If you dress as the Indian in the Village People, you’ll get accused of appropriating gay culture, and get accused of appropriating Native culture.  Double your embarrassment, or double your fun — whichever.

There’s this noxious “truther” logic on this, which strikes me as a spurious maligning attack on M.F….

A short time later The Oregonian/OregonLive received an anonymous email that included screen shots from a video documenting the initial encounter between the two men, along with claims that Fletcher was a member of Rose City Antifa, a prominent antifascist group in Portland, who had reason to “fight” Christian because of their prior meeting.

If I spot this right, some dolt dropped this to the Oregonian in an attempt to dig some kind of hole in his version of events, how he came to have his neck slashed when defending two Muslim girls on a Max train, and find some inconsistency or fault in his story and alternate reason for him to confront the man who killed two people on the Max train.  I suppose we’re dipping back at his defense plea in court, “Not Guilty of anything but defending myself from the violent assault of M. F.!” — a signal that he had personalized him to a new mortal enemy.

So they met before.  Or occupied the same space once.  Had a brief confrontation.  One shouting hateful rhetoric, the other juggling balls around.  Here he is in the same screenshot, see?.
And from here, we gather he’s a member of “antifa”.  Because… that joker clown get up that he’s wearing?  That’s how those antifa extremists dress in doing their dastardly deeds, right?  RIGHT?

(Turn over to the attack ad on special Congressional election candidate Jon Ossoff in Georgia where the Republican running against him used some footage of bandana-ed hoodlums and the line “He’s one of them”, and somehow I can’t imagine the clown get up making the political ad cut of negative images.)

No.  The man’s not antifa.  But, and, you know… like it matters.

Pursuing the comments section brings to mind the axiom “Never Read the Bottom Half of the Internet”.  And we see the strange whisps of victim blaming…

“Not exactly Rocky Balboa”.  A toss out of a call of warning to any “would be “Clint Eastwoods”.  Surely the two men killed on the Max train (one a military veteran and Republican) better fits his demands for buffness, and surely the two girls assaulted fit the criteria even less.

Dreading the farewell of Jeff Flake and the coming in of Roy Moore…

… Jeff Flake suddenly the face of some kind of “moderate” “sensibleness”, because — well, at least he’s at least he’s principled…

“Sometimes works with Democrats” is some such thing that pops up in the news feed…

… Don’t know what that means, but they have to put some qualifier on why his break from the current Republicans is important…

It is worth noting, there is an election coming up in Alabama.  If they really want to stop a Roy Moore, they have an opportunity to do so.  I suppose it feeds into a narrative of a “Democratic Party” rising, which is what stops those Alabama Republicans who “hate him” from taking the leap over…

… and this Democratic win would make the impossible chances of Democratic majority in the Senate turn to merely improbable…

but… goddamned it… It’s freaking Roy goddamned Moore.  Who… “fruit salad“?  Is that code for something?

An odd admission from the National Review:
Republican Roy Moore is the new Welch (or at least one of several new Welches).

I see Breitbart is all over the Roy Moore express. But if Roy Moore is “at least one of several new Welches”… who are the others?  I suppose Flake is the new Goldwater, except for the part where Goldwater never left his Senate job in Arizona for being out-flanked by some definition of a “right”.

One thing to consider…

… on why we don’t see various Republicans leaping alongside Bill Kristol of the Weekly Standard to cut off ties with Roy Moore…

50 percent plus a stray voter of the votes cast in Alabama don’t much care of Bill Kristol, George W Bush…

… sigh and sigh…

Ben Sasse,

… this commenting guy —

I am not an American so therefore I can’t understand how someone as stupid and bigoted (removed from the bench I think twice) could possibly be elected for dog catcher —

And once again, I wonder: why not elect him Dog Catcher?  What’s he going to do hay wire in catching dogs? —

… with a plurality beyond his base of support believing that something like this may be a little right, but the mainstream Democratic candidate he’s running against is too a little left…

… or… just too liberal for Alabama.  Equivalent.

Or maybe we’ll see.

I imagine either candidate would be finished at the end of their one (not quite) term, wouldn’t they?

ITEM NUMBER ONE:  It is instructive to take a gander at the Daniel Estulin 2015 book covering the Tavickstock Institue, on the question of what portion of this book is simply replaying the works of the Lyndon Larouche Movement.  54.5 percent.  Therabouts.

Skip to the endnotes for each chapter, and count the sources to Larouche publications — from the 1970s on into the 2010s.  I note that a weakness in my ability to spot things quickly, as the citations get a little slippery — sometimes skipping over to the American Almanac website instead of the orginial EIR source, for instance.  As well some unfamiliarity with names throws me off.  The result is that in two countings, I myself have slighly diverging numbers.

Introduction: 5 out of 8
Chapter one:  52 out of 84
Chapter two:  14 out of 29
Chapter three:  1 out of 18
Chapter four:  48 out of 80
Chapter five:  50 out of 91
Chapter six:  42 out of 68… with an additional 3 going to, believe it or not, the Larouche Planet website (“Larouche in Wiener World”)
Chapter seven:  17 out of 31

The one that stands out in this group — Chapter three, is instructive.  Here we have a study of how the Illuminati is sending messages through popular music.  It makes a big deal of hip artists’s boasts on being the “Rain Man”, never making clear what this is supposed to entail — is this transferred to simply the Illuminati’s boastings of “Rain Man” dom, conditioning the public to accept the current metaphorical rain, or a signal to its puppets to switch on some “rain” switch?  On the dealings with Rihanni’s song “Under the Umbrella”, we have the issues of robots dancing and goat heads in music videos — the robots Estulin spells out as being conditioning us to accept our robot overlord future — though what this has to do with the Umbrella I don’t know… maybe we’re just all under the Umbrella of the Unseeing Eye?
And what of the echoing of Rihanni with “Umbrella… Brella… Brella… A?”

Anyway.  We can see why Larouche hasn’t much to say about this, being the Larouchies don’t much deal in popular music.

ITEM NUMBER TWO.  Hey now.  An interesting recent attempt at editing wikipedia for some actual analytical purpose on Larouche and his movement.

The Wikipedia editing attempts… far-right Perhaps now more clear than ever,  which espouses deeply [[antisemitic]] ideas and conspiracy theories characteristic of the far-right, Sure… the movement’s underlying ideology entails a series of [[anti-semitic]], [[Holocaust-denying]] [[conspiracy theories]] that are paradigmatic of the far-right No.  They stand for … um… Silk Roads and Land Bridges and… um stuff — foremost of all,  its leadership, in particular, LaRouche’s wife, [[Helga Zepp-LaRouche]], has made the conspiratorial, far-right, and [[anti-Semitic]] underpinnings of the movement evident to the public in a 1979 statement that refers to the Holocaust as a “hoax”.   Good to point out a leadership shifting.
In her statement, Zepp-LaRouche, writes: “While in the US, no one especially cherishes even the slightest illusions about the power of the Zionist lobby the present administration, the influence of a covert Zionist lobby in the Federal Republic has been only a few initiated political figures known, but not the general public. And so we have to take the hypocritical Holocaust hoax as an opportunity to blow the whistle on these foreign agents.”

Interestingly enough, the “Anti-Zionist” tag is removed on Lyndon.

ITEM NUMBER THREE… too clever by half.

The peinlich presentation of the Ignoble Prize in Economics to Richard Thaler—the latest in a long line of Stockholm and Oslo

There actually is an “Ignoble Award”.  Here’s who won it this year…

ECONOMICS PRIZE [AUSTRALIA, USA] — Matthew Rockloff and Nancy Greer, for their experiments to see how contact with a live crocodile affects a person’s willingness to gamble.
REFERENCE: “Never Smile at a Crocodile: Betting on Electronic Gaming Machines is Intensified by Reptile-Induced Arousal,” Matthew J. Rockloff and Nancy Greer, Journal of Gambling Studies, vol. 26, no. 4, December 2010, pp. 571-81.
WHO ATTENDED THE CEREMONY: Matthew Rockloff and Nancy Greer

Surely the Larouche Movement can be put in the running and win something one of these years… just like, say… Jack Van Impe once won an award.

Webster Tarpley wins a mention for a dubious honor… but when was he ever a star bright enough to become dimmer?

ITEM NUMBER FOUR:   Once again, they’re hitting the Farm Circuit.

Oct. 28 will be a day full of expert presentations. Bob Baker is an economic policy consultant and specializes in agriculture economic research. He is currently a correspondent for the Executive Intelligence Review news service.

Will Kansas farmers go for the Silk Road?  Only time will tell.

They’re also hitting the Italian Engineer circuit.

ITEM NUMBER FIVE

Run down of BUSO campaigning in Germany...

“The future of Germany is the New Silk Road!” reads one pinned to a streetlight near Berlin’s main train station.
“Cultural renaissance instead of barbarism,” reads another. And, “Germans can stop world war!”
These posters, in a matching blue and yellow color scheme, all urge Berliners to “vote BüSo.”

More or less, a “What is this? item from Foreign Policy.  The Larouche Movement responds.

The author of the attack, Bethany Allen-Ebrahemian, comes from the East-West Institute in Hawaii, and the detestable contempt she affects for Chinese intelligencia and leaders is a mark of neo-Con geopoliticians. But it belies a real fear of the New Silk Road policy, and the LaRouches as leaders of it.
Foreign Policy will be one U.S.-based observer nervously counting the votes of the parliamentary slate of Germany’s Civil Rights Movement Solidarity (BüSo) party.

Sure.  The members of Foreign Policy magazine watched the results,biting their fingernails as the results came in, wearily counting BUSO votes, like they were liberals watching the election results map of Michigan last November.

Results of the German national election are in:
Out of 46.4 million votes, BÃœSO gains 6735.

Then they… partied?

It is interesting to note that there has been a shift of media, from Russia’s propaganda outlets to China’s.  And it gets rather comical — Helga’s really laying it on thick, ain’t she?

ITEM NUMBER SIX

Hunter Cobb sells the China “work” — “rarely does one see the name LaRouche in print, despite his visionary leadership and willingness to take on the powers of Wall Street and London, weathering wild defamation, proven targeting by the FBI, etc.
I have been an ally of LaRouche for more than 40 years and have seen his vision becoming a reality in much of the world in the recent years.  […]
One of the two Americans who traveled to China for this conference is a close associate of LaRouche. He gave a presentation here in Alameda Sept. 30. Those who would like to know more, may contact me at hunter

Interesting to see just what was happening at this conference…

“… I think we have to go for the full thing. I want full victory. I want to crush Mueller, crush the entire apparatus that’s out to destroy Trump, this country, this organization, and I want to build up this country over the next 20 years. I see Americans as optimistic and hardworking and mission-oriented, and having fun the way I see young people in China doing today.”

On paper it looks like a rousing speech, but then he closes the meeting and the applause makes us feel there are like 5-10 people in the room. If Mike think he’s “on to something,” I think he’s very sadly fooling himself.

And elsewhere… American intellectual Lyndon LaRouche… so he’s got that.

ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.  Historical notes

One.

In October 1983, an article in the Executive Intelligence Review, a publication linked to controversial American politician Lyndon LaRouche, proposed the building of a Kra canal to the Thai Ministry of Transportation.

TWO:

Atlas Novack opposes a constitutional convention in California– don’t vote for this ballot measure; do what you did to the larouche one.

Three:

So, way back in 2004, I decided to engage one of them in conversation, which I quickly learned was like entering an alternate universe where up is down and the Pope is Hitler.
Somehow, we shifted from politics to science. They believed that “reductionism” — the notion that complex phenomena are best understood through a process of reducing them down to simpler parts — was Satanic. Not wrong or oversimplified, but Satanic. As in something the Dark Prince himself would approve of. They also didn’t like Isaac Newton very much. […]

In other words, Lyndon LaRouche is some strange combination of Paul Ehrlich, Ray Kurzweil, and Alex Jones, with just a dash of Naziism. If that’s not a winning campaign, then what is?

I came across him when researching history of mathematics.  He had a thing about Archytas, and in contrast a list of great mathematicians he didn’t like.
Especially “putting down” Euler — that was really over the top.

I’m sure we can find some non over the top Euler critics out there.

FOUR.  Illinois 1986.

Five:  a quick mention of a Citizen Electoral Council win.

ITEM NUMBER EIGHT

An item published by the org: An article published The Nation Caves, Attacks VIPS Report

Yeah, but I think this is more worthwhile reading… at least in terms of what’s important here..

Appalled?

ITEM NUMBER NINE

David Neiwart’s new “What Happened” book — Alt America — on the so called “alt right” and its rise through the Obama administration into the new Trump administration does not have a mention of Larouche in the index page.  But somehow we get this…

The phrase “cultural Marxism” had first appeared in right-wing circles only a few months before, in July 1998, when William Lind, leader of the far right Free Congress Foundation, gave a speech he titled “The Origins of Political Correctness”.

It then slides into a mention of Norweigian terrorist Anders Breivick.

Notable here because William Lind made the coinage for the Larouche Movement in 1992 …

The poll by the Levada Center asked a representative sample of 1,600 Russians to name the “top 10 most outstanding people of all time and all nations.” It also compiled a list of all 20 names that received more than 6 percent of the vote.

The results.  And I’m trying to find the list online, but can’t seem to beyond the news reports from June…

1.  Josef Stalin
2.  Vladimir Putin
3.  Aleksandr Pushkin
4.  Vladimir Lenin
5.  Peter the Great
6.  Yury Gagarin

Only three non-Russians made the top 20. French leader Napoleon Bonaparte garnered nine percent, followed by Albert Einstein and Isaac Newton, each receiving seven percent. The list closes with the first and only president of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, who got six percent of the votes.

I’m hard pressed to say a poll of Americans would result in much less an American laden list.  Jesus would probably end up first.  Trump would find his way somewhere on the list.

I see, in the wake of the tragedy in Los Vegas, a timeline of all mass shootings that resulted in at least 12 deaths.  And I’m scratching my head.  Twelve.  That’s an arbitrary number.  And it is maybe atonal to ask, or suggest — but… what?  Is there a giant spate of eleven deaths that leave not enough room to get everything to fit the allotted space?

Later, I read a citation of a number from an advocacy group, numbering and charting shootings of four or more people.  And again.  An atonal question, surely — but… is there something that differentiates three and four?

From Katha Pollit’s editorial in the Nation chiding reviews of Hillary Clinton’s — or maybe it’s the irksome “ugh” quality — new book as sexist… and see too the “word” on Hillary… and thus the sarcastic pointers against Hillary Clinton.

She’s got a shrill voice and thinks she’s oh-so-special …

It’s interesting, because I’ve always pondered the political problem of Hillary Clinton as her being another boring and sing-songy voice that Americans can’t quiet imagine hearing in the news constantly for four years — in the tradition of Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry — thus meaning she’s a Democratic type that’s borne terribly — and can’t quite place if this is specific in women as we don’t have enough female presidential candidates to compare.  Granted, I thought she’d get away with it in this last presidential election, and join the ranks of — oh, Nixon and Bush I as the trope of never loved and… plodding? … but elected anyways.

But leaving this one to the more interesting one…

She voted for the war in Iraq — true, so did John Kerry and Joe Biden and that momentary darling of the left, John Edwards, but her vote was just… different.

The problem.  And I can never escape this with this magazine.  About a decade ago, the magazine ran a stark cover with a pledge.  Not to endorse any candidate who supported the Iraq War and won’t make ending it a central point in their campaign.  And maybe they’re right to jettison it for the sake of furthering political goals — but they’d be righter to have not made such a pledge in the first place.  Then they wouldn’t have been compromised in momentarily helping make John Edwards a darling of the left, so that self respect would still be with them.

So the magazine sits somewhere to the right of Z magazine and Counterpunch and others who can’t dally in the political muck of compromised compromisers in the Democratic Party.  Even if it sometimes tries not to… and then… lets an institutional memory fade into oblivion.