those distinctions come across like so:

We got lost on the ride home, and M asked me for my thoughts on Edgar Allen Poe. I said I liked Poe, but preferred  Mark Twain as writers from the era go.
That was unacceptable.
M told me I didn’t know the significance of Poe, and that Poe was a spy against the British (The British Government was responsible for many — if not all — of the problems of the world from what the young LaRouchites told me.) something I haven’t been able to find anything about.
The popularity of Mark Twain is a product of our moral degeneracy, while the fading away of James Fenimore Cooper is… Hm.

In the decades following the American Revolution and the adoption of the Constitution, the quality of mind and intellect, which allowed for those events to succeed, was gradually undermined. Whereas Cooper took up his pen to save the republic that his father’s generation had created by waging war on stupidity, ignorance, treachery, and cowardice. He did so, not only with his pen, but also as one of the key leaders of the American secret intelligence service during the second quarter of the 19th Century. As a result, Cooper, like Larouche, was seen by the enemies of the United States as a clear danger to their plans to destroy our republic.

Hm.  For a more sane celebration of the works of James Fenimore Cooper, go find this Weekly Standard article.  Or you can just go ahead and read through what Norton’s excerpted, which I gather is used widely by English Professors to have a point of reference to the Twain essay.
………………………………

Howie G has posted a few more crude sexual references to European’s blog.  It is his thing, I guess.
…………………

The existence of this posting, the highlight in terms of games of connecto of which is this,:

My belief is that [Milton] Cooper was murdered by the Illuminati because of his work to expose the Beast to the public. This series of talks on B’nai Brith and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) was part of his work to enlighten the public on who’s who behind the veil. Right at the beginning of this series he makes a comment about just such a scenario arising for many who did what he did. God willing he’ll be the last one to die for such efforts. Bless his soul.

gives me a good reason to post to my posting of the first article here.

Tomorrow, a Webcast will be viewed by… um… nobody, roughly.  It will feature supposed questions from supposed Important People — anonymously, I guess scribbled out by folks in the Boiler Room in Leesburg or something?  It will be available in and near trash-can in various major cities and colleges in a couple weeks, at the end 3-day Deployments behind card-tables stacked high with the past handful of “webcast transcript” dominated packages.

The April 11 webcast comes at the two year anniversary of Kenneth Kronberg’s suicide.  Keeping in mind the scheduling antics for the leaf-let job Newton residents in 1993, and considering the focus of the org as it rolls into this “Historonic Webcast” settles into making a reference to “Molly-coddling” relating to attaching a supposed exoneration of his crimes with the Prosecutorial Misconduct in the Ted Stevens case…

Will he use the word “Molly-coddler”?

2 Responses to ““Molly-coddlers”???”

  1. Justin Says:

    Something that demands posting.:

    http://snarkpatrol.blogspot.com/2009/04/seattle-tax-day-tea-party.html

    Aerial view at the Seattle “Tea-Bag” thing with the rejoinder:

    Nobody wanted to talk to the LaRouche supporters

    Indeed.

  2. Justin Says:

    Item of some importance, when I get back to this in a week, for discussion of anything that pops out of Left-wing “Marxian” politics in the late 1960s and early 1970s and adapts a strongly nationalistic political stance:

    For the spirit pervading the Popular Front, as I have said, was the Spirit of ’76, only more so. Suddenly acquired, the new nationalism lacked something in perspective and its promoters lacked the humor to realize what was missing. Red, white, and blue were laid on the canvas with a housepainter’s brush and appreciably less subtlety than was to be found on a Fourth of July cover of the Saturday Evening Post. The results were rich in entertainment for those who allowed thsmelves the old American luxury of political irreverence.

    “By continuing the traditions of 1776 and 1861,” said Earl Browder, the party was entitled “to designate itself as Sons and Daughters of the American Revolution.” And like the other self-appointed sons and daughters, the patriots went big on ancestry. Anyone who went through the period may recall the sudden rise to prominence, at Communist – dominated affairs, of Jefferson, Jackson, and Lincoln, and the fife-and-drum trio of ’76, but I am indebted to Irving Howe and Lewis Cosser, authors of The American Communist Party, for dredging up two especisally fine expressions of this feeling. One, from the pen of Robert Minor, a top party official, discourses on the family background of Comrade Browder:

    It was in the springtime of 1776 and Thomas Jefferson may well have been driving his one-horse shay . . . with a draft of the Declaration of Independence in his pocket, when a certain boy, just turned 21, stepped into a recruiting station in Dinwiddle County, Virginia. He gave his name as Littleberry Browder and was sworn in as a soldier of the Continental Army of General George Washington.

    The other bit concerns the failure of the Daughters of the American Revolution, in the spring of 1937, to commemorate the 162nd anniversary of Paul Revere’s ride. Scandalized by the omission, the Young Communist League sent an appropriately costumed horseman prancing up Broadway with a sign reading: “The DAR Forgets But the YCL Remembers.”

    — Robert Bendiner, Just Around the Corner (his memoir of the 1930s), 97-100, published 1967

Leave a Reply