Beelzebub

So: in the Vice-Presidential debate, a fly landed on Mike Pence's hair, and stayed there for a while, and now some people are calling Pence "Beelzebub."

Because "Beelzebub" means "Lord of the flies," and yes that's also where William Golding got the name for the novel everyone in my generation was supposed to read in school but many of us didn't. I'm also reminded of one the many great moments in Rob Roy, 

 

 

a much better movie than Braveheart but Braveheart was released like a month later and destroyed it commercially:

Montrose : Great men such as yourself draw rumor as shite draws flies. Duke of Argyll : You are the shite, Montrose, and the flies upon it!

And I'm reminded of that because I disagree with those who say that Pence is even worse than Trump -- I mean, have you seen Trump?! Have you heard Trump? Have you SMELLED Trump?!

 

To stay with the metaphorical theme of this post, in my opinion the biggest offense committed by Mike Pence is the same as that committed by most Republicans over the past four years, namely, polishing a turd. Admittedly, Pence is even more guilty of this one than are most of his colleagues.

Which is why I'm so struck by the physical resemblance between Pence and Franz von Papen, one of the clique of German upper-class twits who, in January 1933, thought it would be a good idea to appoint Hitler Chancellor of Germany, figuring it would be easy to control him -- a real world-class, Hall of Fame bad idea.

Which brings us back around to Hal Holbrook in All the President's Men, telling Robert Redford that these guys weren't very bright, and things got out of hand.

So get out there and vote if you haven't already. Or stay in there and vote from there, which ever one applies. You know what I mean.

 

Brother Trump

In 1938 Thomas Mann published an essay entitled "Brother Hitler," in which he argued that Hitler's success was not based on anything extraordinary about him, but, exactly on the contrary, because there was nothing, absolutely nothing extraordinary about him. The mediocre masses who felt secretly or subconsciously intimidated by and resentful of politicians who were especially intellgent and well qualified to lead, these mediocrities in the masses could relate to Hitler, who had been homeless for several years, this mediocre painter who had tried and failed to gain admittance to the Vienna Academy of Art before settling for painting and selling postcards, this mediocre soldier who eagerly volunteered at the outbreak of World War I and in 4 short years shot up all the way from private to -- corporal.

When Hitler started to become successful he blamed his earlier failures on Socialists and Jews, and this encouraged his mediocre admirers to follow suit and blame their own failures on others, not themselves, as they may have done before the gang of hisdeous losers known as the Nazi Party began its grotesque and completely unnatural success.

The parallels to the success of that pathetic orange freak in a bad toupee, Donald Trump, are obvious and have been pointed out by many. Those who like him, like him not because he's extraordinary, but because he's so completely ordinary and stupid and crude, just like they are.

And now, after losing the Iowa caucus, Trump, true to form, is being a bad loser. He claims the only reason Cruz won is because the Republicans cheated.

I can only fervently hope that this is the beginning of Trump's 3rd-party run, that he's going to say that "the Republicans cheated and left him no choice." Stabbed him in the back. A 3rd-party run by Trump, as far as I can see, will just about guarantee big Democratic wins in November -- unless Bernie goes 4th-party.

"McBain To Base: Under Attack From Commie Nazis!"

The Huffington Post showed this photograph of a billboard in Iowa as an example of right-wing nutjobs comparong Obama to Hitler:

The Huffington Post clearly takes issue with such comparisons. It's not at all clear, however, whether they mind a bit when someone compares Lenin to Hitler. Well, I object to it. And I think Stalin was much, much worse than Lenin, but I also object when someone compares Stalin, or Mao, to Hitler. (Comparisons of Pol Pot and Hitler are valid. If you can find a Marxist or a Leninist who thinks Pol Pot was just great, please let me know. If you know of any Stalinists still living, that also would be news to me.) If you think Stalin was as bad, or worse, than Hitler, I've said it before, I'll very likely say it again: get Stalin: A Political Biography by Isaac Deutscher, the 2nd edition from 1966, read pages 566 through 569and then get back to us, and if you haven't changed your mind, tell us where you think Deutscher is wrong. (Go ahead and read the whole book while you're at it, and other things by Deutscher, it will do you no harm.) If you think either I or Deutscher is praising Stalin as a glorious hero and role-model, well, you just haven't been paying attention, and I'm mostly likely going to shift my attention to people who are paying attention.

And if you're one of those people who believe that Communist regimes have murdered 100 million people -- or if you believed it a decade ago and have revised that round number upward since then -- read this.