Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

[Bob Butler]

But then whole industries have been savaged by the last year:
Hotels
Restaurants
Airlines
Cruise Industry
Anyone with Rental Property

Once things get even somewhat "back to normal" and people actually have to pay the bills, I think that bankruptcies will seriously accelerate, which in turn could cause the crisis.

The list of savaged industries is about right.

An alternate view? The crisis heart is already here. There was a bad leader dedicated to not solving the crisis problems, with preserving the existing structure. He was replaced by a leader that who has led an administration focused on them, a federal regeneracy. The problems are COVID with its economic effects, systematic racism, and red violence. If each issue has its own trigger, they would be the virus manifesting in New York, the death of George Floyd, and the capitol insurrection of January 6. No lack of catalysts.

I suspect the possibility of bankruptcies has been anticipated and the administration will print more money and tax the rich to get out of it. How well they will succeed is yet to be seen.

[Navigator]

An alternate view? The crisis heart is already here. There was a bad leader dedicated to not solving the crisis problems, with preserving the existing structure. He was replaced by a leader that who has led an administration focused on them, a federal regeneracy. The problems are COVID with its economic effects, systematic racism, and red violence. If each issue has its own trigger, they would be the virus manifesting in New York, the death of George Floyd, and the capitol insurrection of January 6. No lack of catalysts.

I suspect the possibility of bankruptcies has been anticipated and the administration will print more money and tax the rich to get out of it. How well they will succeed is yet to be seen.

Bob, I would certainly take exception to painting Biden as any kind of savior. Or his administration being any kind of "regeneracy".

Biden will do, as his predecessors before him, whatever is in the best interest of the banks and the large market funds. This has included ALL predecessors going back to Reagan (the 1987 crash and subsequent Fed intervention).

The sad thing is that Obama could have held the banks accountable in 2009. Instead, he let them all off scot free.

In addition, the Biden Covid bail out is just an expanded version of the previous Trump ones, which are mostly pork for insiders. All of this is just exponentially expanding government debt and bringing us ever closer to the financial "day of reckoning".

Printing more money (or taxing the rich) is not going to save us financially. We do not "print money" in the USA. The Fed creates money by issuing DEBT. So we create far more additional DEBT than we do funds. This is why DEFLATION will be the hallmark of the financial implosion.

Also, and this is crucial to understand, the banks would be destroyed by hyperinflation. Biden will not allow this to happen.

If you think that Biden is going to either eliminate everyone's debts, or that he will allow the banks to be destroyed by hyperinflation, you should go out right now and borrow every cent you can. Buy all of the property you can. Because debt forgiveness and/or hyperinflation will result in you not having to pay anything back while you can keep everything you bought with borrowed money. Good luck with this.

BTW, violence is now shifting more to Antifa / BLM (Portland leading the way once again), and will really take off if any of the Minneapolis police involved in Floyd's death get off or get off lightly.

[Bob Butler]

Bob, I would certainly take exception to painting Biden as any kind of savior. Or his administration being any kind of "regeneracy"... (Snip)

I would not expect you to consider Biden as a savior than the Confederates of the day would consider Lincoln a savior early in that crisis. That makes Lincoln no less a grey champion given 20 20 hindsight. As usual, the progressive values triumphed and the dominant progressive got sainted. While Biden is hardly impressive just now, I don’t see the crisis heart extending in duration and I don’t see a more dominant progressive.

It is just that an early crisis advocate of the conservative old values would not reliably judge the grey champion or the crisis well and objectively. Mine is presented as an alternate view which many here would resist, would shun. I don’t think your operating in a total vacuum is doing you a favor. You should at least be aware of the other viewpoint.

Agree Obama was not a grey champion. He wanted to resolve Bush 43’s monetary crash rather than gain popularity by punishing the Wall Street elites. Did he choose the right goal? Likely if he had to choose only one. Could he have done both? Regardless, between the economy and Obamacare he lost congress and inertia. While he did the cheerleading aspects of the presidency well, he hardly ended the unraveling.

Or maybe he did. The first black president riled the racists enough to put Trump in. But that was hardly the intent.

I see most of the violence as red. Black Lives Matter is trying for a non violent legislative solution. To prevent the BLM excuses to protest, the Republicans should take the wind out of their sails or the Democrats should kill the filibuster. It seems like the Democratic game is letting the Republicans be obstructionist enough in blocking obviously popular legislation to clearly justify killing the filibuster. Meanwhile, the red guys are are shooting up bars, driving cars into crowds, shooting paintballs into protesters, planning to kidnap governors, and holding an insurrection against the government. It is easy to be a blue and a law and order person. The one beneficial result of the insurrection was to open the police eyes as to who are the bad guys.

But, yes, if systematic racism results in the George Floyd murderer getting off, there will be a reaction. A solution would be justice, but that does not seem to be considered a goal by conservatives.

[Navigator]

I don’t think your operating in a total vacuum is doing you a favor. You should at least be aware of the other viewpoint.

Agree Obama was not a grey champion. He wanted to resolve Bush 43’s monetary crash rather than gain popularity by punishing the Wall Street elites. Did he choose the right goal? Likely if he had to choose only one. Could he have done both? Regardless, between the economy and Obamacare he lost congress and inertia. While he did the cheerleading aspects of the presidency well, he hardly ended the unraveling.

Or maybe he did. The first black president riled the racists enough to put Trump in. But that was hardly the intent.

I see most of the violence as red. Black Lives Matter is trying for a non violent legislative solution. To prevent the BLM excuses to protest, the Republicans should take the wind out of their sails or the Democrats should kill the filibuster. It seems like the Democratic game is letting the Republicans be obstructionist enough in blocking obviously popular legislation to clearly justify killing the filibuster. Meanwhile, the red guys are are shooting up bars, driving cars into crowds, shooting paintballs into protesters, planning to kidnap governors, and holding an insurrection against the government. It is easy to be a blue and a law and order person. The one beneficial result of the insurrection was to open the police eyes as to who are the bad guys.

But, yes, if systematic racism results in the George Floyd murderer getting off, there will be a reaction. A solution would be justice, but that does not seem to be considered a goal by conservatives.

Bob,

I am ok with debating ideas, but I don't think either of us is "operating in a total vacuum". I do look at both sides and I believe both current political parties have failed miserably (see my articles to this point under the Politics section of https://www.comingstorms.com)

First - Obama 2009. He could have ended the crash by letting the "too big to fail" go bankrupt. He then could have prosecuted those that created the mess in the first place for financial crimes. Instead, he went along with what the banks wanted. Why? Because in the end those institutions are smart enough to back people on BOTH sides of the political spectrum.

Second - Political Racism. If this was really a major force in politics, Obama would never have been elected. If not that, he certainly would not have been re-elected in 2012, especially given the Obamacare debacle. On the other side, Trump foolishly did little to nothing to dissuade blatant racists. I say foolish because why support them? Who were they going to vote for instead? And it just gave ammo to his opponents.

Third - Political violence. Most of it has been Antifa/BLM. While BLM purports to be non-violent (and I wish it were, as their stated intent of reducing racism on the part of Police is something that needs to be dealt with), their gatherings seem to degenerate into rioting and looting. Hence the summer of 2020. This is not to say that the other side isn't violent. There are plenty of instances of driving over demonstrators, shootings, ect. I would say that both extremes and any violence is reprehensible. From EITHER side.

Fourth - Obstructionism. This seems to be the tack of BOTH parties. And, in fact, it is a good thing as it prevents a lot of legislation, the vast majority of which is horrendously bad. Its what the founders intended for that very reason.

Fifth - The Police. Getting back to the original issue, racism by the Police. I agree that it exists. I have written in detail about what should be done about it, and it starts with DE-UNIONIZING the Police. And since this is the only viable starting point, the Democrats will not let that happen. In fact, the Democrats are happy to continually "stir the pot" by accusing anyone not in their party of being racist. This is going to back fire on them, just as it did when Hillary branded all of her opponents as Deplorables. At some point the majority of people, who, by the way, are not racist, are going to get fed up with being told how deplorable they are.

You accuse others of not seeing both sides of the argument. I would certainly accuse you of that myself.

[Bob Butler]

First - Obama 2009. He could have ended the crash by letting the "too big to fail" go bankrupt. He then could have prosecuted those that created the mess in the first place for financial crimes. Instead, he went along with what the banks wanted. Why? Because in the end those institutions are smart enough to back people on BOTH sides of the political spectrum.

Obama made some tough choices, While he did eventually recover the economy, he can certainly be second guessed. Along with Obamacare, he managed to loose the inertia by the choices he made. I’m not going to obsess with the spilled milk here, not just now anyway.

Second - Political Racism. If this was really a major force in politics, Obama would never have been elected. If not that, he certainly would not have been re-elected in 2012, especially given the Obamacare debacle. On the other side, Trump foolishly did little to nothing to dissuade blatant racists. I say foolish because why support them? Who were they going to vote for instead? And it just gave ammo to his opponents.

The Republicans with perhaps good cause dumped considerably on Hillary. That had much to do with why Obama came out on top in the 2008 primaries. Bush 43 had lost the war and crashed the economy at the absolute wrong time. I don’t see how the Republicans were going to hold the White House, black candidate on the other side or no. The dynamics and timing of the 2008 race were unique

I see the encouragement by Trump of racists as a feature of the man. His problems with having racist policies hardly began with his entry into politics. Perhaps racism was a handicap, or did the encouragement of racism allow him after the first black president to come out on top of the Republican primaries? Were the racists happy to come out or the polite phase and demonstrate in the open again? At any rate, Trump’s appearance and appealing to the racist element of the Republican base sure messed up the party.

Third - Political violence. Most of it has been Antifa/BLM. While BLM purports to be non-violent (and I wish it were, as their stated intent of reducing racism on the part of Police is something that needs to be dealt with), their gatherings seem to degenerate into rioting and looting. Hence the summer of 2020. This is not to say that the other side isn't violent. There are plenty of instances of driving over demonstrators, shootings, ect. I would say that both extremes and any violence is reprehensible. From EITHER side.

The looters, Boogaloo Bois, Proud Boys, etc… did use Black Lives Matter to push their own agendas which had little to do with BLM. I am all in favor of using law and order against those who break the law. The conservative habit of blaming the blues for what reds do is predictable if repugnant. I don’t think Antifa has been big since the KKK faded and the BLM became dominant on the protest scene, but still the red see them under every bed.

I just do not see the supposed BLM and Antifa violence.

Fourth - Obstructionism. This seems to be the tack of BOTH parties. And, in fact, it is a good thing as it prevents a lot of legislation, the vast majority of which is horrendously bad. Its what the founders intended for that very reason.

McConnell just didn’t bring house legislation for vote in the senate. Obstructionism pure and simple. What examples can you give in the other direction?

Fifth - The Police. Getting back to the original issue, racism by the Police. I agree that it exists. I have written in detail about what should be done about it, and it starts with DE-UNIONIZING the Police. And since this is the only viable starting point, the Democrats will not let that happen. In fact, the Democrats are happy to continually "stir the pot" by accusing anyone not in their party of being racist. This is going to back fire on them, just as it did when Hillary branded all of her opponents as Deplorables. At some point the majority of people, who, by the way, are not racist, are going to get fed up with being told how deplorable they are.

I would say removing some of the immunities if the perpetrator is racist enough and establishing voting rights are viable starting point. I agree de-unionizing may be called for in many places, but distrust recent against the worker policies of de unionizing by the Republicans. I would see it used locally in the cases of blatantly bad racist unions.

Some on the red side are racist. Not all. There is much in the conservative position which is entirely honorable. Hillary calling them deplorable was a mistake, but true enough.

[John]

** 22-Mar-2021 World View: Red xenophobia

> A variant of the above hate crime article appeared in the Butler's
> Perspective thread, along with my full reply. I shall only repeat
> here that the Atlanta shooter was white, that his motive was thus
> hardly jealousy of a 'model majority' status, and that both black
> and red xenophobia against Asians would be equally deplorable.

I answered that. There are two separate cases. The century of
anti-Asian hate crimes, including the spike in cases last year, is
explained by the NIH paper, which was published in January of this
year. But the Atlanta killer case, based on people I've known in the
past and the evidence that's been made public so far, is a case of
someone obsessed with Asian women who went berserk, in my opinion.
Neither of those cases has anything whatsoever to do with "red
xenophobia," which is your word for Republican white supremacy, which
is just something you're making up, and cannot be justified without
actual evidence. As I've said before, if the Atlanta shooter were a
Republican, that information would have come out by now, so I assume
that he's a Democrat, and that fact is being suppressed by the police
and mainstream media, because it doesn't fit their narrative.

[Bob Butler]

There are stereotypes. Shortcuts. Ways of thinking of people that you don’t know all that well. I for one try to throw them out as you get to know people better. Now, in my time of employment I worked fairly closely with two black people. I had lots of stereotypes available at first. One was former military and drill sergeant. One was a fellow engineer. A third would be the ghetto stereotype. Guess which one I didn’t end up using?

What percentage of folks with the ghetto mindset harass Asians as they are jealous of their status as a model minority? What percentage of blacks have a ghetto mindset? What percentage of Democrats are black? And yet, is your attitude to blame all Democrats?

There is a line in the ‘I have a dream’ speech, in which MLK’s dream of people being treated according to their character rather than the color of their skin is mentioned. Less stereotype. More reading to people’s character instead.

Racism is real. White supremacy is real. Xenophobia is real. No willful looking the other way will deny this, not in a realistic fashion. A big time advocate and expert in xenophobia ought to know this and take special pains to account for it. Instead, you go out to paint your vile stereotypes with as broad a brush as is possible. If you are going to be deplorable, if there is going to be a stereotype that reds tend towards being deplorable, might as well embody the stereotype?

Henrich differentiates between what he calls Weird and what he calls tribal thinking. The first type of person embraces abstract principle. The latter deals with dividing between groups, favoring your group, creating vile stereotypes that supposedly fits the others, and encourages hatred and oppression of the other groups.

I will embrace the former. If it seems likely you cannot grow into the other way of thinking, that you will remain a pariah indefinitely, or at least as long as you live in the area of Havahd and MIT.

But you should at least be reminded that humanity is moving in another direction.

[Bob Butler]

A variant of the above hate crime article appeared in the Butler's Perspective thread, along with my full reply. I shall only repeat here that the Atlanta shooter was white, that his motive was thus hardly jealousy of a 'model majority' status, and that both black and red xenophobia against Asians would be equally deplorable.

This man is a prototype of everything that is wrong with the country. Lies and identity are more important than anything else. A truly disgusting thinker and promoter of all lies and Alinsky's favorite rebel.

In every crisis, the greatest flaws in the culture are addressed and left behind. Thus, the conservative side, the side that embraces the old values, staying the same, not solving the problems with the culture, generally loses.

Deal with it.

[Cool Breeze]

Every one of your disadvantaged, identity driven groups (by your marxist agenda) was given civilization and freedom by the people you claim have "old values". Not the other way around. You are delusional. "Conservatives" attempt to conserve virtue and civilization, not promote degeneracy and division, like you do. Cut the bullshit.

[Bob Butler]

It seems that Sidney Powel in her defamation defense in her Dominion voting machine company lawsuit is arguing that no reasonable person would believe the claims of massive voting fraud.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/22/politics ... index.html.

If one believed her defense accurate, one has to conclude that most people here are unreasonable? The bulk of Republicans?