The Waffle House Conspiracy

Travis Reinking, the 29-year-old, Tr*mp inspired "sovereign citizen" who invaded a Waffle House restaurant in a black suburb of Nashville on April 22  sought an interview with the President last July.  Although denied a meeting, his name did come to the attention of White House officials.  Anonymous sources report that he was of particular interest to Stephen Miller, the 33-year-old speechwriter and Tr*mp-whisperer who has maintained a suspiciously low profile in recent months.  Those sources say that a Miller aide contacted Reinking the following week, and helped him plan the attack.  "Don't wear pants," the aide suggested, "and they won't look at your face.  Nobody will know it was you."

Miller apparently believed that a racist massacre would help to distract media attention from the seizure of incriminating documents from Tr*mp attorney Michael Cohen, as well as other White House problems connected to the Mueller investigation.  "They'd have preferred more prominent victims, like in the Dylann Roof attack," said one insider, "but the guy was crazy, so they had to take what they could get."

All of the above is a total fabrication, of course, but no more incredible than the story about Hillary Clinton running a child sex ring out of a pizza parlor.  You'd expect that somebody might believe it, though — right?  Well, no.  Conspiracy theories aimed at liberals are far less effective than conspiracy theories aimed at conservatives.  "That's because conservatives are stupid," you reply.  Sorry, wrong again.  There are plenty of stupid liberals.  The difference is attributable to the different personality characteristics of liberals and conservatives.

Research shows that conservatives have a far greater need for cognitive closure: they find it much harder to tolerate ambiguity, and so are more willing to accept new "information" that confirms their preexisting beliefs.  Conservatives also are measurably more fearful than liberals, hence more responsive to stories they see as threatening.  Fear overrides logical inconsistencies, and demands an immediate, aggressive response.  Fear feeds authoritarianism.

Nonpartisan internet entrepreneurs who monetized fake news during the 2016 election quickly abandoned attempts to make money on liberal-themed sites, but the conservative clickbait was highly profitable.  There is little reason to believe that Facebook and Google will correct their algorithms in time for the 2018 midterms, so we can expect the lies to flow on unabated.

Totally irate, again

If I seem to spend a lot of time attacking the presidential candidate I intend to vote for in November, it's because he keeps pissing me off. The latest, of course, is his support for the alleged "compromise" (read capitulation) on FISA.

Last Monday, Paul Krugman was wondering whether Obama was really a liberal or just another poll-driven, Clintonesque asshole. Okay, Krugman didn't say asshole -- that was me. (As Krugman noted, there are fates worse than Bill Clinton -- but that's not much to celebrate.)

The alternative, of course, is McCain -- and more supply side economics. If the media were a bit less corporate and if liberals invested anywhere near as much in think tanks as conservatives do, supply side would have been the victim of mercy killing years ago. America being Amerika, however, supply side economics marches on like a zombie in a B movie.

What would make any rational person think, at this particular historical moment, that tax cuts for the rich or the corporations lead to economic expansion? Give the rich more money and all they do is bid up the prices of the investments they and their friends already own. Give the corporations more money and all they do is distribute it, in the form of dividends, to the rich. Nothing new gets started that wouldn't have been started regardless. Entrepreneurs start new businesses because they think those businesses can turn a profit -- with or without tax cuts.

Granted, tax advantages always can make a business more profitable, but how often are those additional profits translated into jobs and benefits for workers in the affected industries? The answer: rarely, if ever.

So, yes, I'll vote for Obama -- how could I do otherwise? I just wish I had a better choice.