Let me explain. Several years ago, the transformer above our house at SADM blew up and landed on our roof. Although reported several times, this has never been fixed by CFE, nor has the cement pole which is ready to fall over into the street been fixed - if it falls (which it will) it also could land on our house. The problem is that another transformer down the street from us which services the homes on this block and a cache of others of at least thirty homes is malfunctioning and is threatening (if it hasn't already) to blow out people's appliances, despite them using surge protectors.
These homes and maybe even more, are receiving unequal electrical voltage. On the houses, there are three leads connecting to the "working" transformer, where the voltage should be a constant number. Instead, homes are receiving 120 volts on one line and then 133 volts on another. Mike has checked nine homes, they are all receiving the improper and unequal amounts of voltage. The results are the electricity is unbalanced, it goes up and then it goes down, constantly. At night, you can see sparks flying off of the electrical lines down by Reubans. Big sparks.
This may not sound like such a big deal to you, but this constant surge then re-surge of electricity is wearing down if not entirely breaking home appliances. Potentially it could also be the reason why the street lights are always breaking down. So this is what we learned: regular surge protectors do not protect you. You need to buy and install the "Brown Out and Surge Protector" on all of your appliance outlets. We found them over on ebay. Still, I just had to buy a new freakin wash machine due these surges and I am not happy about that. Is this an example of CFE's definition of safe maintenance? I'll tell you, if you are late three days paying your electricity bill, CFE is here in a heartbeat to shut your electricity off, end of story. Kind of makes you wonder just how safe that LNG Plant is, doesn't it?
|Courtesy Democracy Now !|
Meanwhile, here is just one example which typifies the U.S. Presidential election coverage in Mexico:
What is bothersome about this is that most of the so-called Progressive media sources and even those in the conventional Corporate press of the United States have continually redirected or written their own articles concerning different critical social and political events affecting Mexico - to the point where these U.S. articles are linked within some Mexican news sources almost as though these are validations of the importance of the initial Mexican reports. Obviously, there is no reciprocation, except in the case of TeleSur. Yes Mexico, the United States is undergoing a critical event in the U.S. Presidential elections - we are being forced into voting for the lesser of two evils, and the majority of Americans are angry about it.
I have never found any reports in Mexico critical of Hillary Clinton's past including being anti-gay marriage, pro the Secure Fence Act of 2006 (report with included Jorge Ramos interview of Hillary), and her stand on sending thousands of children back to Latin America. A reminder that it was because of Hillary's 2009 Honduran Coup that even more violence has broken out in that country and others where the majority of these children were fleeing from. Please, how can you not take these actions of Hillary Clinton as slurs and hatred towards the people of Mexico and Latin America ?
There has been no criticism of the past continuation of neo-con and neo-lib policies of Bill Clinton which produced the economic collapse of 2008 and affected Mexico nor has there been any criticism of NAFTA, which enslaves the Mexican people and offers absolutely no environmental safeguards. Forget about the drug war, for the time being everyone is supposed to believe that the Merida Initiative and the Alliance For Prosperity Plan insures human rights, right? Do the Mexican people really believe this hogwash ? If they do not, then we must assume they realize that under Hillary it will be more of the same if not worse, right ? You cannot be a Hillarista then Mexico, it does not make sense. But you are.
In light of this huge slap in the face, here is the Democracy Now ! report which "expands the debate" to include Jill Stein. To read the transcript in Spanish, all you need to do is click the translation button at the top of the Democracy Now page.
Democracy Now !
Expanding the Debate: Jill Stein "Debates" Clinton & Trump in Democracy Now Special
Parts One and Two.
So never mind that these so-called debates are just an example of the two party mafia in the United States, no one down here seems interested in that fact or that 76% of the people of the United States wanted the third party candidates to be able to participate in the debates ! Wow, that's almost the same percent of people in Mexico who do not approve of Pena Nieto in current polls.
From Counterpunch, and I noticed Julian Assange is asking for donations to Counterpunch, we gave...might be a good idea, but you will not hear about this in Mexico !
September 28, 2016
That’s the real issue this time,” he said. “Beating Nixon. It’s hard to even guess how much damage those bastards will do if they get in for another four years.”
The argument was familiar, I had even made it myself, here and there, but I was beginning to sense something very depressing about it. How many more of these goddamn elections are we going to have to write off as lame, but “regrettably necessary” holding actions? And how many more of these stinking double-downer sideshows will we have to go through before we can get ourselves straight enough to put together some kind of national election that will give me and the at least 20 million people I tend to agree with a chance to vote for something, instead of always being faced with that old familiar choice between the lesser of two evils?
Now with another one of these big bogus showdowns looming down on us, I can already pick up the stench of another bummer. I understand, along with a lot of other people, that the big thing this year is Beating Nixon. But that was also the big thing, as I recall, twelve years ago in 1960 – and as far as I can tell, we’ve gone from bad to worse to rotten since then, and the outlook is for more of the same.
—Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail ’72
Another bummer indeed. It’s been nearly four and a half decades since His Majesty, Dr. Gonzo, wrote those words…and my oh my has the rot turned putrid, the stench overwhelming.
Were it only the fact that a corporate imperialist sociopath and a raving pseudo-fascist gasbag are competing to become the Murderer-in-Chief, one could simply retreat to the friendly confines of the Hobson’s Choice Inn. There, among the carpets and curtains carrying the stains of elections past, one would watch the political circus in peace while doing the work of organizing against both Tweedle Bum and Tweedle Bummer.
But this time, there’s something even more sinister afoot, something far worse than mere cardboard cutouts in formal dress. No, this time it’s the pompous arrogance and vacuous prattling of “leftists,” “anti-imperialists,” and other assorted mental contortionists doing their damnedest to browbeat everyone within earshot (eyeshot?) that THIS TIME it’s important!
“How can you sit aside so smug and allow the fascist Trump to win? You’re being irresponsible,” they chirp.
“How can you attack Trump and let the Warmongering Witch of the West become President? You know what she’ll do,” they drone.
And the response to the denizens of both camps remains the same: If you’re not opposing both Janus faces of Dillary Crump while working to guillotine the many-headed hydra of the ruling class, then what the hell are you really doing? Oh, right, I forgot – this is all “strategic,” it’s about avoiding a calamity by accepting a disaster. I’m sure the children of Libya or Muslim-American and Mexican-American immigrants will understand as they are crushed under the bus beneath which they were thrown by a “progressive left” so quick to speak for them.
But perhaps it might be useful for the Left, of which I consider myself a part, to reflect on just what the sort of ‘sophisticated’ and ‘pragmatic’ politics of lesser evilism hath wrought: the continued evisceration of the working class by both the red team and blue team of the single ruling party, perpetual war for profit and Empire, an immutable rightward drift that makes Richard Nixon look like Eugene Debs, and a parasitical ruling class of finance capital whose greatest trick has been convincing the people that it doesn’t rule them.
And where are the victories? What can we point to as the great breakthrough justifying the tactical vote? [crickets]…[a single tumbleweed rolls along an empty desert landscape]
Have we seen anything but an acceleration of the worst aspects of imperialism and capitalism? The climate is in crisis and we’re told by leftist royalty like the great Noam Chomsky that we should vote for Clinton because she at least recognizes the peril of climate change while Trump wants to put a lump of coal in Pachamama’s stockings. But the obvious question then becomes: so what?
So what Clinton pays lip service to the global threat? She was an ardent supporter of the “All of the above” energy policy of Obama while promoting fracking around the world, taking massive campaign donations from energy industry lobbyists, and tacitly supporting the construction and expansion of the Keystone XL pipeline until it became politically untenable (thanks in no small part to the Bernie Sanders campaign). And, of course, who could forget the votes she cast in support for expanded offshore oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, a shameful vote which directly contributed to the Deepwater Horizon spill in 2010.
I suppose the question should be asked of Chomsky: Is a begrudging vote for Hillary to be cast solely on the grounds of her having appropriately progressive and focus-grouped talking points? It seems that’s just about the size of it. So then the inevitable follow-up question would be: Why f*cking bother rewarding her for knowing the importance of lying well?
And how about that pesky little World War III problem? I can almost hear the “Oh, don’t exaggerate…Hillary doesn’t want to start a war with nuclear-armed Russia” cries from the tastemakers of the liberal unintelligentsia. Well, let’s allow the Queen of Chaos to speak for herself. In a raving, Strangelovian speech given before the mouth-breathing jingos of the American Legion, Clinton explained:
We need to respond to evolving threats, from states like Russia, China, Iran and North Korea…We need a military that is ready and agile so that it can meet the full range of threats — and operate on short notice across every domain — not just land, sea, air, and space, but also cyber space…You’ve seen reports — Russia has hacked into a lot of things, China has hacked into a lot of things — Russia even hacked into the Democratic National Committee! Maybe even some state election systems, so we’ve gotta step up our game…Make sure we are well defended and able to take the fight to those who go after us. As president I will make it clear that we will treat cyberattacks just like any other attack…We will be ready with serious political, economic, and military responses.Did anyone else feel a shiver run down their spine, as I did? Clinton literally advocates for war with Russia, arguing that a cyberattack which may, or may not, have originated in Russia be treated as an act of war. Nuclear-armed Russia should expect a military response from the United States over allegations of hacking? It’s sort of a pot calling the kettle black and trying to smash it with a goddamn sledgehammer kind of situation.
Now, of course, there are plenty of good people on the Left – Adolph Reed, Noam Chomsky, Arun Gupta, and many others – arguing that Clinton is a necessary evil to block Trump from bringing to fruition a full-fledged fascist movement that would have dire ramifications for social justice movements. And there is undeniably an element of truth in that.
However, the wisdom of the logic relies on a false premise: Trump represents an existential threat while Hillary does not. This basic assumption is undeniably flawed as global war with countries like Russia and China is indeed one of the great threats to humanity; this is precisely what Clinton’s belligerent foreign policy leads toward. And there was a time when anti-war still was synonymous with Left activism. What happened that we are now told that the pro-war position is necessary in order to stop, er, um, fascism? How far we’ve fallen.
Trump: The Fascist “Anti-Imperialist”
In the unending search for the most imbecilic political logic, one comes across that rare breed of obtuse ignoramus who suggests that Trump is the anti-imperialist’s choice. If that word has any meaning left today – something that is very much open for debate given recent developments – its application to Donald Trump is about as appropriate as referring to Clinton as the anti-fascist’s choice.
Trump doesn’t mean no more imperial wars; he simply means no more pretending our wars aren’t imperial. He’s not for ending the wars, but rather fighting them with the nakedly neo-colonial intentions made overt that Clinton would only secretly share over candlelit dinners with Huma Abedin, Madeleine Albright, and Mephistopheles. With people like Walid Phares, Michael Flynn, and Keith Kellogg as advisers, Trump will retain a pro-Israel imperial policy in the Middle East while advocating for NATO’s expanded mission of counter-terrorism. Oh, excuse me, Trump wants Denmark to pay “it’s fair share” of NATO costs – pardon me while I release to the heavens a flight of doves in his honor.
What anti-imperialist isn’t enamored with a candidate who calls for a full military invasion of Syria and Iraq? And, of course, there’s no connection whatever between imperialism, colonialism and white supremacy, right? Trump can spout the most virulently racist filth heard in US politics since George Wallace and Barry Goldwater went on a Tinder date to the Old Ebbitt Grill, and yet these anti-imperial mannequins swear up and down that Trump is an enemy of the Empire. Even his complimentary reach-around to Bibi Netanyahu isn’t enough to shake the cobwebs from the faux anti-imperial noodleheads of the commentariat. Sigh.
And so, where does this leave us on the Left? Everyone wants to bludgeon leftists into supporting Clinton to stop Trump using the familiar cudgel of “necessary evil”, while offering little to no additional direction other than “once the election is over we will…” Yeaaaaaah, that’s worked out well for us thus far.
Others secretly root for Trump to upset the apple cart and open a space for the Left, conveniently forgetting that the Left remains a fractured and disunited bloc while the fascist right grows in strength and organization every day. And commentators of the Left rush to tell their readers and fellow travelers that THIS or THAT is what they should do.
I’ve got an idea. How about we take a breath, drink/smoke/snort something nice and strong, close our eyes and listen close to hear the echoes of Dr. Gonzo reverberating off the walls of the Left echo chamber:
“Life has become immeasurably better since I have been forced to stop taking it seriously.”
Or, if that’s just too droll:
“In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity.”