Thursday, May 26, 2016

The Aristocrats

Watching whatever stage of grief the Republicans are in right now is entertaining, to say the least. Some have a false sense of triumphalism and unity, as if their boy's excursions into Nineties nonsense is going to help their, um, cause. Yes, Deadbeat Donald, please do keep telling us about Whitewater and Vince Foster. While you're at it, go transcribe some Mudhoney lyrics, ya fuckin' hump.

Now, "principled" Republicans and/or conservatives, to the extent that there are any left, find themselves scrambling for purchase, wondering how they can in good conscience support the bloviating, comically-coiffed ass-clown representing their supposedly grand old par-tay.

This includes some of your more high-profile conservabloggers, folks who flew the #NeverTrump flag proud and made fun of the cult followers, right up to the moment they decided to come down on the side of the dipshit assclown after all. You have to wonder how, between a competent, craven hack and a raving lunatic, any honest observer -- hell, even a dishonest observer -- could weigh in on the side of the lunatic. And Ace's Twitter feed is even worse. Maybe he thinks that "ironically" labeling his candidate "The Dishonorable DJT" will resonate back some pre-emptive credibility, on the off chance Fuckface Von Clownstick actually loses due to being a filthy, repulsive piece of shit.

Because that's what John Miller is, even at this early stage of the campaign. He's a fucking nutjob, who doesn't even bother with the good graces of actually learning something about anything before spouting off about shit. The Albuquerque putsch earlier this week was just another such example of Miller's peculiar personality trait.

(And yeah, once again, the dumbass protesters need to fucking smarten up and think about how their antics and their Mexican flag-waving look to everyone else. I don't like it at all, and there's no way in hell I'd ever vote for Miller. How do you think it looks to someone who hates Miller and HRC, and really hasn't decided yet? Maybe they stay home, maybe they decide that they'll at least vote for the guy who vows to smack those idiots down. So just keep it up, assholes.)

Anyway, much was made about Miller going after New Mexico governor Susana Martinez in his speech, even referring to notes on her at one point. Miller flat-out lied that Martinez was a supporter of the Obama administration's plan to bring Syrian refugees to the US.

So of course the usual talking heads in the media furrowed their brows, as they do, and tried their smart-guy guesses about Miller's rationale, whether it was some sort of "message" to the party, to Hispanics, to women, whatever. Whatever these people are making at their jobs, they are immensely overpaid.

John "Donald Drumpf" Miller has been in the public eye for decades now, a fixture in the national media for at least thirty years, and in the New York media for nearly forty years. There should be no puzzle about why Miller called out Martinez -- it's because she doesn't support him. Do we really need anyone to point out to us that if Martinez knew her place and welcomed Miller, either in person or with, say, a brief  genuflection on Twitter, he would have praised her, talked about what a great job she's doing? Come on, there's no mystery or greater message to any of this.

Miller's message has been effective precisely because of its transparent simplicity -- we good, them bad. This dynamic extrapolates to everyone and everything Miller chooses to expound on. I don't know much about Susana Martinez' performance as governor of what is one of the more chronically destitute states in the nation, but we know how Miller thinks, and that's all that matters.

Martinez could be a spectacular governor, getting phenomenal things done with maximum efficiency, and Miller would still find a way to shit on her. Conversely, she could be the worst, most incompetent person to walk the planet, a Palinesque moron, but if she supported Miller, he'd talk about how great she was.

This can't be news even to his full-throated cultists, much less to his more recent converts of convenience. Given the extraordinarily high negatives of both Miller and Clinton, it's possible to understand how someone might come around to Miller simply because they are that much against HRC. But it's far more difficult to understand how anyone -- especially a professional politician, or even a serious political junkie, people who know far more about the players than the average doofus 'murkin -- could be for Miller.

And the thing about politicians, or even serious bloggers such as Ace, is that they always talk a good game about principles, beliefs, values. This year epitomizes the old Chomsky line about the evil of two lesser, but more than that, it's turned out to be the year where the shameless, empty cynicism of the electorate finally caught up to the cynicism of the political class.

No comments: