They Whine When You Point Out That The Ivys Are Training Grouds Of America's Most Dangerous Gangsters And Also The Judicial Dupes Of Them

LET'S START with the indicted fascist who last weekend's news reveals is still active in the scheming to impose martial law on the United States on day 1 of Trump II and Republican-fascism forever after.

Jeffrey Clark :  Harvard University (AB) - University of Delaware (MA)  - Georgetown University (JD)

He graduated from one of those putrid Catholic prep schools for the rich, the Father Judge High School in Philadelphia.   Big on sports, football, lacrosse (a dead giveaway), golf (need I go farther?), apparently low on the teachings of Jesus and Paul.   

----------------------

I'll continue with the three Judges, two Obama appointed and one Biden appointed, who gave Trump 17 more days to call out his goons to do violence against Judges, prosecutors, jurors, etc.  instead of holding an immediate hearing and issuing a timely ruling against the most pampered felon in American history.

Patricia Millett: University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Harvard Law School

Cornelia Pillard: Yale University, Harvard Law School

Bradley Garcia:  Johns Hopkins University, Harvard Law School

I am so confident in the provenance of those three appeals court judges that I made a dare to myself to post whatever I found, even if they were all products of Land Grant universities.   

The Ivy League law schools are the source of what's wrong with the law.  

I should have posted the Youtube of Keith Olbermann's podcast on this because it's far better in the listening:

The Cowardly Behavior Of the Appeals Court Panel Permitting Trump's Terrorism

 IT MAKES SOME LIBERALS nervous when I diss judges and "justices" so often.  I don't diss all of them, though almost all of them share in some of the dishonest habits that lead them to be so dissable.    I do what I can but I post this recent masterpiece in entirely justifiable anger at that kind of cowardly, willfully stupid judicial behavior that is so obviously dangerous to us all.  It is a masterpiece in the kind of thing I intend to say.  Here it is from Keith Olbermann's transcript of his podcast bulletin from this weekend.

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals Friday afternoon halted Judge Chutkan's gag order against Trump for at least the next 17 days. Rather than deal with it on an emergency basis, it scheduled the first in-person hearing for NOVEMBER 20.

The members of the three-judge panel consisting of two judges appointed by Obama and one appointed by Biden should be impeached and disbarred because they actually fell for not just a pathetically weak 1st Amendment excuse but also for a series of arguments based on the delusions-of-grandeur, megalomaniacal premise that this madman Trump believes a 100,000,000 Americans are somehow being deprived of their right to hear him because a judge had ruled no, Trump was not allowed to threaten the judge and the court officials and the prosecutors and not allowed to try to convince his cultists to try to kill them.

He had already been given – BY the Judge who issued the gag order – the right to continue to insanely claim that the prosecution of his attempt to overthrow the government and foment violent revolution in this country and install an authoritarian regime with him as its permanent dictator was actually a political vendetta personally ordered by the President of the United States. All she wanted to stop was the continued attempt by Trump to use the social media site he OWNS and the propaganda video networks that make their only money by platforming him and the fascist rallies he stages to say it in just the right way to get somebody to KILL special counsel Jack Smith and to KILL judge Tanya Chutkan and to call in bomb threats to the court room and to doxx the jurors, the way he got hundreds of his cultists to attack the Capitol on January 6 and the way he doxxed Obama and one of his cultists went to Obama’s neighborhood and hunted him, with the ultimate goal being obvious and evil: to institutionalize political violence and turn it into the determinative factor in how this country is not governed but RULED.

Donald Trump is a terrorist. A. TERRORIST. And he has been using terrorism by proxy to destroy the laws and rules of this country, without interruption by the law or the courts for fully EIGHT years now. And when the justice system FINALLY stands up on its feet and the courts FINALLY stand up on their feet and recognize that after ALL of our other institutions have utterly failed and ALL of our leaders have failed to protect the nation against domestic terrorism in the form of Trump and his family and his enablers, when SOMEBODY finally BEGINS to do SOMETHING about it, this DC Appeals court say well, no, maybe the legal system of this country has been bending over backwards to protect the rights of this man who would destroy it and KILL anybody in it he doesn’t like, but we don’t see that in bending over backwards it has yet severed its own SPINE yet, so we’re going to grant an “administrative stay” until at least November 20th to prove that we’re great legal scholars and we’re giving Trump every opportunity to get Jack Smith or Merrick Garland killed and why, yes, if there HAD been some sort of legal case against Osama Bin Laden before us in the summer of 2001 we would have delayed the injunction against him for two weeks because it’s FAR more important to give people bent on destroying the United States every last ounce of their rights, than it is to protect the LAWS of this country or the JUDGES of this country or the REPRESENTATIVE FORM OF GOVERNMENT of this country itself.

John Fugelsang on Christianity

 

When They Insist On Having It Both Ways, They're Pulling A Con Job

IN THE FIRST CHAPTER of the huge multi-volume A History Of The Book In America, the eminent librarian Hugh Amory starts:

From the beginning, printers have rejoiced in two ideologies; one vindicates the majesty of their art; the other exculpates its abuses.  In the more familiar of these pleas, echoed in may an early colophon, theirs is a divine art and mystery, Laurens Couster's "art that preserves all arts" (ARS ARTIVM OMNIVUM CONSERVATRIX), Johannes Gutenberg's "artful venture" . . .

The alternative ideology, though rarely noticed by historians of the colonial book before Stephen Botein, insists that publishing is only a trade, exercised by "mere mechanics" who must print whatever comes to their hands.  William Bradford, the first printer in Pennsylvania, claimed that his divine art deserved the special patronage of the colony, yet, only six years after his arrival in 1685, he argued that the Philadelphia magistrates could not blame him for printing George Keith's attack on the Quakers, since he had to take whatever work he could get. . . .

Due to a lack of time, I've skipped the lists provided of examples of each of these self-serving ideological formulas in practice instead of in abstract claims.

And it is self-serving and dishonest and hypocritical.  The history of printing and publishing - the proverbial "press" of First Amendment fame -  is full to the top of negative consequences of what has been done by the printing industry, a profit making venture, something which, by the very words of the first claim is an entirely artificial human creation, not carrying with it any kind of natural right.

Similar two-steps are frequently found of self glorification of those engaged in different human enterprises then followed by a total disavowal of the frequently bad consequences of those, often destroying the lives and rights of People, damage to the environment, inciting violence, in the case of lawyering and judging and "justice"ing finding for those who do all of those evils.  That's as true for the most obvious instances of intentional harm doing as that of those who are secondary in allowing that to happen and the ones who get the wrongdoers out of any penalty for doing it.

I have a whole list of rights which are often summarily disposed of by the publishing industry, by lawyers, by judges and "justices,"

The right to know the truth.

The right to have the truth about them being told.

The right to not be lied about.

The right to not be attacked by a mob, in person, in the media, online, etc.

The right for all of us to have an honestly informed voting public who will install the government.  That last one is among the most obvious of the most consequential rights which was never included in any of the Constitutional language, on which any notion of self-governance, representative governance or democracy completely depends.  

That the fabled founders never noted that shows what total amateurs they were when they set up the government.  To put the present First Amendment language in place without such stipulations was always a guarantee to produce anything but an egalitarian democracy.  The worship of The First Amendment as it is and, especially as it is read by Supreme Courts, lower judges and "civil liberties" lawyers extremely dangerous to those who will be destroyed and attacked AND TO THE POSSIBLE ACHIEVEMENT AND RETENTION OF A REAL DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT.   

That Benjamin Franklin, probably the wisest of those in what they decided was going to be the Constitutional Convention, was a professional printer is certainly relevant to what came out of that.  That so many of them were lawyers and, overriding that all, they were all affluent, aristocrats many with questionable business practices and many slavers as well.  

We need a new Bill of Rights that includes those rights I've listed above and many others as well, the right to a livable environment perhaps more pressing than any of them.  But you'll never get that until the Constitution stipulates there is no such a thing as "corporate person-hood" and there are no rights held by corporations, and that there is no "right to lie."  Anyone who says there are such rights are anti-democrats, anti-egalitarians, they are tools of the oligarchs and plutocrats. 

By Something Like Popular Demand, I Respond To Simels

 "Simps gets upset when I diss the commercial entertainment industry."

SHORTER SPARKY: Rock-and-roll and comic books caused Juvenile Delinquency.

They would seem to have contributed to your illiteracy and inability to draw a rational conclusion about what someone else said. 

As to taking the potential of comic books being a danger due to the content those hold seriously, I don't have to stand alone in that worry,  it's clear that those who produce them share that worry and it's clear that some of those who draw them intend them to have malignant effects:

For a lot of Americans and non-New Yorkers, the number “212” holds no special significance. Neither does the number “51.” But for comic book artist Ardian Syaf, who slipped the numbers into Marvel’s newest X-Men comic book, they represent an anti-Semitic, anti-Christian message.

It’s particularly inflammatory and disappointing that it was smuggled into the X-Men, a team that’s represented inclusivity, empathy, and tolerance.

Syaf is Indonesian artist, and in Indonesia, “212” denotes a mass protest against Jakarta’s Christian Gov. Basuki Tjahaja Purnama. Meanwhile, as the comics news websites Bleeding Cool and ComicBook.com explain, the number 51 refers to verse in the Quran (Chapter Surah 5, verse 51) that’s been interpreted by those protesting Gov. Purnama in Indonesia to: “Muslims should not appoint the Jews and Christians as their leader.”

In the premiere issue of X-Men: Gold which came out last week, there are a few instances where Syaf surreptitiously inserted the numbers into the comic. You can see an example in the panel below, which features Kitty Pryde, the Jewish-American leader of the X-Men, talking to civilians, and “212” appears on the awning of a building in the background of the scene . . .   

And that use of comic books goes all the way back to before Simps or I were born, it's a fact of the history of comic books.

The Nazi-controlled government in German-occupied France produced the Vica comic during World War II as a propaganda tool against the Allied forces. The comics represent Nazi influence and perspective within French society. The three issues are Vica au Paradis de l’U.R.S.S, Vica contre le service secret anglais, and Vica défie l’Oncle Sam. The author, Vincent Krassousky (also known as Vica), disappeared in the late 1940s.

The history of comics to promote antisemitism alone is a long one.  The Library of Congress, among its collections, has a trove of German antisemetic cartoons going back to the 1890s.   If you think that the future Nazis might not have imbibed such stuff in their formative years, you are as stupid as an ACLU attorney pretends to be and "justices" on the Supreme Court, as well. 

Pop kulcha carries a far higher potential for danger BECAUSE IT IS POPULAR AND MANY, MANY MORE PEOPLE CONSUME IT THAN THEY DO ACADEMIC SCRIBBLAGE AND BABBLEAGE.   

As for neo-Nazi rock music, for crying out loud, Simps, I thought you were supposed to be an expert in rock music?   I hate it and even I know about that.   You think that doesn't carry any dangers?   If all that John Lennon pretending to be a flower child peace and lovechild junk is supposed to have a positive effect, you can't pretend that without admitting the potential of its opposite to gain influence.  The ACLU line that all this stuff was innocuous was always a lie, maybe that's one of the reasons they duped so many idiots into believing there was a "right to lie" so much of their legal mumbo-jumbo were blatant lies of that kind. 

Update:  And, while I was doing the minimal amount of research necessary to respond to this, I found out that I wasn't the only one who noticed that what I started calling "fascist chic" in the early Reagan years was a real thing, especially as "Nazi chic".   

Nazi chic is the use of style, imagery, and paraphernalia in clothing and popular culture related to Nazi-era Germany, especially when used for taboo-breaking or shock value rather than out of genuine sympathies with Nazism or Nazi ideology.

Its popularity began in the 1970s with the emergence of the Heavy metal, punk and glam rock movements: the Sex Pistols' first television appearance occurred with a person of their entourage wearing a swastika. Nazi chic was later used in the fashion industry.  The trend, while having originated in the Western culture, by the late 20th and early 21st century became particularly popular in Asia. Nazi chic also partly inspired some of the fashion of the leather subculture.  

I noticed it, especially, in the themes and content of Hollywood shit.  Then in pulp publishing.  I associated it with Reagan and it has continued since then all through pop kulcha.   I would call "Celebrity Apprentice,"  a live action comic, as being a part of the wider phenomenon, it gave us Trump as a president, already.

 Update:   45 mins ago
Oh good grief, Sparky, this is just too easy. It's like shooting ducks in a barrel with an AR-15.

Here's a hint, clueless: my use of the phrase "Juvenile Delinquency" was a specific reference to a spcific time in recent American history. Specifically, the 50s, i.e. when humorless prig idiots like you decided that Batman and Robin (obvious homosexuals) and Elvis Presley (lock up your daughters!) were corrupting our youth and had to be stopped, lest the Commies take over!!!

In other words, nothing in your above rant has the slightest relevance to the point I was making, but of course since you have no idea how humor and irony work, that's not exactly a surprise.

None of that has the slightest relevance to the crap in your rant

 I'm not bound to argue on the ever-shifting bull shit that you shift to when you've got nuttin,'  the fact is you generally have nothing.  

 Second: I've been telling you for well over a decade that you should attain a 4th grade ability to use the dictionary, here's what Merriam Webster online - you don't even have to open an ink on paper book, Stupy - says as to the origin of "juvenile delinquency."

juvenile delinquency
noun
1: conduct by a juvenile characterized by antisocial behavior that is beyond parental control and therefore subject to legal action
2: a violation of the law committed by a juvenile and not punishable by death or life imprisonment

Word History
First Known Use

1816, in the meaning defined at sense 1

As with Trump, clearly someone who was, I believe, born about the time you were and whose rhetorical methods you share, as well,  you seem to believe that the world began about the time you became conscious of it and know nothing else.  There's a lot of that around Eschaton, one of the reason adults fled from there long ago.  Also, nothing outside of the limited repertoire of American, mid-brow so-called erudition exists.   

Shorter Stupy, Nazi and pre-Nazi antisemetic and other propaganda had no effect, at all.   Hey, Simps, the Supreme Court holds the same massively stupid idea, apparently. 

Update 2:

So yes -- you ARE saying that 50s comic books and rock n roll caused Juvenile Delinquency. Good, I'm glad you've cleared that up. :-)

Simps, you're the only one who mentioned "50s comic books and rock and roll. . . "  I'm nobt invested in that narrative.   I doubt most juvenile delinquents of that era were doing much looking at ink on paper.  Though they may have been listening to pop music shit.   I'd think they got most of it through Hollywood crap, it's easier to consume.  

So, let me guess, you heard something about this in the media or through some mid-brow media geared to the geezers with college credentials but no real education.   Let me guess, someone wrote a book about it, you watched the report and didn't read the book.   You're like Susan Stamberg late of NPR.  She couldn't open her mouth without a cliche coming out of it and you can't type on a keyboard without typing them.   That's the difference between having a college diploma and being educated.
 

A Frosty Footnote

IN MY RECENT READING VACATION into the Library of America volume of Robert Frosts' poems and prose, there is this 1951 half-rhyming-limerick that demonstrates even as the news about the Nazi death camps and other Axis genocidal atrocities was sinking in, eugenics was still being pushed by some of the best and brightest among us.

Pares Continuas Fututiones

Says our Harvard Neo Malthusian
"We can't keep the poor from futution;
But by up to date feeding,
We can keep them from breeding."
Which seems a licentious conclusion!
 
Of course, being a sworn enemy of eugenics and Malthusian economics and the "best and the brightest" who push those as "a benefit to humanity and the world," and a long time hater of Harvard (we get lots of them here North of Boston, as Frost would have known better than most),   I had to find out who the Harvard boy who was pushing that in 1951 was.  Luckily the book provided that answer in the many very helpful notes in the back of the book.  

Harvard Neo Malthusian]  In the letter to [Louis Henry] Cohn [dated September 21, 1951], Frost wrote that James B. Conant, a former professor of chemistry and the president of Harvard University (1933-53), as a "mouthpiece" for science had "undertaken for it to make a the planet less uncomfortably crowded with a new kind of manna . . .  a contraceptive to be taken by mouth so we can stop breeding without having to stop futution."  

No doubt tricking them into it or forcing them into eating it was the clever scheme.  The elite, especially the elite in science and the "science"  that really matters, economics, never seem to ever tire of thinking of ways of eliminating large numbers of People from the human future.  And to find ways to insult or belittle their own intelligence in their monumental arrogance.   

Conant was a great progressive who decided to push for a meritocracy as an alternative to the traditional American elite but never seemed to really understand that equality was the real cure for what was wrong with the world.  He opposed real equality, equality in results, for that guarantee of the elite always remaining elite, "equality of opportunity."  I'd love to find out if he ever tried to stop legacy admissions to the college he led, though it doesn't seem to have happened.   As I recall he did vote for the cap of 15% of Jewish students at Harvard, instituted by the previous president.   It's largely due to him that we got the college board examinations that merely reinforced the status of those with wealth whose parents sent them to better schools.  He really was kind of a pudding-head about how the reforms he instituted would actually work out. Perhaps he saw opening up admissions to a wider section of the already wealthy and, so privileged as progress.  Maybe it's just he wanted more regional diversity of the elite at Harvard.   

Unfortunately I can't find out where he made the suggestion, though I suspect it is in the Terry Lectures at Yale, he was the 1951 honoree.   Unfortunately, I don't have a copy to look at to find out.

I don't imagine he imagined feeding his contraceptives to the most dangerous families in the world, those who he, no doubt, would see as meritorious, many of them Ivy League grads and others like them.  I could take the time and research and give you a list of such dangerous people born around that time and after who I'm sure Conant wouldn't have considered the world would be better off without.  The majority on the Supreme Court and many in the Congress, for a start.
 
As I most recently mentioned around the centennial of America's most evil war criminal at large, Henry Kissinger, it was in contemplating his evil that I first realized there were many extremely intelligent People the world would be better off without but there was no such thing as a good one that you could say that about.  And a lot of them are certainly not on any list Conant would have had about who should not be allowed to have offspring.  I'd certainly put the children of George H.W. Bush on a list of those the world would probably be better off  if George and Babs had been fed contraceptives.  I could go for the idea of having prevented those lists of Ivy Leaguers and their ilk who have duped Americans into believing there was "a right to lie."  And Ron Desantis who is not as far removed from them as they'd ever want anyone to notice.

And it's such a pudding-headed idea that was bound to not happen.  For a start it would mean feeding the poor and the best and brightest aren't, on balance, big on that.  And it wouldn't have worked.  Of course, if People have economic security, if they have a decent life with prospects of being able to live out their elder years in security, most People opt for choosing a smaller family for themselves, that's pretty much what experience has shown.  

I don't know, maybe those rhymes work better in the old style of pronouncing Latin, my teacher, from the generation right after Frost, taught me the more up-to-date reconstruction of Latin pronunciation.  Or maybe Frost pronounced the English differently. In the notes on it Frost pointed out that he was referencing a particularly blue verse by Catullus, poem no 32 that includes these lines,  

. . . sed domi maneas paresque nobis
novem continuas fututiones . . .

The note translates that as,

but stay at home and prepare yourself
for nine consecutive copulations

I'd have thought "prepare ourselves" would be more accurate.

It's all a far cry from the popular imagination of Frost, that boy improbably swinging from those friggin' birches.