Constants and variables 54
The DNC side of this "election" was normal. Kicking out all honest candidates and real votes to insure the dynasty. Wikileaks showed us this process in detail, but it wasn't news. We already knew that "parties" worked this way.

ZH points out a supposed "smoking gun", DNC trying to shape the RNC process. Again this is normal. Both sides in EVERY competition run this routine. Politics, industry, sports. Hire moles to push the competitor into untenable or unsellable choices. See the 1962 Plymouth for a classic industrial example.

But the gun doesn't smoke. What DNC wanted was an R candidate who couldn't possibly get votes. They blew it.

As I noted at the start, the RNC side was the variable this time, the non-default performance. It would be genuinely informative to get some hacked emails from RNC headquarters, to see why they ALLOWED non-Bush candidates to win primaries and caucuses. Were they simply paid by DNC, or did they have a strange unknown agenda? (Winning the election is not a physically possible agenda for RNC; it must be something else.)

= = = = =

A couple other leakings that would be truly informative:

(1) Federal Reserve between 2007 and 2009. What really happened? What was the extortion threat that forced TARP? (We don't need inside info about ZIRP. Bugsy Bernanke announced publicly that he was doing ZIRP and QE to pump up the Tribal Casino, not to "aid the economy." Economists continue to tell us the opposite, contradicting their own Tribal Chief.)

(2) A major insurance or health care company between 2009 and 2011, during the passage of Romneycare. Blue Cross, Kaiser Permanente, Humana, etc. What did they EXPECT? Why did they lobby for a system that would ultimately decrease their profits? Were they truly clueless, or were they seeking something other than profit?

(3) A small-market TV station or newspaper. Wikileaks showed us a direct and active conspiracy between DNC and the networks and big papers. DNC provided stories and expected headlines, and media copied as expected. Small stations and papers are equally direct and consistent, even when they're not simply carrying a network program or reprinting a NYT item. The old Groupthink excuse no longer applies. We know it's a conspiracy. How did the lower levels receive their daily commands?

Labels: Constants and Variables

  ¶ 12:36 AM