And now to discuss another movie I have not seen and likely will never see — this one destined to edge on into basic cable rotation with other sitcomy movies of vaguely “edgy” contours.

It shouldn’t be a movie I think twice about, but I am oddly fascinated by some things I have read on this movie.  It seems that from the component parts of Bad Teacher, I can construct something moderately interesting — though probably not anything that could pull through more than half an hour or so.

In the movie, Cameron Diaz plays a disinterested teacher behaving badly, who decides her out of the job she hates is by seducing a virginal substitute teacher — played by Justin Timberlake — rich off inheritance money and highly idealistic in his profession — and to that end, she schemes to purchase breast implants from money raised by taking over a fund raising car wash where she writhes around in short shorts, the better to increase the funds from which she would pilfer money out of — and by shaping up her curriculum in order to increase her class’s test scores so as to win bonus money awarded to whatever teacher shows the greatest increase in test scores.

It looks like  a movie with strained plot contrivances at every turn.  I take it to be a sign of just how convoluted this plot comes across that the reviewer for Reason, who would be inclined to take an anti-teachers’ Union “What does a public servant have to do to get fired” stance — can’t accept her remaining as teacher as exaggerated political commentary.

I do see something in this pile that sparks my interest, and stops me from immediately discarding it into a “Hollywood Machine Rolls Out mildly profitable Brain Dead Filler” slot.  It is a sign that just maybe, layers down in the production, some creator affiliated with this movie had something inspiring in mind to add to this thing.  Apparently the Cameron Diaz character fills up her curriculum by showing her collection a wide collection of “Inspiring Super Teacher Movies”.  These have a troubled contradictory lineage — teachers love and hate them in equal measure.

A case study of the uneasy Hollywood Production process in fictionalizing actual teacher experiences is the teacher whose book inspired Dangerous Minds.  I heard her book on a book on tape on a car trip with my (teacher) sister — it was a series of vignettes of individual student cases in that “little miracles, and no magic bullet” category of the challenges of teaching in an economically deprived inner city high school.  I did not recognize it as attached to Dangerous Lives, until This American Life did a story on her disillusioning experiences with Hollywood.   The first step the movie took, in emphasizing her “drill sergeant” background and the environ of a her school, was to take her high school of — like 60 percent black students and 30 percent white students and make it 100 percent black.

The teacher was a mixed bag for her, though she saw positive and redeemable qualities in the character ever-so-loosely based on her.  These qualities were then chopped off when the movie was spun off into a tv series — where the show faced its ratings and sweeps needs by, for instances, an episode where the students organize a fund-raiser at a strip club, to the teacher’s guarded and reluctant acceptance, to which the original teacher commented — “I would not have condoned or accepted that.”

But that’s an extreme example of the “Unusual” “Outside the Box thinking” that the teachers of the bulk of “Super Teacher” movies are tending to try.  I’m thinking if we throw out the bulk of “Bad Teacher”, getting to the thrust of what this person sees in it, we may have a situation where a teacher — inspired for selfish reasons — wants to bring a turn-around in her teaching, and the only thing she knows is to imitate the gimmicks that abound in the genre.  And after a bunch of stunts and having the kids stand on the desk, and with an inspiring montage of the kids readying themselves for their big moment —
— Nothing changes.

In the movie, apparently this happens.  And she gets by by stealing the test-scores by seducing whatever official is in charge of keeping the scores — because it’s just that kind of stupid movie.  It’d be a fatalistic message, or one that there are no quick fixes to the problems of student achievement — but I am guilty here of constructing my own narrative of the droppings of a largely forgettable stupid movie.

The only thing I remember from the original Transformers movie — circa 1986 — was that Optimus Prime died — and this I only remember because of something some said about it years later — with that sense of false nostalgia I used to play with — “I cried when Optimus Prime died.  My Grandma took me to see it.  She fell asleep in the middle.”
That does strike me as a type of torture — family duty though it may be.  I trust Grandma took him to the park after to shake off her lingering debris from the experience.
I believe Optimus Prime was immediately resurrected in a series of cartoons which aired as much to wrap up the movie’s loose ends as to put in the mind of boys to get their parents to buy the Optimus Prime toy for Christmas.

The movie was based on a cartoon produced to sell a line of toys.  The storyline had to be put in place so boys in the single digit age range would know what the plot line was when smashing their gadget toys against each other.
Two decades later, Michael Bay produced a new trilogy of live action Transformers movies.  Roger Ebert, a movie critic in the populist vein who both believes that the general public can enjoy and appreciate high brow cinema and that there is room for low brow junk well crafted — tried to give the thing a pass but then threw up his hands in the air and declared defeat.

The best review I saw and heard of the first one of these was Rick Emerson’s notebook observations.  From what I have seen of the thing, it looks rather irredeemable.  There is no bother to make the storyline coherent, and Bay undercuts anything on that score by winking and nodding on through what the audience came to see — the big bloated action sequences.  The CGI looks bad, and through the last decade it has generally been clear we had not reached a point with this technology where we should be to make these things credible.  As it is the contrast is dizzying — it is shiny on shiny where there was a visual reason for the old black and white Westerns to have the “White Hats” against the “Black Hats”.

The best review I saw of the second one of these was from Ta Nehisi Coates’s blog at The Atlantic.  “That movie was fun, but god was it racist”.  It was observed in many sources that we had found our way to some “jive talking” Transformer robot characters.  And naturally, the spectacle was amped up to another degree, with .

It seems that the last installment is a “minor breakthrough” in CGI — no small feat and either nothing special or the whole difference — but reportedly the heart of the movie — a bunch of explosions — has some clarity to it.  I get mixed reports on the nature of the storyline — Yes, you have all this — does this thing give a damned in that sphere of “In a World where–” to have a world where all that makes any type of sense?  And apparently the Racist act has been dropped.

And the movie is, apparently, two things against it in devolution.  It’s apparently more sexist.  It may seem absurd to contemplate character and motive to the previous sexy love interest, what with the scene that the audience remembers is of Megan Fox bending over to fix a car, but if you throw out her personality — “Biker Chick” — you do see easily her place in fighting against automotive robot toys.  She was, reportedly, hard on the set and as such was replaced in the script with a Victoria’s Secret Underwear model whose personality is nurturing to the bitter lead male, and falls into the “captive” role.  A fuller and revealing story “on the set” is found in this LA Times story — our new actress knows how to “arch her back” right, as “Rosie comes with this Victoria’s Secret background, and she’s comfortable with it, so she can get down with Mike’s way of working and it makes the whole set vibe very different.”  Read into that for the character’s place in the movie whatever you may.  It is a difference between a 1 and a 1 and a half dimensional character within the backdrop of story-lines that move within that same range.

The other observation from this review — Bay’s adolescent id — is the exploding bloodiness of the scenes — or, our blood substitute of grease and grime and oil.  This is the nature of these movie sequels — the audience expectations are for the next installment to have “MORE!!!”, and I gather even Bay knows the limits to that game, and knows enough to check out before having to embark on a 90 minute sequence where the Transformers are now actually shedding something that looks even more remarkably like blood.  We see this too in the reported crass-ness of Optimus Prime — who, if I recall, and is an uncrass character who should be, absurdly and stoicly perhaps, making noble statements of grandeur.  His crassness is that last line to cross for this thing.

It is probably a case of the difference between indulging a child’s instinct and an adolescent’s instincts, but my guess in all of this is that for any adult sensibilities , the initial cartoon movie is the least insulting.  And there your inner adult has simply fallen asleep.

As I put things away in the farm shop the other day, the phone rang. I picked up and a voice on the other end said “Hello, my name is Anton I’m calling you because Lyndon
LaRouche wants to take your .…”
My normal response to political calls is to hang up. That’s what I did, and made a mental note to move the phone up higher. We’re having a flood you know. I no more than stepped away from the phone when it rang again. The voice on the wire said hesitantly, “Hello, this is Anton again.”
That’s when Anton got an earful.
I confess I used an expletive in my brief outburst against poor Anton. He interrupted me to advise that the call was being recorded. As I later told a friend about my little speech to Anton, “That should be some good listening!”

Yeah, my first thought on seeing this was “Is that… the Anton?” — which strikes me as a little odd, given his place in the Larouche firmament — I mean, he co-wrote the Bush book, and was the one who hackled Ezekial Emanuel! — that he would be dialing for dollars.  But maybe his sales technique is that good that he is the one to raise funds from Tornado and Flood Victims.
My gauge has been, of late, to bring some things up to the current date with respect to the congressional campaigns of Kesha Rogers, Rachel Brown, Summer Shields —

hm.  “The early impeachment and ouster of President Barack Obama is almost inevitable as an event before or during the coming Summer months, unless the backers of Obama, especially from London, were to copy the Adolf Hitler option with the likeness of the British creation, Adolf Hitler’s March 24, 1933 Ermächtigungsgesetz.”

Diane Sare, Dave Christie, and Bill Roberts, and some hypothetical debate and fparty forum question which will be asked but would if they were real candidates taken seriously.  Unfortunately, this one editorial news item is not enough to run on for questioning on the ethics of “Fund raising from Natural Disasters”, but… maybe someone should look into that.  I suppose this is what the current “government failing to accurately and precisely predict natural disasters” part of the “Globalist Plot to Eliminate 4 Billion People” is all about.

While Summer Shields, being that he is running for the Democratic House leader’s seat, will likely be with even fewer party functions than the others next year, if he were he should be asked why either his Obama Impeachment prediction didn’t come true or, since he isn’t impeached, whether he believes we’re now living under Nazi Germany.

Something else someone should look into:

The Glenn Beck connection:
About 30-40 years ago, members of Lyndon LaRouche’s cult followed Frances Fox Piven (a specialist on urban poverty) around the country to disrupt her speaking tours, and she was nearly pushed down a flight of stairs by someone calling her a fascist and CIA agent. Now, Glenn Beck has placed this elderly Jewish woman on his list of most despicable Jews, alleging that she “sows the seeds of revolution.” And, Glenn Beck’s followers make open threats of violence against this elderly woman, right on Glenn Beck’s website. […]
Since Glenn Beck lifts a lot of his material directly from Lyndon LaRouche, I’m wondering what the relationship is? Does Glenn Beck simply read and regurgitate LaRouche’s ideas, to save time on research? Or, is there some actual collaboration? Do some of Glenn’s employees have membership in the LaRouche organization?

Hm.  There’s a reason that I have chopped Beck and Alex Jones into my “continuing look-over” of The “Larouche Challenge”.  Actually there’s a few reason — one is that I sometimes get bored peering at “rare species of exotic floral” and want so go to something of clearer and larger imprint on our political culture.  The Jones — Beck connection is pretty well documented: Beck has lifted material from Jones, generally drawing up a partisan cast for them.  In the past, I’ve drawn up Jones — Larouche as pretty much entirely ideological — the eternal battle against THEY, wallowing in the same fever swamp and one that Larouche has played a part in for the past few decades.  But Jones’s having now found a spot for Larouche in his rotation of guests pretty well cements something a tad more — my thought on this matter has shifted about 30 degrees.  I have a half baked theory that upon Larouche’s death, Steinberg and Chaitkin and others now have readied connections with Jones that allows for an escape hatch — whether directly with Jones or just as a primary platform for Executive Intelligence Review sans Larouche.
I have tried to see if anything new has filtered into Alex Jones space Larouche-wise that suggests more corroboration, but there’s enough ideological symmetry that I can’t really say if there’s any difference — the “environmentalist Malthusian eugenics plot” has long been there, and my perception of an up-tik in “British Royal Family” items may just be from looking for something.

I want to thank “The New Survivalist” (his politics appear to be just as the name suggests) for getting this  Alex Jones — Lyndon Larouche conflab sliced to 17 minutes.  Much more brings the problem of the Overwhelming Crazy.  I hope The New Survivalist will do this task again in the future.

In my research I found that LaRouche was a double agent, check his brainwashed youth if you do not believe me. The specific problem was that he wants total power with no better solution than the fascism that he would claim to solve. Sorry to his fans, for a second there I thought we had a new brave hope…

The incompatible nature of the two’s ideology is glaring, even with the similarities.  I do not for a second believe Jones buys into the “Mobilize the Public to get Glass Steagal Repealed in the next month and this will immediately put Obama out of office and will awaken the public from the long nightmare” stance, or the “Majority in Congress, and Senate, and Gubernatorial System (?) are good people” line.  (How about John Kerry, huh?)  But Jones smiles along and nods anyway.

Some lines from these 17 minutes:  “some weaklings in the United States afraid to close in on itself.” “Cannot survive the conditions in July — will collapse sometime in the Summertime.” “Twitter operates a riot creating operation. Twitter as an organization is control, control from the type. […] Reduce the population from 7 Billion down to 1.  We’re looking at a whole system — began in the Roman Empire.  [–] established as a new empire with [] Venetian Party… did a lot of killing… outcome with the 70 years’ war.” … The Obama Administration is an instrument of that policy of genocide.  If you look at the policy — only Obama and what he represents are the people who are behind –  Are we going to be Human or are we going to be cannibals?  If you go for Obama, you are going for Cannibals.  8:52:  “He’s impeachable because he’s insane also.  And he couldn’t be what he is if he weren’t insane.  This man is a mental case of a certain type.”
[Jones brings up the 57 states gaffe, and I don’t know about the Age of daughters thing… neither all that interesting, really — but in the world of this conspiracy thing, as well as partisan hackery — politicians can never ever make a misspeak.   I’ll have to check into the  “There’s news today asking if he’s starting to have mental problems” ]
“He’s crazy.  Nero…”  False Flag:  Ruling Class Tricks, block from removing them from power: 9/11.  British system, certain branch of its operation, together with Saudi Kingdom — [the funding for 9/11… a vast ]…  Congressmen, good ones, not working together on a common cause… not effective in fighting against a man who is rotten…  “Bush all over the place.    “Glass Steagal will unite enough members of Congress to create a force that will be able to face stand up to Obama … if succeed, we will have crippled Obama and lead to elimination of him from the Presidency.  And then, the American people will see that they have their nation back, and… Mobilize.”  (To question of whether a Staged Terror Attack is in order, an example of the two having two different agendas and talking past each other)  “Incorrect.  Restore sense of … we can win this fight and win it in short order.”

Whew.

Comment-palooza Time!  For this, and various youtube clips of the show.  Here.

Two or three decades ago I sent the Larouchies photocopies of a 33rd degree Council book I got in a used book store. They asked me what my solution was. I told them the only solution was to take out all the mass-murderers – the entire political-judicial-legal-bureaucratic system and start over with a theocratic system.
They said, No, no. We can fix things like this with economics. Build a bridge in Germany, etc. Wrote them off, although I really like their books – like Dope, Inc., Ugly Truth About the ADL, etc.

Really its homey to have a 90 year old “expert” on everything puff  & blow like he has all the answers but come on now…  We know this country is whiskey bent and hellbound if its down to us having to LISTEN TO LYNDON LAROUCHE!

How ironic and bizarre is this?!? Lyndsay LaRouchan,a two headed monster brought to us by……………Alex Jones?!? I thought Alex was a serious person.
You really have to wonder just what is Alex Jones’ agenda.
Who’s next on the platform,Paris Hilton? David Duke? Oops,forgot,Dave’s already aboard.You know,the Jew thing.

Thanks Alex for consistently identifying fringe elements to the 911 Truth movement. One step forward, 3 steps back.

http://www.infowars.com/lyndon-larouche-war-is-globalist-favorite-tool-of-choice-for-poplutation-reduction/

LaRouche is a seriously imbalanced and mentally frail individual. He wanted to build a canal across Africa in the later 60s and early 70s. He has not got one single balanced thought in his repetroire. His shtick is humourous, not hillarious as that would imply intellegence, but humourous as in nut case.

Ok, I’ll be the fall guy on this cointelpro post…
LaRouche is a brilliant individual and the fact that paid gov trolls like yourself expend your employers resources in efforts to discredit him is further proof of that.
LaRouche’s philosophies would save America and much of the rest of the world if people in power listened to him and applied his knowledge.

That’s right folks, if you search for info about LaRouche online, you’ll see that for years there’s been a massive smear campaign effort online spanning hundreds of sites and negative articles that have flooded the search engines, pushing most if not all the positive info off the front pages of the search results and into the abyss. This is a tactic used by detractors to discredit individuals and groups who do not fit into the plans of governments and those in power. It’s a tactic to bury people, and the comment made by magnacarta above is parroting the negativity.

So when you see magnacarts’s comment above, then you google LaRouche’s name to find out what he’s talking about, it looks like LaRouche is a crackpot because google’s search results seem to back up his statement. It also has the added benefit of making supporters of LaRouche look like crackpots themselves (See my reply above).
Unfortunately, most cursory searches are enough to convince the majority of people without a second thought as they see something shiny or their phone beeps with a txt from their bff or the redbull starts to kick in.
It’s very effective, but only if you are naive enough to keep falling for it.
Knowing the propagandists tactics and being able to see them in action is the first step to truly waking up.
(Hey.  I know all about that Conspiracy!)

i just want to second WeCanHide’s insight into the Google search technique of burying alternative information. i was looking into Mao’s education at Yale Divinity School east and membership in some oriental Skull and Bones thing. nomatter how i worded my search i had to go ten pages deep to find anything.

The false flag attack they they are speaking of will be the tactical nukes that went mising in the soviet union. The illumanati purchased these to be used on american soil.This will keep obama in power unless the illumanati can buy another canidate because less face it. We know they bought Jimmy Carter,George Bush Senior,Bill Clinton,Bush junior, Barak Hussein Obama. Revelation states the Beast will hate the women(america) and will eat her flesh(economy) and burn her with fire. Stock up on food.

Obama is not going anywhere, there is only one solution to getting rid of him, but who is willing to pull the trigger? (Eep?)

LaRouche sounds like confusion specialist. Blah blah blah. Screw LaRouche. What an Ass! Why should someone control whether you live or die while telling you what to believe. Screw this prick. The only problem is the nature of hierarchy and its psychotic nature. It seems like it’s coming from somewhere where they don’t care. Didn’t people formerly live without central oppression and control. Isn’t centralized oppression “slavery”?

U really gotta’ love how Alex ALWAYS (110% of the time) tries 2 diflect attention away from jewz =)) WHOA NO! Never mind the people coming up with these big $ scams R mostly jewz – it’s the magical ‘English crown’ & some old guys in suits ‘over there’ someplace ‘secret’. No, it’s not those Israeli bags of krap right here in USA working tirelessly their entire lives 2 destroy the place. It’s the magical ‘regal clan’ someplace else ROFL!! =)) This is what happens when U marry a jew, Mr. Jones.

He’s right on Glass Steagall and he’s trying to take the side of the federal government, in an idealistic sense, and that, is to be, respected. LaRouche is a genius and a legend. One of the finest sons of America. He defended ex-slaves. He respects native Americans. He wants us all to live together, and, to be educated, in a classical sense. LaRouche is for productive, physical economy. He is true greatness. LaRouche And Alex Jones are what we are losing. People, we must stand now

bring back the glass act or kick there arse

larouche is a known right wing socialist. he was an infornment for the government, he worked with the reagon administration, he worked with the liberty lobby and the kkk. do i need say more?

No, because you sound wholly ignorant. Learn about the real world, and keep your mouth closed until then.

LaRouche is a communist and a fraudster.Hard to believe Alex has him on.

By the way, conspicuous by its omission is the Vatican, which is the oldest, wealthiest, and most corrupt institution on the planet (or in known civilization) but rarely hear reports on their dealings and influence in the world scene…… Holy Puppetmasters, Batman!

this guy is so boring my eyballs dried up and fell out.

Funny, I haven’t even watched the video yet, and already this was my first question, that’s because i know LaRouche. I just know he’s going to rattle on for 30 minutes saying nothing, but doing it an a creative way. However, i’ll give him a chance…one more time, and listen. LaRouche must have had a very troubled childhood, trying to fit in somewhere… he’s still at it.

How is this guy relevant to anything today? just curious….

We’ve heard of honor among the thieves – here we have an instance of honor among the political kooks. LR is an older and kookier Alex Jones, and Alex never met a conspiracy theory he didn’t like. Still he has his good points – he does a good job in interviewing Ron Paul, e.g.

his was one of the most powerful interviews i have seen so far. its both refreshing and liberating to hear someone talk about things as they really are.
after half a life time of disinformation spread by that sloppy whore the main stream media its refreshing to me to hear the truth.

make that man president!

People thought I was crazy supporting Lyndon LaRouche for president in the 1980′s, and they think I’m crazy for talking to his supporters now. Yeah, Mr. LaRouche is crazy – like a fox! Man, this guy is like a breath of fresh air!

Sorry Doc I’m going to have to disagree with you on this pick…
LaRouche is a a real good speaker but he’s also a hardcore Marxist / Socialist. He, like all the others in Washington would increase the size of government and use it to make us (in his own words) “truly equal”.
That is scary 1984 type thinking if I’ve ever heard it. He talks about free markets, because of our countries current predicament but Free Market Capitalism does not mean equality, just equal opportunity to succeed.

Okay.  Time for Point / Counterpoint.
Point: Lyndon LaRouche for Prezz
Ron Paul is a douche bag

Counterpoint:  As a matter of national survival we need an asymptotically-growing synergy around the idea of a post-Obama presidential troika with Rep. Dennis Kucinich in the role of president, Rep. Ron Paul as vice president and Mr. Lyndon LaRouche as senior advisor on science and economics. It is a perfect match on a multiplicity of political, meta-political and extra-political levels.
It is a solution that is obvious to me for the current political impasse but the solution needs to be obvious to millions of Americans beginning at the top with Kucinich, Paul and LaRouche. […]
The Presidency must be taken by 2012 or before. Mr. LaRouche believes that November 2012 will be too late. He is calling for immediate impeachment for violation of the War Powers Act or for removal from office under Section 4 of the 25th Amendment. Negotiations between the three principles towards the creation of a presidential troika must begin posthaste if they have not yet begun.

AND  Paul — Larouche — Kucinich.

Har de Har Har.  But you know…  Lyndon LaRouche, former Advisor to President Reagan Addresses the American Nation on 25^th June 2011 (26:21):

Fun fact for this person: Larouche hates Thomas Jefferson.  He warned Conservatives about Thomas Jefferson in his book “The Truth about Thomas Jefferson”.  “Sovereign Independent”  — AND so we have something to pile into these sentiments: 

Their decentralized model led to infiltration. I wouldn’t be shocked if the Left gout neo-Nazis to infiltrate the organization. It’s like the Tea Party, you and I saw Larouchies.  The EDL needed to disband and reform and keep stricter membership.

And for the purpose of  the Commenter for “Black News”

Anybody who has followed LaRouche over the years knows damn well that he is not a racist, in fact, he is the “Anti-Racist” Obama is controlled by White billionaires and he loves the Oh-so-white-WASP BITCH Queen of England. LaRouche is fighting the racist genocidal Prince Philip, consort to Obama’s beloved Queen Elizabeth-Obama is a pawn for these racist genocidalists, and so, apparently, are you!

Hey!  That item (see the Larouchies cursing King and see Dennis King recounting his experiences with Our Town here.) was was also picked up by “African Globe“.

“Irish Green Eyes.  Welcome to My World“.  (The neat thing about this story finally receiving some traction, limited though it is,  is that it puts a new photograph into the pool.  I was getting sick of the last one.)

This isn’t the only video out there receiving a smattering of comments.

We’re all going to burn in a fire ball on September 26th.
Luckily, I’m taking it pretty well.  You know, considering.
Comet Elenin is gonna kill us all, except for the billionaires who are already hiding out in secret caves in Colorado or Wyoming or somedamnplace.  LaRouche even made a YouTube about it.  I can’t put it on here because it has some dirty words on it but you can go see it in full color anti-scientific stereo insanity.
Now, I’m having trouble figuring all this out, but it has something to do with the Denver airport, seed storage in a secret very cold place, and some kind of big ole underground tunnel, but if we impeach Obama, all this will go away.  Click here, and check at the 4:05 mark.  That’s the part where Obama is determined to kill the entire human species.

I don’t know what made me laugh harder…the video featuring a “panel” of LaRouche, Santa Claus and Urkel, or the first YouTube Comment: “If you want there is a group forming in the Ozarks…”

And a bit more Chris Christie disruption item from mah29001:  Oh indeed, how typical is it that Lyndon LaRouche who states how we’re heading toward a Fascist like state does not mind his supporters were involved in trying to disrupt a Chris Christie event?
Strange those who sing the loudest on the coming of Fascism are the Fascists themselves.

Conyers and Lee are big-name Democrats, but I doubt they will be generally called mainstream within the Democratic Party. Conyers is the guy who held his own mock hearings asking to be called Chairman at them the last time the Dems were in the minority, and had lengthy ties with the LaRouchies until word spread widely (spoke at their fundraising dinner, held a Congressional hearing on a hospital where half of the invited speakers were connected to LaRouche, etc.). Lee is the only member of Congress to vote against war after 9/11. A Jared Polis, despite far lower name recognition, is a far more likely public face for the Democrats if they’re actually trying to get something passed.
Also Larouche hates marijuana.

Alliances abound:

Kentucky State Senator Perry Clark.  (admitting to demagouging on the EPA)
And here’s something else I didn’t know about Perry Clark until about 5 minutes ago when the Google Mechanism informed me, but I thought I should share it. In 2004, Perry Clark endorsed Lyndon LaRouche for President. And LaRouchites still promote Clark to this day (a “Long-standing LaRouche ally).

The case of Pena Esclusa has also encountered indifference among fellow countrymen. Pena Esclusa like Baduel is somehow controversial because in the past he had ties to Lyndon LaRouche. Pena Esclusa and LaRouche severed ties years ago. Now, all these past associations are absolutely unrelated to their convictions or indictments. Justice is a separate matter.

falsity of the feds’ lies about the Oklahoma City psyop than did Coop and his cagey CAJI-ites, although the Birchers, the Willis Carto Spotlighters, and the Larouchies were close (and characteristically uncooperative) rivals

Charlie Veitch just left the 9/11 Truth Movement, and is getting 9/11 Truth calls of being bought off by “THEM”:
Many,many people realized the 9/11 movement is a cult that is rotten with Jew haters,former Urantia Cult leaders,Scientologists,LaRouchies (just get a load of Alex today!) liars,opportunists and egomaniacs and have rethought their position.You illustrate expertly the paranoid style that dominates.
A guy changes his mind and right away he’s with the FBI.
How ironic when you are the schnook with the agenda.
“Police shades”?!? Goober,get off the train,it’s hurtling over the falls.

The Post Office Tour continues see here.

Went over to our little post office and there was a Lyndon LaRouche table on the sidewalk with a big DUMP OBAMA sign.
Oy, Lyndon LaRouche. He makes Ron Paul look normal. The economy is going to do in Obama, imho.
The LaRouchies are now on the Right. They went from Castroite to Constitutionalists.

And West Roxbury

The problem with matching funds.

 

James Wechsler‘s recollections found here.

 

Having listened to a recording of the evening’s proceedings and pondered a transcript, I still find myself largely out of Kerouac’s reach. I am, admittedly, eight years older than he-forty-three to his thirty-five the night of the symposium at Hunter-but such a gap is not normally considered prohibitive among adults. I was on speaking terms with a lot of men some years younger than Kerouac. Moreover I brought no instinctive hostility to the occasion (toward the end, in one of his most coherent thrusts, lie cried, “You came here prepared to attack me,” but in fact I had come, as previously indicated, utterly unprepared, period).

There were times when he sounded like a jaded traveling salesman telling obscene bedtime stories to the young; there were others when the melancholy of his cadences achieved a mildly hypnotic effect, so that one listened to it as if hearing an obscure but appealing fragment of music. There were also many intervals that can only be described as gibberish. Thus at one point he was chanting (and I quote from the transcript):

In fact here is a poem I’ve written about Harpo Marx: […]

Without questioning the place of Harpo Marxism in history, I find little rhyme or reason in these observations, and the Leader drooped to the dimensions of ham. The totality of his performance, brightened as it was by flashes of imagery, was a union of madness and sadness; by the end the occasional vivid or moving phrase seemed like an isolated line of poetry surrounded by vulgar ramblings on a latrine wall.

Did we ever establish any communication? I think we did; at least there is no other way I can explain the furious feeling he exhibited in the exchange that took place after the allegedly prepared recitals had occurred.

KEROUAC:…James Wechsler…Who’s James Wechsler? Right over there. James Wechsler, you believe in the destruction of America, don’t you?

WECHSLER: No. (The transcript added “laughter.”)

KEROUAC: What do you believe in, come here, come here and tell me what you believe in …You told me what you don’t believe in. I want to know what you do believe in. (Cries from the audience: “That’s right.”) This is a university, we’ve got to learn . . . I believe in love, I vote for love (applause).

It was rather difficult to avoid a pretentious reply:

WECHSLER: I believe in the capacity of the human intelligence to create a world in which there is love, compassion, justice and freedom. I believe in fighting for that kind of world. I think what you are doing is to try to destroy anybody’s instinct to care about this world.

KEROUAC: I believe, I believe in the dove of peace.

WECHSLER: So do I.

KEROUAC: No you don’t. You’re fighting with me for the dove of peace. You came here prepared to attack me.

It went on for a little while longer and then the chairman mercifully explained that it was very late, and in truth it was a few minutes after ten.

There is no point in indefinitely prolonging the reportorial agony. This was hardly a debate in which anyone could have scored the points; I was grappling with a man in outer space, and it was only for the briefest of intervals that we even seemed to occupy the same mat. I shall never quite understand why he assumed I had come there with a plot, or even why he responded so angrily to a minor quip I made at President Eisenhower’s expense, this being a time when even Republican newspapers were ceasing to regard Eisenhower as above criticism.

Kerouac had observed, if that is the proper term:

Well, Mr. Wechsler, I was sitting under a tangerine tree in Florida one afternoon and I was trying to translate the Diamond Sutra from Sanskrit to English and I said shall I call it a personal god or an impersonal god, and at that moment a little tangerine dropped out of the tree and they only drop out of a tree about once every six weeks and landed right square in the middle of my head. Right, boing; I said, okay, personal god.

Somewhat testily I interjected:

I just want to say, Mr. Kerouac, that as an editor I have to write about Dwight D. Eisenhower’s press conference every week–

KEROUAC (interrupting): He’s very witty—

WECHSLER:–and it’s possible to reduce life to an area of so little sense that there would hardly be any reason for all these people to have come here tonight, or for us to be here. I don’t think we render any service by doing that—

KEROUAC: Education is education.

WECHSLER: Well, as Eisenhower would say government is government.

KEROUAC: And as Dulles would say, statesmanship is statesmanship.

For that small moment we seemed like two quarreling editorial writers occupying the same planet.

Dr. Joseph Kauffman, the soft-voiced moderator, gently interpolated that “the point which Mr. Wechsler makes is one which is fairly commonly held among people who are considered activists in the sense of social and political action.”

In what I must characterize as a growl Kerouac responded: “Don’t give me that stuff. I’m going out of this atmosphere.”

In a sense, that is the last I saw of him.

 

Jack Kerouac’s opinion found in the footnote here.