On the Eve of the 2008 Pennsylvania Democratic Primary
Who will defeat Casper the friendly Ghost?


Will it be Hillary? Will it be Barack? Either one would be fine with me--much though I like the friendly ghost that comes to mind whenever I see a picture of John McCaine, I don't think that we want to have another term (or two!) of Bush-like people, policies and politics. Folks, this country, this generation, this world simply cannot afford it. Literally--we are running out of money, dinero, out of het slijk der aarde, the mud of the earth, as we Dutch call it. We need change--desperately.  The winter of our discontent has been long and it has been hard. After having drilled a trillion dollar hole in the desert--and the price of oil is still going up--it is more than time for a change. 

Besides--there have been stories about Casper--he may not be all that friendly....in fact I've heard he can be pretty nasty and snide, that he has a bad temper, to say the least: News results for john mccain's temper

So who will bring in the change? Throw out the old and ring in the new? Hillary or Barack? Well, tomorrow will hopefully bring us the final outcome of who will ride that fresh Democratic Donkey into Washington DC to overthrow the money changing tables of the Publicans and clean up the place of graft and corruption.

My hope, prayer and expectation is of course that it will be Obama, for Hillary does not have a mathematical ghost of a  chance to win the nomination. Nor does she come in with entirely clean hands.

Perhaps she is counting on some meta-mathemetical intervention--but after consulting with Richard Hofstadter,  who wrote the book on meta-mathematica, (in Metamagical Themas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, in which he followed up on his even more monumental opus:  Gödel, Escher, Bach - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) I think that hope is wearing awfully thin.

Before I go on, let me provide you with a link: The New Skeptic: I Am a Strange Loop: Gödel's Loop and a blurb from this website of The New Skeptic:

I Am a Strange Loop: Consciousness Continuum

To get back to reviewing I Am a Strange Loop, today I will be going over one of Hofstadter's cute analogies, a scale for comparing things of varying degrees of intelligence. Taking a cue from a quote by James Huneker, about a Chopin piece:  Small-souled men, no matter how agile their fingers, should not attempt it.
...Hofstadter creates a tongue-in-cheek unit of consciousness called a "huneker." A being's level of consciousness is measured along a scale from 0 to 100 hunekers; that maximum changes as he refines the scale, but as it can always be adjusted so that 100 hunekers is the maximum consciousness a thing can have, and since the whole idea is not quite serious anyway, let's stick with the original numbers, for ease of explication if for nothing else.

I am not even going to attempt to evaluate who might rank highest on this huneker scale, but you might be able to divine my educated guess if you have been reading my journal entries--in particular the one on: http://forthuyse.googlepages.com/padmasambhavatobarackobamapart3

That said, what is the pro-gnosis, the fore-knowledge of what tomorrow will bring? I don't know about you, but I feel in my bones that even in small town Pennsylvania people may have seen the dawning of new possibilities when we elect someone like Barack Obama--with the whole world watching....

The difference between people and pundits is huge: the disgraceful performance of  George Stephanopoulos and Charles Gibson has largely been seen and felt as an insult to people's intelligence. The first half of the entire debate these witless questioners fired such totally irrelevant issues at the candidates--and especially Barack Obama (after all Stephanopoulos used to be a Clinton aide) as "why did Obama not wear a lapel pin with the American flag on it?" Or--"what did he mean by that remark at a private party in San Francisco where he mentioned that some people who are frustrated with Washington politics might seek refuge and consolation in the politics of religion, gun control and immigration?" Rather than investigate the truth or relevance of that observation, the questioners skipped that part and went to the issue of  'elitism'.

After all--the remarks were made in San Francisco! At a private party of the Chablis and brie crowd! 

I could hear Casper the friendly Ghost laughing out loud in the background. Like Casper never had Chablis and Brie at his countryclub. Who calls who an elitist? From Casper the friendly ghost we could have expected that--after all it is straight out of textbooks written by the likes of Newt 'the Salamander' Gingrich and Carl Rove--who taught a whole generation of Publicans how to be irrelevant and unfair in their political attacks--down even to the advice never to refer to the Democratic Party--but always to the Democrat Party.

I have to admit I 'll call the Republicans Publicans in a tit for tat--and will do so until they change their tone. A two letter reduction in dignity for a two letter reduction in dignity--fair is fair.

But Ms. Hillary! It should have been beneath you to engage in that kind of talk--taken straight out of the books of the Publican campaign against John Kerry--who also was called an elitist, by Bush of all people!

And Gibson and Stephanopoulos: what a waste of an opportunity to let the American electorate find out about what the two Democratic candidates had to say on some really important issues: instead of lapel pins, how about the crunch of the population explosion--which is driving climate change, economic problems, the health care and social security crisis, globalization, and the rise of millions of militant fundamentalist Muslims in the Middle East who, in their frustration with the usual political games of their governments are clinging to religion, guns and the issue of foreign influences on their culture. Hmmm. 

Did someone ask: 'And what about that reproductive purpose in marriage? Is that good or bad during the current serious problem of population explosion? Shouldn't we perhaps take a break from procreation?'

Let's roll this back for a moment--where have we heard such 'elitist' remarks before? Was it not in the early years of National Socialism in Germany that the Nutsies were using exactly these frustrations of the less well educated, lower middle class people of that country in creating a dangerously militant force with which they almost took over the free world? Who sought refuge in the new Nazi religion, Nazi slogans, Nazi armbands and lapel pins and the Nazi guns of Germany and blamed all their trouble on those people who were different from them: Jews, Homosexuals, Gipsies, Communists and foreigners in general. And we know what happened to millions of them--or rather: of us, for I too would have been gassed.

Let wel, pon atencion, be aware there were in fact very good reasons why the German people were very frustrated. The arrogant and punishing treatment of the Germans by the allies at the insistence primarily of the rather low hunekered French government practically guaranteed a counter-reaction--which came with the force of a Blitzkrieg.

Frustration is a force easily manipulated. For that reason, Obama's remarks were made in private and such remarks should have been kept private, but in this country, it is sad to say, there is little privacy anymore--and some blogger posted the remarks on the Huffington Post, of all places! Ariana Huffington, herself an Obama supporter, disagreed with her own reporter according to the The Weekly Standard:

Shockingly, Huffington's take is a bit different than her reporter's. She insists there's nothing at all "elitist" about Obama's comments, and she accuses Clinton of "twisting Obama's words in a way that confirms every right-wing demagogic caricature of her own Party." Actually, you know what confirms every right-wing demagogic caricature of the Democratic party? Arianna Huffington attempting to rebut charges of snobbery with a story filed from a yacht off the coast of Tahiti.

OK, so Ariana enjoys sipping Chablis while munching on brie on board of David Geffen's yacht off the coast of Tahiti? Wouldn't you, if you could? I would. I'd probably even add some caviar! But, hey, the Republican establishment should never talk about elitism--they live in a glass house. Nor should the Clintons, who considered Obama too uppity to be taken seriously, a kind of fairy tale prince--until it was too late.

But how is this at all relevant as to who should be our next president?

Shame on you, George and Charles! Go stand in the corner boys, and don't come out till you've apologized.

What a waste of time. I don't blame Barack for being taken aback with such utter silliness in the last major Democratic debate--in fact I am mighty proud of his admirable restraint in responding--but I do blame Hillary for her aiding and abetting the Publican side and these lackluster and unimaginative newsmen for wasting everyone's time and money. After all, it takes mucho dinero to put on such a debate! And then to waste time on lapel pins and charges of elitism? Is that what the whole thing comes down to? That's pandering to the lowest common denominator in the American electorate. It's like accusing some still unbrainwashed politician in Nazi Germany of being unpatriotic for not wearing a swastika armband.

Excuse me while I barf a moment.

OK, I am back. Oh, that felt good. Maybe I should check out bulimia--perhaps it just got a bad press.

You know what is elitist? It is the idea beltway people have of underestimating the American electorate. In assuming  we are only capable of thinking in terms of lapel pins and faux class warfare. Shame on you! We are better than that, beltway folks! We know when we see a ghost of Christmas past who is running for office on a platform that has brought us and the world nothing but disaster. You can't fool us anymore. 

And Hillary--before I dismiss you, let's take a look at that new old phrase: if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Excuse me mam, but it is not the heat in the kitchen we are complaining about--it is those damn mice and cockroaches that are bothering us. When you can't stand the heat of cooking, sure, by all means: get out of the kitchen--but if you can't stand verbal vermin, it is not you who should get out of the kitchen, but the verbal exterminator who sould be called in. Lapel pins are a cockroach issue--a distraction from real cooking--for they have  nothing to do with cooking or the heat in the kitchen.

Mind your metaphores, Hillary. You are not cooking in the kitchen anymore girl, you are engaging in a bar brawl with broken bottles when you stoop that low. That's a whole different metaphore.

What do lapel pins have to do with the important issues of the day for goodness sake? They are no hot issue, they are a distraction, as Obama clearly stated, looking tired and glum in his sheer frustration. They have nothing to do with real heat--they are distractions that don't belong in any real political debate. But the pundits seem to have lost their mind and their common sense--as well as any respect for common folks like myself. And I can't blame Casper for grinning from ear to ear while Hillary cackles all the way to her inevitable defeat--for after Hillary has done her job, Casper only needs to plagiarize. Or will he? I think not, for the American electorate must have learned something in the last eight years--at least I would hope so.

Anyway--that's the way I see it in this still free country of ours. You may see it otherwise--that's your right.

Either way--let's call it a night--tomorrow we will find out how this cookie crumbles.

Bon soir à toutes et tous. Goeienavond iedereen! Have a good night! Selamat malam semua!