Wandering Stars
report this user
4:44 PM yesterday Wandering Stars commented on A Bad Day for Sound Transit: Budget Hits in Both Washingtons.
I know what a Republican is.

When I fill out my ballot, if I see a (R) by the candidate's name, I know how s/he will vote on every single issue. I could know absolutely nothing else about the candidate aside from the parenthetical letter, and I would know all I need to know.

I do not know what the (D) means.

It could mean a Tammy Baldwin, an Elizabeth Warren. Or it could mean a Joe Manchin. There's just no way to know how they will vote, what they will cave in on, how much they will compromise. Not from that parenthetical letter, anyway.

This is why we need a parenthetical S. I know exactly what a Socialist is. I know they will not vote to cut transit funding. I know they will vote to expand healthcare access. I know they will vote for higher wages and better hours.

Lets replace these (D)'s with (S)'s.
4:16 PM yesterday Wandering Stars commented on Free Will Astrology.
I'm tired of astrology.

I want something exciting. Something new.

I want ass-trology.

Will I wake up tomorrow to find my buttocks have at long last blossomed into something so massive it would drive Kim Kardashian into a jealous rage? Or have years of sitting on office chairs rendered by glutes as flat as roadkill? Only the stars can know!

Oh, ass-trologer, tell me what will become of my derrier today!
4:11 PM yesterday Wandering Stars commented on I Anon: Thank You for Being Decisive and Helpful to a Fellow Human.
Cocaine is fucking expensive, man. And endless baggie would translate to Pablo Escobar levels of material wealth.

I don't think he'd need the EBT card after you gave him the baggie.

As for MadDog 20/20, if you spell that backwards, it's goD daM!
4:06 PM yesterday Wandering Stars commented on Playin’ in the Band: The Grateful Dead’s Long Strange Trip.
Why the hell did they pick you to review this? The film is aimed at a very specific audience-Deadheads- and you clearly arent one.
3:53 PM yesterday Wandering Stars commented on The Morning News: Seattle Tops Fastest Growing US Cities By Population and Density, About That Assault in Montana.
METH, more like it.

Historical trends, combined with current poll numbers, are valid predictors. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. That holds true for individuals and for groups. The historical trend for the POTUS's party in his first midterm is a large loss of seats. This effect is amplified when the POTUS is deeply unpopular.

The GOP controls 52 Senate seats. If they lose 3, power shifts to the Democrats in that body. There's 9 up for grabs. The Democrats can afford to lose 6 and still gain the majority.

As for the 50 in the House, who exactly are you relying on to state that only these 50 are competitive? Considered so, by whom? Fox News? Zogby? Oh come on. Lets have a look at their accuracy in predicting past elections. And don't quote some TV talking head at me, either, I want to see real numbers from a reputable source.
1:18 PM yesterday Wandering Stars commented on Appeals Court Smacks Down Trump's Second Muslim Ban.
I deeply dislike Islam and every other religion. I also oppose the Muslim ban.

Religion is a reactionary force that drives otherwise sane people to do insane things. It is absolutely proper and right to profile on the basis of religious fervor. If you believe in any faith rabidly, whether its Catholicism or Mormonism or Islam or Scientology, the law should be keeping a very close eye on you. That's because all religions carve out exceptions for its fanatics- its perfectly okay for evangelicals to lie to you if they think they can convert you by doing it. Or murder you, if they can't.

That said, alot of those refugees are running away from the horrors created by religion in their countries of birth. We have a moral obligation to shelter anyone fleeing from violence. That doesn't mean we let them in and then ignore them, however.
12:53 PM yesterday Wandering Stars commented on Trumpcare Will Restore Discipline In the Workplace.
I strongly favor the decentralization of power in all aspects of life.

I distrust everyone who feels uncomfortable when people disobey them. People like this doom not only their would-be slaves- they also condemn themselves. It is those who disagree with us who point out things our blind spots make invisible. If I as your employer had a sadistic tendency to threaten your employment every time you disagreed with me, the only ones who would remain employed would be the yes men. Should my ego prevent me from noticing the flaws in my plans, I would need someone to direct my attention to those flaws, however uncomfortable it is to face them- else, the ship I'm piloting would crash on the rocks.

In short I need dissidents. Everyone needs dissidents. Even if they're wrong, its always good to hear them out so you can consider what may otherwise slip past your attention.

Universal Single Payer emboldens such critiques, as does full employment. I endorse both.

12:08 PM yesterday Wandering Stars commented on The Morning News: Seattle Tops Fastest Growing US Cities By Population and Density, About That Assault in Montana.
@11,

That is a statement made by everyone, everywhere, when their party is in danger of losing big in an upcoming election. Democrats made that exact same statement in October of last year, and just before Obama's midterms.

Really, it means absolutely nothing, and is utterly devoid of value as a contribution. Of course, it is true. However, it doesn't matter. You may as well have replied by stating that gravity pulls all objects, regardless of political affiliation, toward the center of the Earth at the same speed. Or you could have said, "Yes, but I predict it will rain in Olympia when the November 2018 election date comes".

What I'm more interested in hearing is whatever nuance you think may be applied to the upcoming election. Barring any unforseen change of circumstances, I predict a replay of 2016 on the Democratic side, with neoliberals and progressives vying for control of the Party. Usually, when a party loses a POTUS bid, the losing candidate disappears, allowing someone else to have a chance of leading it to the victory they could not clinch. Al Gore, who also won the popular vote but lost the EC, retired from politics after 2000. Hillary has not. She's very much staying in the limelight. I think this means her faction will be fighting against the Sanders led Our Revolution/DSA contingent in the primaries, and if they win, we will see Hillary run again in 2020. I further suggest that if this occurs, the Democrats will lose and whoever the POTUS is at that point will be re-elected (or elected if Trump isn't POTUS anymore). She's kind of the William Jennings Bryan of the 21st century- so determined to become POTUS, she'd rather burn her own party to the ground than concede.
More...
10:21 AM yesterday Wandering Stars commented on The Morning News: Seattle Tops Fastest Growing US Cities By Population and Density, About That Assault in Montana.
Every House seat is up for grabs in 2018. Midterm elections typically favor the party not in the White House. And the House GOP has hitched its star to Trump. Trump's popularity right now is roughly the same as cancer. If it gets worse, the House. will likely go to the Democrats. The question is, what kind of Democrat?

If Quist loses, its likely to be the Nancy Pelosi/Hillary Clinton wing. That means no chance of impeachment, more policies that favor corporations and screw the poor. If Quist (endorsed by Our Revolution) wins, its likely to the the Sanders/Warren wing. That means impeachment, free college tuition at state universities, universal single payer, and corrupt Wall Street bankers being perp walked in front of cameras.

As for the Senate, 9 seats is within the margin needed to seize control. Chuck Schumer isnt exactly a dream Majority Leader by any means, but enough pressure from Speaker of the House Alan Grayson could drag him into the 21st century.
10:03 AM yesterday Wandering Stars commented on On the Blabbermouth Podcast: The Hypocrisy of Trump's First Official Trip Overseas.
I've listened to several podcasts this morning.

On the Intercept, I heard about the dark implications of this trip overseas. On Blabbermouth, I heard about how ridiculous Trump looks. On Democracy Now!, I heard Tariq Ali talk about how everyone is trying to manipulate Trump to their own advantage (the Palestinians, the Israelis. the Saudis, etc). I'm sure the next podcast of the Bugle will feature a series of fart jokes directed at all the above parties by the time I get around to listening to it.

This is pretty much what I listen to podcasts for. I gave up on watching TV news or reading newspapers in 2001, when everyone said you'd have to be a traitor to oppose the Iraq Invasion. Its very hard to take journalism seriously anymore, with vapid reporters throwing softball questions in front of CGI backgrounds, their biases so blatant now that any paens to 'objectivity' ring hollow.

I'd rather hear Jeremy Scahill and Glenn Greenwald tell me a horror story, Amy Goodman interview people who would never get on CNN, Dan and Eli tell me about Melania and the Pope both smacking Trump's hands away, and Andy Saltzman informing me of how often the President passes gas in public. If that sounds at all ridiculous, is it any less so than believing anything that Brian Williams has to say? Am I suposed to think Rachel Maddow or Glenn Beck are serious people when they throws their fists in the air and scream at a camera?

Or should I trust the Grey Lady after she insisted there were WMD in Iraq? WaPo, which fawns over George W Bush? The Seattle Times, which used to fawn over Mark Sidran and still thinks Tim's the apple of their Eyman?

Give me Rania Khalek and the Jacobin, Robert Scheer and Rich Smith. I may not always agree with you, but I trust you a hell of a lot more than I do the 'respected journalists'.
More...