Trump Parliament

Since last May (see "ABH Corpus"), more candidates have joined the race. No surprise, except maybe for George Pataki, a serious contender for VP who didn't have to show up that early. As expected, Chris Christie and Scott Walker jumped in, as well as the Bobby Jindal - Rick Perry - Rick Santorum trio.
 
Of course, Donald Trump eventually putting his money where his big mouth has always been remains the most entertaining part of the show, particularly when you're on the Democratic side.

Yet Latinos and Veterans are not finding Trump that funny. Not after his latest outrageous remarks on Mexican migrants or John McCain.

That's classic Donald Trump: a farcical extremist, a guy who, at the same time, makes you want to laugh (doesn't he look like Owen Wilson?) and to puke (doesn't he think like Jean-Marie Le Pen?).

Owen? You'd better not pout, I'm telling you why (Donald Trump between Jean-Marie Le Pen and Owen Wilson)

This outrageous character is leading the polls for the GOP primaries: according to Fox (July 13-15), he scores 18% compared to 14% for Jeb!, 15% for Walker (Scott, not W), 8% for Rand Paul, and 7% for Marc Rubio (who didn't stand the distance vs Bush The Third).

This shouldn't last, but Donald Trump has become the ultimate deformable mirror for other GOP candidates, forcing them to distance themselves from this radioactive clown, to the risk of alienating ultra-conservative voters.

And ultra-conservative voters are not in a mood for laugh, following the latest victories of democracy:  Confederate Flag outlawed, and equal rights for same-sex marriage (hell, Lindsay Graham even became a candidate for the GOP, how's that for LGBT rights!).


blogules 2015
Since 2003, nonsensical posts about noncritical issues in nonenglish (get your blogules transfusion in French)
NEW: join blogules on Facebook!!! and Twitter (@stephanemot, @blogules)

Follow Us

I, RomnBot (Meet Mitt)

Another exclusive interview from our Agence Fausse Presse: former Massachusetts Governor Willard Mitt Romney.

Blogules: "Thank you for having us today, Governor. Wow. What a great smile."

Mitt Romney: "You know, I'm 65, but I look 55, and soon I'll be 45. The 45th POTUS, that is. I found out the best way of keeping fit was to spend time and money."

-"As long as it's just my time and your money, I can join you for a little while... Did you expect the primaries to last that long?"

-"First, they're far from over: Rick has left the race, but Newt and Ron will keep piling up as many delegates as they can until the Convention, and even as we speak, voters are casting ballots for Herman Cain. Second, from the start, these primaries were meant to last, and the Republican Party optimized the process to make the show as entertaining as Obama-Clinton '08."

-"It sure has been entertaining, but instead of building momentum around the best Presidential candidates, your show is exposing on prime time a bunch of morons struggling for the survival of the most unfit for the job."

-"Precisely. It was meant as a clear religious statement."

-"Uh. I said 'morons', not 'mormons'."

-"I know you said that. I was referring to the "survival of the most unfit" part: we're finally proving Darwin wrong. Actually, our primary process is so smart it should be considered a perfect example of intelligent design."

-"I see you're already shamelessly hustling up creationists... But you do believe in the survival of the fittest, don't you? You, ever the good capitalist..."

-"Yeah, yeah, Romney's the name, money the game. But it's not a matter of fitness. Only a question of timing. Of understanding the music of money."

-"And what kind of music would that be?"

-"I don't give a grand. What matters is the timing, the moment when the music stops, just like when you play musical chairs. The aim of the game is to pass the buck before that moment, to get rid of all the junk, to collect the $200 M, to build a hotel in the Caymans, and never, ever, to go to jail. That's where all the Mormons go."

-"The morons. Morons belong to prisons. You said 'Mormons'."

-"I know I said that. Morons go to jail, but we Mormons do have a thing for the Cayman Islands. Salt Lake City is so far from everywhere anyway, and it's so quick with our private jets. Since we have three Beechcraft‎s, four Cessnas, two UTCs, five Lockheed Martins, and a couple of Boeings, I don't need to pass by home after work to pick up Ann and the kids. Each one brings their own set of Vuitton trunks, and I take care of the dog. Strapped to the roof, as usual."

-"To the roof of the jet as well?!?"

-"Seamus always relieves himself during takeoff. I never even considered bringing him in."

-"May I ask something: have you ever considered trying to be likeable?"

-"Look. I'm trying to be electable, and that's already something difficult for me. Not running risks, maintaining Chinese walls, keeping emotions out of the scope, milking the cow... That's the way I like it."

-"Indeed, you never quite left the BCG... And by the way, you must be toying with matrices and consulting a lot for the future Veep. Any hint regarding your running mate?"

-"The vetting has started, yes."

-"Let me guess... You need someone to compensate your weak points: a Republican identified as such by all sub-currents of your nuthouse, preferably an icon for fundies and Tea Partiers, a woman, with charisma, some sense of humor, an aversion for boredom, and an open bar at Fox News. But I don't see Sarah Palin don a white shirt and a black necktie to promote the Book of Mitt at your side. And she won't help for key demographics..."

-"Sarah refused: she's planning a coup for the Convention. Susana Martinez would do a perfect Biden-buster, but she used to be a Democrat."

-"So did Reagan."

-"Yeah, but I'm already OK with Reaganians. The thing is, I have to cope with various breeds of loonies who want me to marry Marco Rubio, or to have some kind of zealot one Huckabeat away from Presidency... I'd feel so more comfortable with a running mate as boring as Paul Ryan."

-"Another 'moderate' on the Gingrich-Limbaugh scale..."

-"I'm not a moderate. I'd think and say whatever you'd like me to think and say to win that race. I've been programmed to win races."

-"Sometimes, you almost sound like a robot."

-"Because I am a robot. I wasn't built in Motor City by accident. And I wanted GM and co to file for bankruptcy in order to get all the patents for a song. Picture that: an armitt of Romneys roaming the World. Without any purpose whatsoever."

-"Except, maybe, to convert everybody to Moronism?"

blogules 2012
Since 2003, nonsensical posts about noncritical issues in nonenglish (get your blogules transfusion in French)
NEW: join blogules on Facebook!!!

2012 Presidential Elections in France - It's not the economy, stupid

In 2011, America discovered that helping a young democracy could result in a new theocracy. France tried that too, back in 1776, and as of today, the result is still unclear: the President of the United States pledges allegiance on a Bible, finishing with a vibrant "so help me God", and he would never dare ending a speech without godblessamericaing the audience urbi et orbi, for fear of being considered Un-Amerikan. In this presumably model democracy, all Greenbacks are tagged with the words "in God we trust", Satanists are better considered than atheists because at least they believe in fallen angels, and self-proclaimed 'republicans' would rather be represented by a Christian ayatollah (Santorum) than a moderate Mormon (Romney).

Technically, mixing religion with politics is not compatible with democratic and republican ideals, and I already explained how, in France, putting secularism at the core of the Constitution was meant to secure both democracy and the freedom of religion, and how that fragile balance was undermined as Nicolas Sarkozy followed George W. Bush's dangerous path (see "France, secularism and burqa : a political issue, not a religious one").

Of course, the French democracy was threatened long before Bush or Sarko came to power. And the 'laicite' and 'egalite' dogmas didn't succeed in a truly multicultural / multicultual society.

Anyway. Back in 2007, I voted Sarkozy because France needed reforms, and only he could deliver. I didn't trust the man, but somehow counted on the vast majority of UMP lawmakers to prevent him from breaking his very formal pledge to respect the French brand of secularism. Of course, Sarkozy implemented only a small part of the necessary reforms, and broke his pledge. He followed Bush's missteps to the tiniest detail, undermining the delicate balance of powers at all levels (executive, legislative, justice, media, religion...).

I can't imagine how low the French economy would have dived had Segolene Royal won the 2007 elections, but we would probably be very glad to maintain double A ratings. Yet unlike most his European counterparts who got the pink slip following the (first) depression, Sarkozy will not be judged by the economy: he simply cannot be re-elected because he betrayed the nation.

His main rival, Francois Hollande, also happens to be an impostor. He even received a boost from Sarkozy, who believed he could play the same trick as in 2007: I have my friends in the media push a weak and hollow candidate (then Hollande companion Segolene Royal), I vampirize the extreme-right with preemptive strikes in the no-man's land between 'law and order' and outright fascism, and I leverage my reputation as a doer.

Hollande is not as weak and hollow as he seems to be: he shares some of the key 'qualities' that helped his model, Francois Mitterrand, reach the top... only not the qualities leftist voters wished he had. And unsurprisingly, the worst enemy of Hollande happens to be Mitterrand's archrival Michel Rocard.

Traditionally, the French have their hearts on their left, but their wallets on their right, so they tend to vote for a center-right candidate. Fourty years ago, Mitterrand, a conservative with an ambiguous Vichy background, highjacked the Socialist party and managed to build an artificial platform where the Communists brought the votes needed to claim the Elysee Palace. Rocard, the reformer who dreamt of transforming a patchworked party into a modern social democrat powerhouse, was sidelined before witnessing, helplessly, his side fail miserably each time it claimed victory (most notably: ill timed, ideology driven 'reforms' in the early eighties or late nineties).

Holland lacks experience in governments, but he already proved his inability and unwillingness to reform the Socialist Party when he was Secretary General. Worse, instead of seizing the momentum when he finally was chosen as the party champion, he opted for yet another impossible consensus. Needless to say, his majority is bound to fail.

So the choice for those 2012 elections is clear: continuity, alternation, or change.
- Continuity means Nicolas Sarkozy and a moral collapse.
- Alternation means Francois Hollande and a deeper decline for French economy and politics.
- Change means either Marine Le Pen and the Front National, a French Revolution for the worse, or Francois Bayrou and the MoDem, a bet on the ability to build a national alliance government with moderate reformers from both sides.

Back in 2007, I hesitated between Bayrou and Sarkozy: the former would have made a good and fair president, but he didn't have the capacity to reform. Now France could be ready for a less partisan approach. Furthermore, a Bayrou victory would necessarily lead to the much needed reforms of both the Parti Socialiste and the UMP. The PS remains one of the few dinosaurs sticking to XIXth century politics, and the UMP needs to discard un-republican (no cap letter, please) elements from its platform.

The worse is that even top members from both leading parties are not enthusiastic about their own champions:
- socialist 'elephants' know Hollande is a fake but the right has never been that weak ahead of a Presidential election (even the Senate sports a socialist 'pink'), and nice positions are up for grabs in the government
- UMP leaders know Sarko doesn't stand a chance, and they already prepare for 2017 and the ineluctable failure of Hollande. Francois Fillon plans to conquer Paris and to capitalize on a strong performance as PM, while Jean-Francois Cope shamelessly carves himself into a Sarkozy mini-me.

Compared to Nicolas Sarkozy's, Barack Obama's reelection bid almost looks like a stroll in the park: both performed relatively well on the economic front, but the POTUS can put much more blame on the opposition, including during his tenure (after the 'sound economy of 2008', last year's budget mess...), and the Republican Party is even more divided, ideologically crippled, inconsistent, and unfit to govern than the French Socialist Party.


blogules 2012
Since 2003, nonsensical posts about noncritical issues in nonenglish (get your blogules transfusion in French)
NEW: join blogules on Facebook!!!

Six Buffoons in Search of a Kingmaker

It takes a looney to know one: Palin just endorsed Gingrich.

And the only sane person in this nuthouse dropped out of the GOP race (not Stephen Colbert, the other one: Jon Huntsman*).

Which leaves us with 6 people: Romney, Gingrich, Paul, Santorum, Perry, and the future Guest Star.

Who knows from which asylum the nominee shall vet his Veep? And how about a third candidate? Say, from the INETP (INdependent Evangelical Tea Partisans), or from Sarah Palin's LGBT party**?

You know what's missing for GOP candidates this year?

Let me rephrase it: you know who's missing for GOP candidates this year?

Rupert Murdoch.

The Great Kingmaker is out of the race. Posing as a bald monk meditating on some distant hill, chain-twitting pearls of wisdom, but cut off from all wordly matters. Maybe a few eavesdroppings now and then - you can't kick the habit that easily.

Anyway, at Fox News, the whole crew seems to be running headless. Even Theocons need a Qibla.

Ideology-wise, surviving members of the nuthouse can only agree on their greatest common divisors:

1) They want to kick Obama out. On the grounds that...
... the guy's a sissy (he won a Nobel Peace Prize, only used two choppers to kill Osama, and didn't even invade Libya to get Qaddafi)
... he's screaming at oil diggers as soon as they spill a bucket or two in the Gulf
... he's a divisive figure: our dear GOP has never been so divided
... he was not even born in the United States of Amerika, and, for the Grand Wizard's sake, the place is called The WHITE House for a reason, duntcha think?

2) They want to Restore Amerikan Honor. In other words...
... restore the great Amerikan values (teaching creationism at school, and waterboarding at West Point),
... restore the sound economy of 2008
... restore budget orthodoxy by removing all taxes and launching an illegal war
... invest less on schools (to prevent the Steve Jobs of tomorrow from happening), and remove all regulations (to create a land of opportunities for the Kenneth Lays, Bernie Ebberses, and Bernie Maddoffs of tomorrow)

Six buffoons in search of a Kingmaker...

blogules 2012
Since 2003, nonsensical posts about noncritical issues in nonenglish (get your blogules transfusion in French)
NEW: join blogules on Facebook!!!

* who, eventually, didn't get a ticket to ride all the way to Florida (see "Grand Old Parting: fix your party before causing more damage to your country")
** see "Mid-Term Elections : Sarah Palin to run in West Dakota"

Grand Old Parting: fix your party before causing more damage to your country

Can a Republican reach the White House this year? The answer is yes, possibly, but the real question should be: can Republicans actually run the country anywhere except into the wall*?

As I write, South Carolina Evangelists are preferring Mitt Romney to Rick Saint Orum**, and most pundits expect him to become the next GOP nominee. Mitt is probably considering vetting a running mate who doesn't know how to don the white shirt and wag the Book of Mormon, but Newt Gingrich keeps throwing Hail-Mary-passes and Latter-day Slanders, actually helping Romney for the general elections by depicting him as a Massachusetts moderate (the closest thing to a mass murderer in Amerikan lingua). For GOP's sake, even Harry Reid is a mormon.

Rick Perry is a moron, so he can perfectly qualify for the Veep position, in the great Dan Quayle tradition. Twitter darling Ron Paul prefers to bet on the next caucuses (Nevada): obviously, Libertarians cannot trust pure democracy, you know, that process where voters are actually free to think by themselves when they cast a ballot? I wish Ron were running as an Indy come November to ruin the party, but he might be tempted to salvage a few bridges for his son Rand, a mini-me with a sheep wig (Gary Johnson? I said nevermind). Which leaves us with Donald Trump, a Romney impersonator with an even sillier wig, but who does a decent "you're fired".

Mercifully, because Jon Huntsman didn't drown in New Hampshire, we'll enjoy the presence of a reasonable man in the race until at least Florida.

Mitt Romney also seems a reasonable man, but if you're starting to picture him as the next POTUS, here's some food for thought:

.Yes, this guy can win...:
- Okay, he speaks quite good French, but he is likeable enough (though not as much as Hillary, with whom I bet - four years ago - that Obama would replace Biden for his 2012 run), and he is a moderate by nowadays GOP standards (which doesn't mean anything, but some independent voters might get fooled, and even Reaganians could fall for this caricature character from a 1980s sitcom). But Romney won't be allowed to run without making unacceptable compromize, and without a dangerous lunatic one heartbeat away from nominating the next Supreme Justice.

... but no, neither Romney nor any other Republican candidate should become President...:
- We're not just talking about a person but about a party. And right now, the Republican party is not fit for power. Simple as that. This divided nation cannot afford a divided party that hasn't achieved anything positive over the past twenty years, and officially imploded eight years ago***. If they really love their country and their party, Republicans must first reform the GOP to transform it into a sustainable platform, fit to govern the nation. Even the Democrats did it twenty years ago by getting rid of their most caricatural parts, and by trading ideology for pragmatism. Of course, Reps still manage to win now and then (and not always by cheating in Florida), but look how they fail miserably when they do. And the only time they came up with a consistent vision, it was the ultimate negation of republican and democratic values. You want more impostures? Guess who turned record surplusses into record deficits, privatizing gains and socializing losses? And guess who saved American capitalism?

... and yes, Obama is still the man:
- Yes he could have performed better in many ways at home and abroad, but the things he did wrong were the things he did the conservative way, for instance getting along with corporate abuses or Israel excesses. At home, Obama managed historic reforms before the Reps shook the House. Yes, the economy hasn't recovered yet, but he has already cleaned an impressive part of the incommensurable mess they caused, and even until now they keep provoking further damage (last year's surreal budget drama exposed if needed the GOP's inability to govern). Yes, Guantanamo is not closed yet, and yes, Obama couldn't prevent the implosion of Iraq borne by the 2003 invasion, but he proved a better and smarter Commander in Chief by getting Bin Laden and freeing Libya with limited means. Yes Iran remains a danger, but the regime has lost the ideological battle home and Obama was inspirational for a change that later rocked the region.

Yes, he can.

But for that, he needs four more years, and a majority.

Since America is a free country, voters can decide that they preferred the way the country was run before Obama (reminder: the Bush-Cheney administration destroyed more value and more values than any other in American history), and that the whole country should be run like the House they voted for in 2006 (a disgrace mocked all over the world). A no-brainer, I tellya.

Right before the 2010 midterm elections I asked that simple question: "Can America really afford a Republican Second Dip?".

I have the bad habit of repeating myself, but so does History.


blogules 2012
Since 2003, nonsensical posts about noncritical issues in nonenglish (get your blogules transfusion in French)
NEW: join blogules on Facebook!!!

*without caps: forget about that dream image of a bull on Wall Street.
**For the few retards who didn't catch his subtle marketing positioning, and the surprisingly many retards who embraced it, Rick Santorum wrote down a few words below his name on his campaign billboards: Faith, Family, and Freedom. In other words: Theocons, Paleocons, and Anticons* (for that latest flavor, see "Grand Old Parting - enter the anticons").
*** see "GOP: time to split"

Grand Old Parting - enter the anticons

Just a few months left before the NH kickoff, but the Republican primaries have already entertained us with series of debates and debacles.

Among the "quitters", Sarah Palin refused to follow Segolene Royal in a doomed candidacy (the French diva who rocked the 2007 presidential elections claimed only 7% of the votes in the first round of the Socialist primaries). Tim Pawlenty illustrated the Peter Principle by exposing his incompetence as early as he postulated for the job. Donald Trump made us laugh with his usual roaring 80s / toupee in fire routine. Chris Christie didn't even try to run - the New Jersey heavyweight will have to find other ways of getting fit.

Among the "no shows", Bobby Jindal or Charlie Crist seem to focus on 2016... or poised to become "has-beens that never were".

Among the "Tea Partiers", Michele Bachmann is the most likely to cause durable damage withing GOP ranks. Libertarian in Chief Ron Paul (I won't even mention Gary Johnson) cannot rise as high as MB in the polls, and he will not try a Ross Perot diversion.

Yet, letting Tea Partiers run by themselves would be the smart choice for Republicans. As we all know, the Grand Old Party never recovered from the 2004 implosion (see "GOP: time to split"), and those paleocon-neocon-theocon divisions have been amplified by the emergence of yet another torpedo, the Tea Party.

I'd rather call these guys "anticons": the Tea Party is not just an alternative to the Republican or the Democratic parties, but the very negation of the republic, the very negation of democracy. The Tea Party refuses the balance of powers, of rights and duties that forge modern democracies. Make no mistake: if this imposture claims a revival of founding principles, it ultimately seeks their destruction. And Michelle Bachmann should never be allowed to break that fragile glass floor.

What does it leave us as we speak ? Newt Gingrich ? Come on ! Rick Santorum ? That man would sign a pledge of allegiance to the Devil to get nominated. Rick Perry ? An empty shell, a Dubya clone lacking his model's conviction and clutches (Karl Rove, Dick Cheney).

Mitt Romney has tried everything he could save visiting the Discovery Institute (he changed his mind on liberal reforms, and pledged to nominate judges that would revoke Roe v. Wade, but doesn't condone creationism yet). Even though, the mormon label remains a drag.

Herman Cain seems to propose the impossible synthesis between conservatism and teapartism (a populist 9-9-9 tax plan that only flies in polls), and the African American from Georgia could challenge Obama with his corporate background (even Mitt Romney struggles against this former CEO and Federal Reserve Banker).

For the moment, the most sustainable candidate seems doomed : Jon Huntsman has decided to take the high road, the closest thing to a dead-end for a GOP candidate nowadays.

blogules 2011