The archetypal postmodernism of Mrs. Palin

The White Horse of the Appocolypes (maybe Red), William Kristol


[Note: cross posting today at www.projectivecaste.blogspot.com]

This week the prevailing framing from Democratic media outlets is that National Review founder and grand wizard of douschbaggery William Kristol is responsible for the nationalizing of Sarah Palin. It seems facile in the least to suggest one dillhole, no matter how mightely he might suck, could be responsible for pandemic platitudes, but let's continue under the assumption that he could. Further, lets allow that there is ample evidence to substantiate the claim that the beacon of the retardation can represent to a constituency their tribal ideal.

There have been numberous left leaning writers from Scott Horton to Andrew Sullivan are suggesting that the talented Mr. Kristol culled the G.I.L.F. not in spite of her empty suitness, but specifically for her vacuity.If her uncharacteristic character were cardianal among her endowments Bill Kristol's douschbaggery is tendind toward absolute truth. However, beyond the obscene anti-republican power to control such decisions the effect of political burlesque in this style represents either mastery of postmodernity with the cool menthol taste of deconstructionism or a rorschoch test which I'm sorry to say is going to lead to many more sessions, maybe bringing in some other members of the family, but let's do a couple more sessions one on one and see how it goes.

Peter Eisenman, Bill Kristol and Jacques Derrida. What do these characters from history have in common? They are all masters of the semantic school of the deconstructivist wing of the postmodernist party. (I think I've used that "wing of the party" gesture before...damn you Howard Dean and your lyrical word smithing)

The post Derrida-Eisenman break up to me signals the begining of the end of proper pomo, but in a way is the deconstruction of deconstruction. Somol-ien cool moves into or crafts the intellectual vacuum left by the collapse of criticality cum disciplinarity, and injects a theory of the thing dripping with faux zeitgeist optics and yearning for a criticcality of the uncritical. All this as a lyrical pathway toward expressing that postmodernism was shown to be a characture of itself, cliche and dogma dependant, stagnant and referential not of a historically crafted embeded system of knowledge but of a means of practice and a mode of product.

Damnit. I have to start writing these things earlier in the day. I've been absolutely wasting precious blogging time with this working that's been going around.

Cliff's Notes: She has substance and meaning and she is a symbol of her meaning. The meaning, sign and symbol are the same. there is no collapse of the meanings and valent representations, they develop in space coincidentally. The sign must then be emptied of it's meaning, the sign refilled with new meaning, and the sign becomes signifier of new meaning.

Anyhoo, the homework for if I decide to comeback to this: Notes Around Conceptual Architecture, The Seven Crutches of Modern Architecture, Notes Around the Doppler Effect, Christy Canyon Unleashed (the Anabolic one not the Vivid Video release), Simulations (Buadrillard), The Myth of the Red and the Brown

Screw Flanders

P.O.W. Presidents and Detainee Prime Ministers

We've all seen the videos by now. When confronted by questions he cannot answer, positions he cannot defend or the unfortunately unpopular privilege of his biography John McCain has and will always present as proof of his indisputable membership in club every-man his time as a P.O.W. in Viet Nam. As surely as the seasons will turn, the Buckeyes won't live up to their hype, and Democratic leadership will always shy from a fight, the genuinely tragic reality of his time in Viet Nam will always be presented as and reported as unequivocal proof that his motivations are beyond reproach and more importantly that follow up questions would be in poor taste. 

Two recent examples of the technique. When the editorial board of the Des Moines Register noted that John McCain had lived his entire life with federally funded healthcare and then asked if that disqualified him from understanding the difficulties of the private health insurance system he replied by not really answering the question and then noting that he had no health insurance while he was a p.o.w. When he could not remember how many houses he and Mrs. McCain owned his campaign reminded us that he only lived in one house for five and a half years.

Constant reference to this chapter of McCain's life is not a reflexive response to uncontrollable environmental stimulus, nor is it the punctuation mark on a well crafted argument. It represents a calculated tactic intended to create a shield of credibility. The intent is to establish a direct causal link between his experience as a prisoner of war and his motivations and his policy catalog. That is, because he was a P.O.W. he must be working in America's best interests, and because  American exceptionalism is the foundation of republican tribalism, being a P.O.W. will make him a good president.

All this is a lengthy bit if history to establish the appropriateness of the following question:

Which of the prisoners in Guantanamo who have been or will be release without charge does John McCain feel is most qualified to be Prime Minister of their country of origin?

Joe Fucking Scarborough

"...if this election was about experience Barack Obama would lose." This is really the alpha and omega for not just Joe, who is basically a douschbag trying to sound reasonable, and in some ways the tripping point for contemporary Republicanism.

It starts with their belief that we electe leaders. I've never voted for a leader. Most people I know have never voted for a leader. I have on several occasions voted for a representative.

Now, it's always difficult to craft a logical aegis in defense of liberalism when combating republicanism because there is a unified political front, but no unified theoretical front. That is, as I've said many times before, republicanism is a coalition of disparate constituencies who do not agree in any way except that they are not Liberal.Its a perverted form of tribalism.

I digest, The phraseology, the Joe Scarborough debaters are searching for is "we don't vote for leaders with experience, we vote for representatives with judgement."

If you are coming from a point where you must have a leader. Where your starting point is cowardace and tribalism then leaders are necessary. When your starting point is faith in system, then representation within the system is adequate.

At Least 3 Moves Ahead...

Perhaps too often analysis of Republican strategizing devolve to bitch sessions over Rovian tactics. I think we frequently err in our application of the fallback "oh, how Rovian" label to seemingly dirty politicing and, I believe this for two irreconcilable reasons.

1) Bad poker players
2) Meta Rovian politicing of scale in time and space.

to be continued...

I'll tell you what's really scary

Today at 2:39 PM Central Time, there is a 43% chance that starting January 20, 2009 Phil Graham will be the sole individual charged with disbursing funds to stem the financial crisis.

can't be fixed

I usually use as a statement within any connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition (read as part of an argument) that contemporary repubilcanism, is not so much the conservative of the two evolved American political parties, but rather a coalition of triabalist cliques who self-identify as us, identify other republican cliques as near-us, and democrats as them.

The contemporary Republican coalition is demonstrably unconservative. This is irrelevant. The point of republicanism is increasing the access of the republican political class to federal funds.

The result of this tribalism, is policy indifferent, and focuses on us maintenance, focusing solely on the continuity of the tribe.

Typically, the tribe has policy specific origins, but the focus of the efforts has shifted among the atribal, amoral political class to maintenance of the coalition.

Let's say the coalition has 5 main parts. We could define the tribes within the Republican coalition

enough for now.

Last Night...

Hillary Clinton officially lost the presidential race...for Barack Obama.

When I wrote many months ago, that the loss of John Edwards was the line in the sand that we could someday point to as the moment John McCain became president I maintain that I was correct, but not for the right reasons.