Wednesday, March 16, 2016

Marco Rubio Withdraws from Presidential Race

flash- this photo is old file footage

The biggest news of last night is that Marco Rubio has withdrawn from the Presidential race.  In a speech he says he was right but that doesn’t make him a winner.   Ohio Governor Kasech won his home state of Ohio and 66 delegates, denying Trump an easy path to victory at the Convention.  Now they say Trump will have to win 59% of the remaining delegates.  I don’t know who does the math on this stuff, but I’m guessing this assumes that Trump is picking up NONE of Marco Rubio’s delegates.  Rubio still has more delegates pledged to him than does Kasech.  Trump won the other four states, Missouri, Illinois, North Carolina, and the big win in Florida with the prize of 99 delegates.  Ted Cruz is the big loser of the night.  He was hoping to win Missouri and I thought polls had him up in that state.  Hillary Clinton swept all five of the states, which surprised me.  It will be about the first time that Sanders fell way short of expectations.  Sanders was expected to win easily in Missouri and Illinois, and Ohio would be more of a challenge.  They waited a long time before calling the victories in Illinois and Missouri and I’m guessing the margin of victory for Hillary was slim.  Then we have the question of just how it is the momentum could have shifted so markedly in just one week.  The answer may be found in a Washington’s blog post of several days ago.  They said that Hillary Clinton forces were sabotaging the campaigns of both Trump and Sanders.  They did this by planting protestors who pretended to be for Bernie Sanders with signs and slogans and all, at the Trump rallies.  People would see this on their TV’s and get turned off on both Trump and Sanders.  They’d be turned off on Trump because of his gestapho tacticts in handling these demonstrators and they’d be turned off on Sanders because he was the one associated with these protestors.  But in reality no Bernie Sanders afficianado would even care to protest a Trump campaign.  After all polls have Trump as the weakest candidate.  People lie about the polls.  Trump is the weakest republican candidate they could put up, and Hillary is the weaker of the two democratic candidates they could put up.  This false notion is rampant now according to Washington’s blog that somehow Hillary is better because she “has experience” and is more “mainstream”.  By “mainstream” though - - they mean her people aren’t involved in protests where people get arrested.  There is also the false meme that Hillary is more “electable” in November.  This false notion has been proven wrong time and time again by actual scientific polls.  But sometimes myth has more of a grip on the American public than do actual facts.  Due to the difference in time zones, even if Sanders had won in Missouri and Illinois, it wouldn’t have shown up in the evening news because this is central time zone- - and they finish up voting later. 

Washington’s blog attacked Norm Chomsky the other day saying that he relies on basically government myth to support the idea that there is nothing about the 9 – 11 events that we don’t already know and all the facts are well known about how of course- - - Iraq did the destruction which is why we went to war in Iraq.  At least this is what the Bush people want the people to believe.  There is a 28 page chapter of the 9 – 11 report that is classified.  This is strange because I thought the whole idea of the 9 – 11 comission is to make public the story about 9 – 11.  Here is a case where the conspiracy people are the ones who rely on facts and not cling to romantic pre-conceived notions.  If you try and pin down the “facts” of 9 – 11 you first have to start by saying that fifteen of the nineteen hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.  And two were from the United Arab Emeritz, and one each from Lebanon and Egypt.  You will note that none of the hijackers are from Iraq, Iran, or Afghanistan.  Another false notion is the idea that somehow “We turned Iraq over to Iran, who run it now” all because President Obama pulled out the troops too soon.  Here is falsehood on parade.  Obama didn’t do any “pulling out” of troops.  He was going along with a pre arranged timetable laid down by Bush.  If anything President Obama tried to delay the withdrawal of our troops.  People forget that ISIS didn’t exist in the summer of 2011 when the last of our troops left Iraq.  Some day the history books will get the real truth about what happened on 9 – 11 with the Twin Towers.  Today isn’t that day. 

THE FOLLOWING IS A PLUG FOR A BOOK;  By studying the history of the US, from its origins in genocide, white supremacy, oligarcho-fascism, and mass enslavement, to its continuing genocides, ethnic cleansings, terror-bombings, assassinations, coups, cluster bomb and other weapon sales, and annexations and atrocities-by-proxy around the world today, we can see that the title of a new book, ISIS IS US, by the founder of Washington’s Blog and several other authors, is more than a play on words.  The book traces much of this history in explicit detail and with a vast range of sources, quotes, and studies. Comprehensively, it leaves a picture that will enlighten and make concerned readers want to do something to stop the flow of terrorism, charred corpses, and smashed democracies that is the productive output of the US ruling elite, a fundamentalist group obsessed with money, luxury, power, and death, their own “ideology and form of religion and god-worship, based on self-interest and the whitewashing of memory”, as Canada’s leading intellectual, John Ralston Saul, has put it.  In considering how ISIS IS US, we can begin with a statement by Ira Chernus, professor of religious studies at the University of Colorado, Boulder, who points out that to “sustain our image of ourselves as innocents … we have to blot out … empirical history and replace it with a myth (not so surprising, given that any war against evil is a mythic enterprise).”

The thing wrong with the "Christ's Ventroliquist" book is that it assumes certain things for which there is scant historical varification.  It's primary "source" is the Book of Acts in the Bible, which the author assumes to be one hundred percent historic fact.  But in terms of James being the "head of the Christian church" hanging out in the Jewish Temple- - about the ONLY place you find this is in the book of Acts and an isolated line or two elsewhere.  There is no Gospel in which it's even reported that Jesus and James even had a conversation or even met in some post resurrection experience.  There is only one brief passage in First Corinthians that states that "Jesus appeared to James".  But "appearing to" is not the same thing as giving James all authority over a Christian Church.  Jesus already gave this "authority" to St Peter if he gave it to anybody.  And we are supposed to believe that something "significant' occurred in Antioch, Syria in 49 AD.  (The author stepped in his time machine and knows it was 49 AD because there was a calendar hanging on the wall)  So we know something significant happened in Antioch, Syria where Acts says "It was here they were first called Christians".   I wonder if Charlie Daniels was involved.  Were there any communist flags tacked up on the wall of anyone's garage.  We are told that the infant Church was collectivist or "Communist" as we would say today.  They were zealous to conthiscate all property of its adherents.  (enforced by the death penalty)  We're told a lot of myths just as Lenin and the Bolshivics relied on extensive myth making for the Communist revolution of 1917.  But the author of Christ's Ventroliquists offers up some new scientific method to decipher who is telling the Truth and who is spinning lies.  Who is giving us history and who is spinning myths.  Why should I trust Him over the Church?  I have a better solution.  Trust Me.  Because I know and trust my OWN extensive research on the matter.  (Selah)

No comments: