Showing posts with label Cruz. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cruz. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 04, 2016

Fox's Folley



THE ABSURD TIMES











Our Illustrator sent this message last night:

We did it! We brought Cruz down. What power we have! Maybe we can micro manage the whole campaign and get the result we want - President Bernie Sanders and a democratic congress! :)

Yes, we are powerful.  Remember when Newsweek announced it was going digital and thus challenging the Absurd Times?  Well, when's the last time you bought a copy of Newsweek?  Remember when Obama and Hillary announced that Crimea would never choose to be Russian?  We told you they would.  We also said that the most dangerous Republican running this time was John Kasich.  Well, we hereby command him to withdraw or we will go after him.

[Sorry, we had to stop typing and do other things.  I suspect my keystrokes were monitored and the news passed to Kasich – that's fine because I'm tired of figuring out how to spell that name.]

Here is a statement many were unprepared for.  More about it after you read it:
Effective this morning, I'm going on holiday.
No, I'm not leaving town for vacation, but rather I'm taking a break from posting about electoral matters here on FB.
Quite honestly, I don't have the emotional energy to deal with all the negativity engendered by differences in approach to elections, their meaning and our roles as citizens.
I believe in engaged citizenship. I also see politics as the art of the possible and see voting as something to be done strategically, given the flawed and undemocratic nature of our electoral system.
I recognize that outcomes matter.
I care deeply about the planet, the urgent need to address the climate crisis, and a whole variety of other pressing issues, from court appointments to reproductive rights, from the minimum wage to social security, from immigration to healthcare, the cost of college and so many more on which there are real differences between centrist Ds, and hard-right Rs.
I continue to encourage all in states that haven't voted yet to support Bernie. Perhaps a miracle is still possible. But I think it's OK to share candidly my thoughts as to what we might do if Bernie does not pull off this long-shot upset, especially when I'm seeing multiple posts daily urging Bernie to run as an independent or Green and urging people to write-in Bernie, if HRC is the nominee.
Some of the responses I've seen to my posts and comments, essentially calling me a "sellout" for urging continued organizing--being in this for the long haul--and strategic voting in November, have been very disconcerting.
I respect the rights of others to view things differently. But trying to point out, in a respectful manner, why, from my perspective, the "Bernie or Bust" mindset is counterproductive has just been a source of acrimony. No, voting for a centrist does not mean one embraces the ideology and values of centrism. It simply indicates one is making a rational choice given a limited set of options.
I honestly just don't have the time or energy for this. There are places where I need to put my energy. I appreciate and respect everyone I've worked with over the past many months on Bernie's campaign and I thank you all for the time, effort and energy you've put forth.
P.S. Feel free to comment if you like, but I'm not going to be drawn in to debating these issues here. For me it's time to move on.

**

Well, that's Mark for you.  He is hardly a sell-out and has long been a social activist.  I know him and can tell you that if he has any short-coming, it is that he is just too much a believer in the human race.

As for me, it is not Bernie or Bust, not at all.  If it is Bernie, I may consider involvement in the political system again – MAYBE.  Let me give a brief history.

In 1960, the people tried a new approach, especially in Viet-Nam.  JFK was elected and decided to stop interfering.  So, the CIA shot him.

The Republicans nominated Barry Goldwater to oppose Lyndon Johnson, the peace candidate.  We voted against more war.  We got LBJ and more war.

1n 1968, McCarthy proved that the people were still against the war, decided against Hubert Humphrey (for 8 years HHH kept saying things, as Mort Sahl pointed out, "it's a beautiful day – just as the President promised") and Bobby Kennedy ran as well.  Martin Luther king was killed, the Bobby Kennedy, they even threw in George Wallace for good measure.

Nixon promised two things: Bring us together and end the war.  He had a secret plan.  We didn't know it was to increase the genocide and expand it and start it up domestically [Kent State].  It does sound like Trump promising to eliminate ISIS but not giving away his plans, eh?

The final one worth voting for was Obama and we know how that turned out.  At least he didn't insult our intelligence every time he opened his mouth, but that was about it.

The jokers and fools who think the choice between Hillary and Donald is significant are very strange indeed.  The only fun that is left to come is the spectacle of Fox News having to think up ways to make Donald Trump look good because is is a Republican.

And I promise, this is it for U.S. election drivel.

Bye

Tuesday, May 03, 2016

Could it be ... Satan?



THE ABSURD TIMES


John Boehner, former Speaker of the House and once third in line for the Presidency,  let it be know that Ted Cruz, far right, is Lucifer incarnate.  He is here with his Vice Presidential candidate, Carley Fiorana, I think, giving a new meaning to the word "Vice".  He also called him a "miserable son of a bitch," which raises questions as to whether the bitch was born in America.  One of you mentioned that we need the Long Form birth Certificate to nail this one down, or are nails appropriate in this context?

Right now, it seems that Donald Trump will win Indiana and eventually be the Republican candidate.  It is not clear if Boehner know that when Lucifer was forced to vacate the premises that he was also obliged to change his name to Satan, Mephistopheles, etc.  So, his Vice Presidential nominee recently fell down or, as it look on TV, simply fell downwards, perhaps to get a start of the Vice part of her role.


The Absurd Times Television Network Breaking News, above, covers this.

Wednesday, February 03, 2016

SPECIAL UPDATE! Our U.S. Idiotic Primaries and the Middle East

THE ABSURD TIMES

ALL UPDATES  IN BOLD ITALICS


Illustration: One of you just sent this to me.  If there are any copyright issues, pleas contact me and I'll obfuscate it.  It coveys our sentiments exactly, however. 









It has been awhile, so here is some catching up. The terrorist threat has been vanquished here at the Absurd Times. A trusted Ally helped me to negotiate with Toshiba and then Toshiba whipped Microsoft's ass and all the files were returned, intact, although the programs (now called "apps" for some reason to idiotic to delve into here) had to be found and reinstalled, some over Microsoft's objections.



Much of the following is based on the input of our army of correspondents from around the world, all very wise in matters of social, economic, and political importance.



Do we really want to elect a blood-thirsty young 68 year old when we have the opportunity to elect an older, wiser, 74 year old? In addition, Sander's wife is a good ten or twenty years younger than the grandma. Her supporters squeal when she speaks, giving a sound similar to that of a flock of horribly violated chickens.  THE DELEGATES ARE EQUAL, BUT WERE DECIDED BY A SERIES OF COIN TOSSES, ALL SIX OF WHICH WERE WON BY CLINTON GROUPIES.  



Groundhog day is a ritual in the United States. If the groundhog sees his shadow, it means 6 more weeks of winter. This year, the Iowa caucus superseded this indication six more weeks of being subjected to Ted Cruz.

DONALD TRUMP HAS CLAIMED HE WON BY FRAUD.  IT HAPPENED BECAUSE CRUZ WAS CANADIAN, AFTER ALL.  WE HAVE DECIDED IT IS THE PALIN FACTOR AS ALL CANDIDATES ENDORSED BY PALIN WILL DO NO BETTER THAN SECOND.   TRUMP WANTS THE IOWA CAUCUSES TO BE HELD AGAIN, A "DO OVER" TO BE FAIR. 



Rand Paul had the only two sensible remarks during all of the Republican debates. The first was "This is like Junior High," and the second, after Trump decided not to attend the second, thus reducing Faux News' ratings by about half and, I assume making them return part of the advertising revenue, Paul said "This will elevate the debate by a few IQ points". It did, but not enough so he has decided not to participate any more.



Putin has done relatively little in Eastern Ukraine lately, much to the Nazi's relief, but this has prompted Secretary of Defense Ash Carter to propose sending more weapons to NATO. Also, he says we are running out of bombs, so would the congress be good enough to give him a couple billion to buy more?



The ZIKA virus was first discovered in 1947. Then Hillary was born.



Zika is now a sexually transmitted disease, so there will be more about this on the news, no doubt, right after the Superbowl.



Israel has been sending its Black Jews to Nigeria from Holot. Well, perhaps "Semetic" has its uses, but no point stretching things.



Michigan has finally been exposed as trying to "privatize" its water supply. The claim that they did not know something was wrong with the water in Flint seems a bit shallow as bottled water had been trucking into flint for State workers for a year and a half before the contamination was admitted.



Two sane organizations, Jews say No, and the Jewish Voice for Peace, collaborated and put out a mock edition of the New York Times. We estimate that about half the readers figured out that it was satirical. Since they were both Jewish organizations, they have a chance of not being called Anti-Semitic (although this is by no means certain).

RICK SANTORUM WILL QUIT THE RACE AND ANNOUNCE WHO HE WILL ENDORSE THIS EVENING.  NOBODY CARES OTHER THAN LITTLE RUBIO.  



Here is an interview on that topic:



Jewish Peace Groups Reveal Role in Spoof New York Times That Criticized Paper's Stance on Israel


FEBRUARY 03, 2016

STORY



172

SHARES










TOPICS




GUESTS



a member of Jews Say No! in New York City.


journalist at Salon who specializes in U.S. foreign policy and in the Middle East. He just published a piece titled "Progressive Jewish groups make New York Times parody issue to protest newspaper's 'biased Israel-Palestine coverage'"

LINKS


This is viewer supported news

A Palestinian village has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Israel is throwing open its doors to refugees. Those were some of the headlines that appeared in a fake version of The New York Times distributed across New York City on Tuesday. The paper carried the slogan "All the news we didn't print." The prank copy of the revered "Gray Lady" also announced Democratic presidential candidate "Hilarity Clifton" planned to quit the presidential race to head up a women's nonprofit based in Ramallah. The edition even has fake ads. Volunteers distributed 10,000 copies of the fake paper, but no group took responsibility—until now. Jane Hirschmann of Jews Say No! tells Democracy Now! her group and Jewish Voice for Peace produced the paper. We speak to Hirschmann and Ben Norton, journalist at Salon.



TRANSCRIPT


This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: A Palestinian village has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Israel is throwing open its doors to refugees. Those were some of the headlines that appeared in a fake version of The New York Times distributed across New York City on Tuesday. The paper carried the slogan "All the News We Didn't Print." The prank copy of the revered "Gray Lady" also announced Democratic presidential candidate "Hilarity Clifton" planned to quit the presidential race to head up a women's nonprofit based in Ramallah. The edition even has fake ads.

AMY GOODMAN: Ten thousand copies of the fake paper were distributed, but no group took responsible for the prank—that is, until now. Joining us to find out who was behind the paper, we're joined by Jane Hirschmann of Jews Say No! Also with us, Ben Norton, journalist at Salon who specializes in U.S. foreign policy and in the Middle East. He just published a piece titled "Progressive Jewish groups make New York Times parody issue to protest newspaper's 'biased Israel-Palestine coverage.'"

Now, Jane, it begins—above the New York Times logo, it says, "Rethinking Our 2015 Coverage on Israel-Palestine—A Supplement" Who are Jews Say No! in New York, and why did you do this?

JANE HIRSCHMANN: Well, it wasn't just Jews Say No! in New York. There were two groups that came together—our group, Jews Say No!, and also Jewish Voice for Peace in New York City. And we're two organizations that are trying very hard to get out the real news about Israel and Palestine.

The media bias is extraordinary. And months ago, we came together to discuss: What can we do about this, the fact that the coverage never has any context to what's going on in Israel and Palestine? People are not aware that there's a 67-year occupation, that they're not two equal peoples. The press—and it's not just The New York Times, it's really all the press. They always typecast the Palestinians as the terrorists, and the poor Israelis are the victims. And we felt that the time had come to really put out the news, the real news, about it.

People don't know that our government is complicit, that we give $3 billion a year to Israel. And we don't give it for social services, for education, for research; we give it to them for military reasons. It's the largest contribution we make to any country in the world. So we're funding the occupation. People don't know there's an apartheid-like state in Israel. And we worked for months to get out this paper. And yes, it's a parody, but all the facts about Israel and Palestine on the ground are correct in the paper.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Well, you know, I'm sure that many of the people in The New York Times would say that they provide some of the most balanced coverage, although, you know, obviously, you might differ with that. But some of the articles are really amazing. You had a headline, "I.D.F. Generals Blame Israeli Government for Recent Violence." And you even had the advertisements, as well, all dealing with a political reversal of how people here in the United States, many, are fed the news on Israel and Palestine.

JANE HIRSCHMANN: Well, actually, some of the generals did come forward recently and did question what the Israeli government was doing and that it may be the cause for the violence. That's what they questioned in The New York Times. And we're saying that after 67 years of violence, of stealing people's homes, people's water, you know, not letting them a cross border, have checkpoints to go to work, not getting to hospitals, that this is violent. And even the generals—that article is pretty factual about the generals.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: What was the reaction when you gave it out on the streets yesterday?

JANE HIRSCHMANN: It was really amazing. We had over 60 volunteers at places like Staten Island Ferry and, you know, Grand Central. And people took the paper and said, "Thank you." And my first paper that I handed out at 7:00 in the morning, this guy left, and a minute later, he came back, and he said, "Who did this?" And, of course, we didn't reveal. And then he said, "This is fabulous. This is the news we never see." He said, "I'm a teacher, and I teach about media and terrorism. And I'm going to teach today. Can you give me more copies?"

AMY GOODMAN: You also have a fake editorial of The New York Times in this four-page supplement. And this, Ben, is one of the quotes you pulled for your Salon piece. You write, "In addition, we are aware"—this is the fake editorial. "In addition, we are aware that a disproportionate number of our news stories in the past year and a half have focused on Israeli government statements and positions or the views of Israeli Jewish citizens; only a small fraction have featured Palestinian speakers, whether officials and advocates or residents who experience the effects of Israeli policies in everyday life." This, Ben Norton, is—was the clip that you chose for your piece inSalon to lay out where the Times says they're going with this, though it was fake, of course.

BEN NORTON: Thanks for having me. It's great to be here.

Well, I think—as Jane said, I think it's important to recognize that The New York Times is not necessarily unique in these regards. Rather, I think, as the U.S. newspaper of record, it epitomizes this kind of tendency throughout American media. And essentially, the idea is, you know, Israel is a very close U.S. ally, Israel is a democracy, etc., so we need to give their side of the view the vast majority of the time. And what that does is it normalizes this notion that Palestinians are violent, and they're reacting against, you know, this more civilized, democratic country. And when you look at the media coverage, very often what you see is, you know, you'll see quotes from Israeli government officials—sometimes they're anonymous—and at most there will be one or two quotes from a Palestinian. And even then, the quotes will be very timid and paltry, and you won't see any kind of quotes that discuss, for instance, the brutality of the military occupation. You won't see any discussion, in any kind of significant detail, of Israel's illegal activities.

And as Jane had mentioned, when we're talking about context, context in media is everything. And The New York Times and many other publications very often refuse to acknowledge that there has been an illegal military occupation of the occupied Palestinian territories since 1967. The U.S. and all countries in the world, excluding Israel, have admitted this. The New York Times rarely acknowledges, for instance, that—when they're discussing the recent wave of violence, that more than 165 Palestinians have been killed since October. You know, in a few months, we're talking about approximately 170 deaths. And, in fact, a few minutes ago, just this morning—I was looking at the headlines—three more Palestinians were killed in occupied East Jerusalem.

So, when we're looking at this kind of coverage, it's important to understand that when American newspapers quote Israeli government officials, when American newspapers kind of don't acknowledge the daily, quotidian violence and oppression that Palestinians are subjected to, that, right there, it's a subtle but very clear form of bias that must be overcome. This whole notion of having balanced coverage is, of course, very important, but what it often actually means is it normalizes and essentially creates an equivalency between the people who are under military occupation, and have been illegally for decades, and the people who are carrying out that illegal military occupation. And any media that make that clear delineation are actually being balanced. If you don't make that delineation, you're not being balanced, you're normalizing violence.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Jane, I wanted to ask you—there were two pieces that were not parodies. They were op-ed pieces by Leila Said and by Aurora Levins Morales. I'm wondering if you could talk about them and the decision to include them, as well, in this issue.

JANE HIRSCHMANN: Well, we thought it was important to put in pieces—as you said, the whole paper is not a parody. There are facts that are absolutely correct. And we thought that it was important to put in pieces—actually, there's only one person that's named correctly in this paper, and that's Aurora. But we wanted to make it accurate, as well. We didn't want it to just be a joke paper. We wanted to show what real coverage would look like. And so, we did that.

And I also want to mention what Ben said. You know, when an Israeli child is killed, they have a whole story about that child. They have a picture of that child. They tell you about the family, you know. So we listed the Palestinian children who were recently killed, and grown-ups, because we thought it was important to get their names into—you never see it in the papers at all.

AMY GOODMAN: Also, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon actually did write a strongly worded New York Times op-ed criticizing Israel's continued occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.

JANE HIRSCHMANN: Right, right.

AMY GOODMAN: But I also wanted to ask you about the ads.

JANE HIRSCHMANN: Yes.

AMY GOODMAN: On the front page, we're used to seeing, you know, various ads.

JANE HIRSCHMANN: Yes.

AMY GOODMAN: "The Perfume of Power." And it says, "Eau de I.D.F. Skunk." Can you say what it says underneath?

JANE HIRSCHMANN: You know, I can't read what it says underneath, because I don't have my glasses, sorry. Ben, can you or somebody read it?

BEN NORTON: So, it is a fake ad for perfume, you know, "Eau de I.D.F," water of theIDF, or perfume. And it says, "Since 2008, the Israeli Defense Forces (I.D.F.) have routinely sprayed toxic 'skunk water' on and into Palestinian homes and schools. Its smell has been described as 'worse than raw sewage' and 'like a mixture of excrement, noxious gas and a decomposing donkey.'"

JANE HIRSCHMANN: One of my children—

AMY GOODMAN: True?

JANE HIRSCHMANN: Yeah, this is true.

BEN NORTON: Absolutely.

JANE HIRSCHMANN: One of my children was at Bil'in when they sprayed skunk. And it was horrific. And, you know, people got very, very ill. One person has died. This is what they spray to disperse the crowds.

BEN NORTON: And it's important to recognize also, for instance, Bassem Tamimi is an outspoken nonviolent Palestinian activist in the occupied West Bank, and he has discussed how they also spray it into homes.

JANE HIRSCHMANN: Yes.

BEN NORTON: And what they do is they sometimes break windows—this is Israeli occupation forces—they will break windows and spray skunk water into people's homes, which ruins their furniture, which makes their house smell horrific for weeks. And if it gets in your hair, it can be stuck—that smell can be stuck for months.

AMY GOODMAN: Did you get a response from The New York Times? I mean, the paper, aside from the headlines and the content, looks exactly like The New York Times.

JANE HIRSCHMANN: Yes, yes. Well, they were quoted. We didn't call them for the quotes. But all our sites have been taken down—our Facebook, our Twitter—

AMY GOODMAN: By?

JANE HIRSCHMANN: —and even our domain. Well, we're not exactly sure. The domain, we know, because they were called by The New York Times and threatened, so they took it down. We will be up and running again today. We will not be stopped. And we'll let your viewers know, through you, how to see the paper online, because right now nobody can see it. We were taken down.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you both for being with us, as Jews Say No! and Jewish Voice for Peace New York City reveals they're behind the fake New York Times that was distributed yesterday throughout the city, 10,000 copies made. Jane Hirschmann of Jews Say No! and Ben Norton, journalist at Salon who's written about this, and the piece has just gone up.