No more coin tosses! Feel the Bern, Nevada! Caucus for Bernie Sanders this Saturday, February 20, 2016!!

(M)an: Dude! Hillary Rodham Clinton’s performance at the PBS debate was less than satisfactory. She condoned Madeleine Albright’s inappropriateness as well as Henry Kissinger’s, by not establishing appropriate boundaries between them and herself. Instead, she came across a lot like Jeb Bush does when he accuses audience members of putting words in his mouth or demands audience applause after using such crass vocabulary words like “blow Harding” or dismissing something in front of MSNBC’s Morning Joe as being a “nothing burger”! Did you know that the term “blowhard” can only be found in The Urban Dictionary and that Jeb Bush misused that too because the “-ing” ending isn’t even recognized as a legit form of that word? And the “nothing burger” term is completely bogus and harkens back to Walker Bush 43’s notorious misuse of languages that became known as “Bush-isms”!    

(D)ude: Man! Hillary Rodham Clinton continually talks about how she will look into matters that deserve far more prompt and direct answers. And the talking points she was utilizing at the PBS debate were heavily borrowed from Senator Bernie Sanders’s campaign. And Bill Clinton’s using the same scriptwriters as Jeb Bush as well, both men bringing up the term “profanity” at almost the same exact time last week. Doesn’t America’s electorate, our fellow voters, know that Hillary and Bill Clinton and their organizers have deliberately tried to ruin Bernie Sanders’ campaign by deceptively placing those profane trolls online themselves? Obviously, all the trolling is being done underhandedly by the Clintons and their camp online, attempting to mar the otherwise brilliant campaign underway at the Bernie Sanders campaign headquarters.    

M: Dude! Bernie Sanders has been a gentleman throughout the outpouring of underhanded tactics by Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton to undermine and ruin Sanders’ campaign. Why? The Clintons are cracking under pressure because they are superficial and corrupt. You need to understand that there are two family dynasties in this presidential election saga we’re heading into in 2016, the Bushes and the Clintons. The Bushes comprise of the Tea Partiers on the Republican side while the Clintons comprise of the Teabags on the Democratic side. If you are a Republican legislator in U.S. government, you must revere or fear the Bushes, and if you’re a Democratic legislator in U.S. government, you must revere or fear the Clintons.

D: Man! How did things become so grim? How were we as a democratic nation reduced to such pettiness? Such petty politics?

M: Dude! The Clintons and Bushes coordinated efforts to create the vacuums in political, social, and economic circles at home and abroad with deceptive and deliberate steps to set us and the world backwards. In 2010, Bill Clinton and George Walker Bush and their dynasties carefully crafted the Tea Party movement which brought in two to five million more voters to the polls, all for the Republican Party, then any other time in midterm election history. In 2014, Bill and Hillary Clinton campaigned for over fifty Democratic candidates in the midterm elections. According to Politico, over twenty Democratic candidates who chose the Clintons as campaign surrogates actually won, while over thirty Democratic candidates lost.       

D: Man! On June 17, 2015, Bill Clinton made a final appearance on Jon Stewart’s Comedy Central gig. Clinton admitted, “We lost the congress in 2010. Lost the House. Same thing happened to me.” Clearly, Bill Clinton’s ego is inflated and, as a result, stuck in the 1990s. The American Media and Press Corps made the Clintons out to be formidable highbrow powerhouses. The American electorate, our fellow voters, see the disconnect between yesterday’s hype and the truth today. The Clintons are as insufferable as the Republican Tea Partiers. The Clintons are Teabag Democrats! The Tea Partiers and the Teabags are the result of efforts by the Bushes and Clintons to rework the political landscape as Nixon and Reagan had with the now defunct war on drugs. Nowadays, the drug-free initiatives are beginning to move towards a focus on urgent treatment and long-term rehabilitation than incarceration and rise of a mortal underclass.    

M: Dude! Talk about pointlessness and meaninglessness! You know, 42 should never have fallen under the influence of 43’s biography on 41 and posted a photograph to his Twitter account showing evidence of his having read that scant attempt to bolster 41’s place in the annals of histrionics. Seriously, I believe the Republican Tea Partiers and the Teabag Democrats will be correlating 43’s book with William Faulkner’s masterpieces if either Hillary Rodham Clinton or Jeb Bush is elected as 45.

D: Man! Talking about pointlessness and meaninglessness, the establishment media worked up the mythology of the presidents of the United States up until the advent of the smart phone and tablet culture that has jumped ahead and boomed. I don’t think President Reagan could utilize the noise of the helicopter blades or other auditory nuisances around him today to get away with not being able to address questions from the White House Press Corps.   

M: Dude! Reagan did unthinkable harm to the working poor. His trickle down economics never trickled down, but he still insisted on reforming government entitlements and welfare programs. What effect did that have? Well the top 2% of society got richer and 3% of society from the very bottom, frustrated with the entitlement and welfare reforms but not knowledgeable of basic Reaganomics, turned against minorities and women targeted in Reagan’s reign of frighteningly cruel sweeping statements like, for example, affirmative action being “reverse discrimination” and the characterization of the “welfare queen” as taking advantage of the system and postponing taking responsibility therefore deserving even more severer cuts to her federal benefits.  

M: Dude! John Kasich addresses his audiences about opening one’s heart and home to neighbors in need. Yet, as an Ohioan Republican member in the House of Representatives, John Kasich introduced the bill that would become the welfare reform law under then-President Bill Clinton, 1996’s Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, legislation that forced people to fulfill work requirements in order to qualify for public assistance programs like food stamps. Of course, the work requirements were waived as a result of the economic recession, but are being reinstated in as many as 21 states, including Ohio, this presidential election year because the nation’s economy is no longer in such dire straits.

D: Man! What about the disenfranchised? I’m emphasizing the grim truths of what Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush did over the span of 28 years! They have instituted the unfashionability of welfare through cultivating the culture of poverty premise which states that the poor are poor because they lack inherent traits like ethics or a code of conduct that make them incapable of securing financial independence. The culture of poverty also berates welfare recipients as resisting an abundance of opportunities available to them if they accept personal responsibility.

M: Dude! President Bill Clinton and Hillary Rodham Clinton are diehard moderate Republicans!

D: Man! This is what H. Luke Shaefer reported to The Atlantic last year, September 11, 2015,

We started with this definition of just asking, “What kind of cash income is coming in from the house?” This could be from earnings, or any gifts from family and friends, public programs that come in dollars, odd jobs, etc. We wanted to be as comprehensive as possible. Our baseline number [of families with cash incomes of less than $2.00 per person per day] goes from, in 1996 (about the time we're making a big change to our social safety net) about 636,000 families who fit that profile, and by 2011, it’s more than doubled to about 1.5 million families with three million children who are reporting cash incomes of less than $2.00 per person per day. Even when you account for some of these major programs like SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program)—which is what we call food stamps now—the Earned Income Tax Credit, public housing, you still get an increase of about something around 50 percent between 1996 and 2011 in the number of families below the threshold.

M: Dude! Hillary Rodham Clinton as president and commander in chief, will inform us, the American electorate, “That’s the best we can do given the circumstances.” She claims every child must reach his or her own God-given potential but she will balance budgets and create surpluses on the backs of these very children’s mothers and fathers living on the edge of society with no insurance of their welfare or well-being.

D: Man! Hillary Rodham Clinton will generate budget balances and surpluses by cutting libraries and their community services in the name of digitalizing them, and then provide us with universal internet coverage that is subpar quality enough to prove punishing for bloggers and businesses online. Bill Clinton has already expressed his disdain for bloggers when he wore that lumberjack shirt and brandished a transcript of a blog from a blogger claiming Bernie Sanders’ campaign was targeting such folks for supporting the Clintons, when in fact the Clintons were organizing smear campaign trolls to intimidate or disgust the general American public from caucusing or voting in the primaries for the brilliant and humble presidential candidate Bernie Sanders.

M: Dude! No more coin tosses! Feel the Bern, Nevada!

Vote for truth in the New Hampshire Primary!! Feel the Bern!!

(D)ude: Man! Madeleine Albright supports Hillary Rodham Clinton, but with a totally reprehensible choice of words. Clearly, 2016 is jammed politically with women behaving corruptly in the best interest of themselves and their amassing worth, women like Madeleine Albright, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Amal Clooney.       

(M)an: Dude! It was reprehensible when Madeleine Albright reported to a Clinton rally in Concord, New Hampshire Saturday, February 6, 2016, and persecuted the females in attendance. “Just remember, there’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other,” she bullied the audience.    

D: Man! The Nation’s got a great article dating Friday, February 5, 2016, regarding Hillary Rodham Clinton’s cunningness. It is entitled, Henry Kissinger, Hillary Rodham Clinton’s Tutor in War and Peace: Last night, Clinton once again praised a man with a lot of blood on his hands. Have you read it? Greg Grandin writes about Clinton’s closing argument, during the debate Thursday night, as betraying not just progressives, but Democrats as well, by emphasizing how Henry Kissinger approved of the way she ran the State Department and for which she was “very flattered.” 

M: Dude! The debate last Thursday night in New Hampshire proved once again just how much of a Republican operative Hillary Rodham Clinton actually is! She’s not a moderate either! Forget progressivism, the presidential candidate would better serve the United States electorate by declaring herself a Republican. This presidential election would become so much more comprehensible if the race for the White House were between Hillary Rodham Clinton red and Bernie Sanders blue.

D: Man! Then why is Hillary Rodham Clinton running for the presidency as a Democrat?

M: Dude! Hillary Rodham Clinton is running for the presidency as a Democrat to reinstate her husband’s policies while wiping out all the hard work, including coalitions, made by the Obama Administration, particularly Secretary John Kerry. Why John Kerry? Because Hillary Rodham Clinton and her colleagues had hoped for a Mitt Romney win of the White House in 2012, hence, her abandonment of her foreign service post at the conclusion of President Obama’s first term. 

D: Man! Okay?

M: Dude! Don’t you get it?

D: Man! Get what?

M: Dude! Why do you think the Arab Spring concluded as it did? How do you think the Arab Spring collapsed? Hillary Rodham Clinton betrayed US! She aligned with the Republican Tea Partiers as a Teabag Democrat herself from the very beginning of her term as Secretary of State. Why do you think we’ve got the opposition on the Republican side of the political spectrum wanting and waiting for Hillary Rodham Clinton to win the primaries and become the Democratic nominee, not Bernie Sanders?

D: Man! Hillary Rodham Clinton’s corrupt? Hillary Rodham Clinton is corrupt!

M: Dude! Yes! The Clintons and the Bushes have arranged this election to conclude by Hillary Rodham Clinton losing to Jeb Bush. They’re all in it together! They believe they have the whole elections process figured out, that they can just study up on their 2010 and 2014 strategy to cheat the Tea Party Republicans into office, as they did in 2010, and then have the Democrats lose the House of Representatives too as a result of one of the lowest voter turnouts in history, in 2014.

D: Man! Hillary Rodham Clinton’s easy to wipe out for whoever is the Republican contender in the general election against her! The Republicans will go after her the way you did just now, and then bring allegations against Bill Clinton for either having been a skirt-chaser or being one even today. Hillary Rodham Clinton never addresses that elephant in the room, does she? Then again, she and Bill are two of the elephants in the room, alongside all the Republican contenders for the presidency this year.

M: Dude! What’s her Achilles heel?

D: Man! Hillary Rodham Clinton conveniently dismisses the issue of her campaign or she releasing the transcripts of all the paid speeches she made to Wall Street. Aside from Bill Clinton’s extracurricular activities, I believe this Achilles heel of hers will cost Hillary Rodham Clinton the presidency, hence making Bernie Sanders by far the stronger candidate. If Hillary Rodham Clinton wins the nomination, the Republicans will only have to surface her transcripts from the all too recent past. I’m pretty sure Hillary Rodham Clinton’s made a 47% comment somewhere in her private speeches, her scriptwriters appear to be the same as Mitt Romney’s in the way she speaks of herself and what she’s going to do, going so far as to say with such insincerity and objection that she doesn’t make promises she cannot keep. I think Robert Gates too utilizes the same scriptwriters as Mitt Romney and Hillary Clinton, because HRC and Bob Gates have used coarse words like “cherry picking” in the same style to respond to criticisms. Remember Romney’s videotaped coarseness regarding the 47%,

“There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That's an entitlement. The government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. And I mean the president starts off with 48, 49... he starts off with a huge number. These are people who pay no income tax. Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax. So our message of low taxes doesn't connect. So he'll be out there talking about tax cuts for the rich. ... My job is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives. What I have to do is convince the 5–10% in the center that are independents, that are thoughtful, that look at voting one way or the other depending upon in some cases emotion, whether they like the guy or not.”

M: Dude! “I’m interested in making what we have work better. I want to streamline programs that are duplicative and redundant. I want to have a top-to-bottom review about what works and what doesn’t work, and be absolutely clear we’re getting rid of what doesn’t work.” That’s exactly what HRC said when responding to Rachel Maddow’s question Thursday night about whether or not she would cut any government agencies as president. 

D: Man! “I will not send American combat troops to Iraq or Syria. That is off the table. That would be a terrible mistake. We will continue to use Special Forces, and we have to because of the kinds of threats we face. You know, the network of terrorist organizations -- not just ISIS, but others who are part of this unfortunate network that stretches from North Africa to South Asia -- pose serious threats to friends, allies, and partners, as well as to ourselves. And we've got to keep our country safe, and we have to work with the rest of the world to try to defeat ISIS, to end that terrorist threat. So I will be a very careful, deliberate decision maker when facing hard choices, because I know what's at stake. And I know you can understand why there can't be from me anyway a blanket statement. But I want to assure you I will be transparent, I will be open, and I will explain to the American people if any occasion arises where we do have to take military action to protect ourselves or our close friends and partners.” That’s how HRC concluded an answer to a question by a potential voter, Michael Feel’s inquiry Wednesday night into her interventionist foreign policy past.

M: Dude! Hillary Rodham Clinton’s an iffy commander in chief and president. She distinguishes a lot between the constituents coming to vote and the people who will be working with her in the government and the White House, telling Anderson Cooper at that same Town Hall Wednesday night, “But I -- well, you know, I don't really know, Anderson. I think -- here's what I want young people to know. They don't have to be for me, I'm going to be for them. It doesn't really matter. If they are not supporting me, I will be their president, I will do everything I can to give them the opportunities they deserve.”

D: Man! Would HRC have made a pact with Wall Street through not releasing the transcripts of her private speeches?

M: Dude! Most likely, yes. Hey! What was it about Amal Clooney, George Clooney’s wife, that you wanted to address?

D: Man! She’s stating the case for her client Mohamed Nasheed, who she labels a political prisoner in Maldives, the tropical nation comprising a chain of hundreds of islands in the Indian Ocean. Nasheed was president of the Maldives from 2008 to 2012, before being ousted himself by the exact same political forces he had ran against for the presidency in a coup d’état.

M: Dude! The coup d’état by police and military loyalists of Nasheed’s predecessor Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, was considered controversial amongst not just Nasheed’s supporters, but by many. British Prime Minister David Cameron considered Nasheed’s departure a legitimate resignation, while Member of Parliament David Amess sided with Nasheed’s supporters to say Nasheed’s resignation was forced. What’s going on?

D: Man! If you look into the history of Nasheed’s successor, Mohammed Waheed Hassan, you find a lot of answers. Mohammed Waheed Hassan also ran against Gayoom’s ideology after returning home from the United States, where he had garnered two master’s degrees and a PhD from Stanford University. Unfortunately, this is a tale of hurt egos on the right and the left. Hassan lost the parliamentary election in 1989 to Gayoom’s brother-in-law and retreated back onto the international relations scene with positions at the UN, specifically UNICEF, before returning to Maldives and trying another hand at politics. This time Hassan had his ambitions set on becoming the leader of the Maldivian Democratic Party, the position he lost to Nasheed.

M: Dude! What’s the scene like in Maldives right now? Isn’t Amal Clooney spreading bias favoring Nasheed at a pivotal point in Maldivian history? Isn’t Amal Clooney’s concerns for Nasheed just another way of constructing concerns over old wounds that haven’t healed?

D: Man! Why would she want to construct concerns over old wounds that haven’t healed? Is she wanting to scratch off the scab and create an abscess? Does Amal Clooney not know that she’s endangering civilian populations across Maldives with her broadcasting her concern for a politician like Nasheed?

M: Dude! Look at Mohammed Waheed Hassan’s successor, Abdulla Yameen, half-brother of Gayoom and leader of the Progressive Party of Maldives! Amal Clooney cannot reinstate Nasheed as President of the Republic of Maldives! Nasheed lost the 2013 presidential elections to the Progressive Party of Maldives! Abdulla Yameen being such a close relation of Gayoom doesn’t immediately deem him as deserving a coup d’état too! Amal Clooney said the following regarding Maldives to Chuck Todd on Meet the Press, January 17, 2016,

“I mean Maldives is not usually the top of anyone's political agenda. And it may be on the short list of holiday destinations. I think there are two reasons. First of all, U.S. values are at stake. You know, we just had the president's State of the Union address. And he said American leadership in the 21st century means rallying the world around causes that are right.

And he gave an example, the U.S. supporting Ukraine's fight for democracy. And that's what we're asking for too in this case. Maldivians have the right to democracy, and their democracy is under threat at the moment. There's another reason that is also not very well known. Just last month, the European parliament issued a report saying that at the moment, the Maldives has the highest per capita rate of recruitment to ISIS in the world. And this is really shocking. So the figures that have been released by the State Department say 200 fighters have gone from the Maldives to Iraq or Syria.

The president has made speeches saying that there's only room for Islam in the Maldives and Sharia punishment should be imposed. You've had fighters who've gone to ISIS come back to the country and not be prosecuted. Also last year, you had a rally on the streets of Malé where people were waving ISIS flags and the police did not crack down on those and no arrests took place. So you certainly have a regime that could be doing a lot more to minimize the terrorist threat.

So his attack was that I didn't let facts get in the way when I was saying that Nasheed had been subjected to an unfair trial and that there were political prisoners in the country. What has happened since then is that he himself was arrested, follow, you know, because the president is now increasingly paranoid I think and is going after members of his own party, having dealt with the opposition in its entirety.

He announced it from the jail cell and penned a very different op-ed to the one that attacked me and said, "What are these lawyers talking about?" That he now says, and I believe this is a direct quote, "I join the swelling ranks of political prisoners in the Maldives, including President Nasheed." And he also adds, you know, "Any casual observer of the judicial system in the Maldives knows that it's impossible to get a fair trial here.

I think that it's easy to dismiss criticism on that basis, like the, you know, I think the kind of attacks that I got from that vice president just smacks of desperation and is easy to dispose of. So it's not something that's worrying. I think on the other hand, if in representing this client and trying to just secure his release and the release of other political prisoners, if people are made aware of the situation in the Maldives, I think that's a good thing.

Because there are thousands of tourists going every year. And I think if people know what's going on, they might find that they don't want to support that regime either, you know? If you're a woman lying on the beach in the Maldives, you might want to know that a kilometer away, another woman is being flogged. And you might want to find your own way to protest that.”

D: Man! Those are awful sound bites meant to confuse the audience, like us! First, what about the fate of the civilians of the Republic of Maldives? The political quagmire that Amal Clooney is attempting to educate US about the Republic of Maldives with, is insincere like presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. She may have been a Goldwater Girl in her adolescence, but Hillary Rodham Clinton remains Henry Kissinger’s disciple today.

M: Dude! Are you saying that Amal Clooney and Hillary Rodham Clinton are collaborative?

D: Man! If Hillary Rodham Clinton is aligned in any way with Kissinger on foreign policy, then she is with registered genocidal alligator hides like India’s Narendra Modi and his political swamp that goes by the acronym BJP. Hillary Rodham Clinton set the stage, during her four years as Secretary of State, for BJP and Narendra Modi’s ascension onto India’s political front in 2014 from the sidelines, where Modi was Chief Minister of Gujarat during at the time of the gruesome 2002 Gujarat riots. The analysis by Martha Craven Nussbaum on the the matter of whether these riots were intentional is succinct and brilliant, "There is by now a broad consensus that the Gujarat violence was a form of ethnic cleansing, that in many ways it was premeditated, and that it was carried out with the complicity of the state government and officers of the law.”

M: Dude! I get it! Hillary Rodham Clinton is an underhanded Republican operative! And Amal Clooney does not want to reinstate Nasheed, but to ameliorate the negative effects on Nasheed’s ego and status in Maldives! But I do wonder if she’s got a plan to create a hell on earth for the Maldivians, the civilian citizenry there, or will they suffer as did the civilian citizenry caught in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971? Jon Pennington [find him on quora dot com] answers this quandary when presenting by far the best answer online to the question, “Why did Nixon dislike India?”  

D: Man! Why did Richard Nixon dislike India?

M: Dude! According to Jon Pennington’s self-identifying catch phrase, “U.S. history is more than the watered-down version you got in high school.” Anyways, Pennington gives the following succinctly brilliant response to why Nixon disliked India,

“Nixon had several reasons for disliking India. First of all, Nixon was a racially and religiously prejudiced man who once said of both Pakistan and India: "Unwashed heathen. They're picking at each other over there." On the other hand, racism alone is not sufficient to explain his distaste for India, because Nixon clearly favored Pakistan over India in the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971. In addition, Nixon took a Machiavellian approach toward foreign policy that led him to favor engaging in diplomatic negotiation with autocrats like Pakistan's Yahya Khan over the more small-"d" democratic Indira Gandhi. (Nixon also liked Yahya Khan more personally, whereas he referred to Indira Gandhi as a "bitch.")

Another factor that influenced Nixon's decision to favor Pakistan over India in the 1971 war was that Nixon's administration was then making preparations for Nixon's 1972 visit to China. Yahya was a vital go-between for the United States in providing a diplomatic back channel for Nixon's trip to China, and the Nixon Administration did not want to anger a country that was still sore over the 1962 Sino-Indian War by favoring India over Pakistan. Finally, Nixon associated India with the hippie counterculture. The Nixon White House tapes reveal that Nixon disparaged George Harrison's involvement in The Concert for Bangladesh as an example of "fruitball causes" and speculated that Harrison was being duped by India about where the money was going. As a socially conservative "law and order" guy, it's not implausible that Nixon would have preferred a strongman like Yahya over a country he associated with heathens and dirty filthy hippies.”

D: Man! You do not learn and get degreed on civil rights and world cultures in order to destroy civil rights and world cultures! Hillary Rodham Clinton and Madeleine Albright did both in their capacities at the State Department, the former having graduated with a law degree while the latter attained a PhD on the Prague Spring and the role of journalists in Alexander Dubcek’s short lived liberal reforms in Czechoslovakia. Of course, Alexander Dubcek’s Prague Spring of 1968 was seen as a threat to the Warsaw Pact of 1955.

M: Dude! Kissinger has been with the Clintons since the very beginning of Bill Clinton’s presidency! Kissinger was a key player in getting NAFTA negotiated in the Herbert Walker Bush 41 Administration and then implemented during Clinton 42’s Admin.

D: Man! The New Hampshire Primary tomorrow better not involve coin tosses favoring HRC every time like at the Iowa Caucus because Hillary Rodham Clinton’s blood red and Bernie Sanders’s loyal blue! Hillary Rodham Clinton’s so concerned about “artful smear” when in fact she crafted the whole mess at the Iowa Caucus to discourage voter turnout in the New Hampshire Primary tomorrow.

  

  

"...today's rigged economy that favors the establishment elites..."

(M)an: Dude! I’m with Senator Bernie Sanders in that I agree there should be three additional debates in California, Michigan, and New York between Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton and him. Last night’s town hall moderated by Anderson Cooper on CNN was an eye opener and set Bernie Sanders in a league apart from Hillary Rodham Clinton. Whereas Hillary Rodham Clinton came across as defensive and edgy, Bernie Sanders was actually very clear and consistent in his answers to the extent that his true personality surfaced unlike anywhere else. Bernie Sanders is not defensive or edgy because he’s aligned his awareness with our suffering, being overworked and underpaid as we are in today’s rigged economy that favors the establishment elites.  

(D)ude: Man! Lobbyists representing the travel industry lobbied against efforts to control the Zika virus by stopping travelers from traveling into the infected areas. Isn’t it a disgrace when the World Health Organization is preempted by travel industry lobbyists? Clearly, there are no boundaries where they ought to be set up, like between WHO and congressional lobbyists. It is obscene!

M: Dude! I’m astonished by how dependent Wall Street is on the production and distribution patterns of oil across continents. Right now, the marketplace that includes domestic and foreign markets, is so entrenched in the value of oil remaining stable and on the high price end overall.

D: Man! Speaking of high price endings, I came across some dire situations that could hold the key to the identity of the Long Island serial killer. I was reading the 2013 bestseller about the female victims of the Long Island serial killer, a book by Robert Kolker entitled Lost Girls: An Unsolved American Mystery and came to an awful realization. That awfulness being that the girls were too disenfranchised to be considered worth fighting for the identity of their killer. In fact, the people who live by the beach over there in Long Island were dismissive and indifferent to the plight of the girls because the girls were revealed to be prostituting around the time of their demise through Craigslist. Even if they weren’t meaning to be doing so, the implication that they had used Craigslist was that they had actively engaged in deviant behavior and had brought upon their gruesome fate themselves.

M: Dude! Isn’t that injustice? I’m really concerned too in the same way for the girls and women who are using online one-night-stand websites like Tinder!

D: Man! I came to realize that the women killed in Long Island, New York, had been sighted by the people living by the beachfront. According to Kolker’s groundbreaking research, many of the girls were spotted by residents owning beachfront property there. For example, there was a similar eyewitness account by a male resident and a female resident of a young woman running to their front doors around the same time one night and being scooped into an unmarked SUV by unidentifiable movements from within the vehicle.

M: Dude! How many Concord, New Hampshire prep school perpetrators like Owen Labrie must there be out there? Labrie had secured admission into Harvard Divinity School when he was arrested for sexual assault of a fifteen-year-old student.

D: Man! Even worse, I read somewhere that perpetrators of serial kills operate in groups. After reading Kolker’s book, I am convinced that there are many groups of prep school perpetrators out there and that they are operating successful horrors on the backs of the working class poor like the girls and women killed in Long Island. There are anywhere between ten and seventeen victims since the Long Island serial killings came onto the radars of local law enforcement and the FBI.

M: Dude! American colonialism has set in as a result of white collar criminals being segregated from blue collar criminals. Likewise, look at the death penalty in the United States and how Amal Clooney’s choosing to represent as an attorney the dual rapist Julian Assange—and I say dual rapist because two women described his anatomy thoroughly after he had assaulted them in the course of consensual sex turned nonconsensual. After last year’s Academy Awards awarding Edward Snowden’s biopic Citizenfour, I wasn’t surprised when I heard there’s another biopic of Julian Assange in the works by the female documentarian that brought us Citizenfour, Laura Poitras.

D: Man! Laura Poitras was featured in a Vogue Magazine article! January 27, 2016! She informed the interviewer Sara Corbett that she’s working on a Julian Assange film entitled Asylum, and that she’s a George Herbert Walker Bush and George Walker Bush crumbling just like CBS’s Sumner Redstone and Hillary Rodham Clinton.  

M: Dude! These folks live on the Bush family’s trillion-dollar pie crumbs in the monetary sums of millions and billions of dollars that are shaven meticulously to purchase allegiances of a diverse group that includes the press corps and politicians red and blue!  

D: Man! Do you really think the Bushes aren’t trillionaires? Why else would Walker 43 choose to appear for jury duty in Dallas, Texas other than to deflect attention from his status as an American trillionaire? Not surprisingly, he’s got an exclusive access across Texas via the Chisholm Trail toll way, just like the way Pakistan’s establishment elites crisscross the country via highways that were installed to get them to and from their workplaces and extramarital affairs.

M: Dude! The Bushes’ trillions are blood money. And it’s not just Iraqi blood, but the blood of the diverse Americans in and outside of the United States via our sons and daughters in diverse uniforms, from soldiers signing up for multiple deployments to first responders and the survivors who risked everything to salvage any lives remaining after the fall of the Twin Towers.

D: Man! Why is Amal Clooney so focused on the Maldives at the moment? Does it have anything to do with Hillary Rodham Clinton not being able to answer audience questions last night about her interventionist record and drafting women in the armed services as well as men?

M: Dude! Folks which constitute the Bush family’s crumbs?

D: Man! Media giant Sumner Redstone killed Dan Rather’s career on behalf of the trillionaire Bush family dynasty. And Hollywood too is eating up the crumbs from the Bush trillion-dollar underworld otherworldliness. Look at the way Jane Fonda has endorsed Jennifer Lawrence for a second Oscar win this year despite Lawrence lacking any acting chops of her own. And have you seen Patricia Arquette in the film she was awarded an Oscar for last year, Boyhood? Well, let me just fast forward to one of the final scenes where she laments to her teenage son on his way to whatever university he’s selected to attend. Patricia Arquette’s character, the mother, mourns for past days including the time where the family awaited test results for the now-adolescent college goer concerning a possible dyslexia diagnosis. No acting chops there either! Patricia Arquette and Jennifer Lawrence suffer the same flatness!  

M: Dude! Movies are deteriorating and, yet, the Academy Awards refuses to recognize Netflix films as legitimate moviemaking and the organization a viable production house.

D: Man! White media big shots must boycott these Oscars because the same exact mechanics have played out time and time again. Look at the way perverted predators like Woody Allen and Roman Polanski have sustained imminence with the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and have very active string of lineups underway, remember Polanski’s commercial for the fashion house Prada four years ago? Woody Allen’s films are complete nonsense but hyped up as extraordinarily genius while the degenerate gets award after award from the Academy, even 2014’s Cecile B. DeMille from the Golden Globes!

M: Dude! Chris Rock and Denzel Washington beware! The two are nothing but tokens in the hands of a rigged Hollywood awards economy that’s nothing but beasts of no nation. Rock and Washington will be targeted as was Steve Harvey at the Miss Universe pageant. Harvey never exploited his guests on his television and radio programs, hence he became vulnerable to the exploitative entertainment hunters like William Morris Endeavor and Donald John Trump.

D: Man! Speak of enslavement!

M: Dude! Edward E. Baptist’s masterpiece from 2014, The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism speaks volumes across all times when he describes the physical conditions slaves endured from before the time of the American Revolution to the expansion outwards into more territories, slaves being forced to trek barefoot westward and southward from New England into the rest of what became Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and so on and so forth. This is how Baptist makes the slaves’ brutal journeying even more unmistakably clear and obvious, from page 4,

“There are 1,760 yards in a mile—more than 2,000 steps. Forty thousand is a long day’s journey. Two hundred thousand is a hard week. For eighty years, from the 1780s until 1865, enslaved migrants walked for miles, days, and weeks. Driven south and west over flatlands and mountains, step after step they went farther from home. Stumbling with fatigue, staggering with whiskey, even sometimes stepping high on bright spring mornings when they refused to think of what weighed them down, many covered over 700 miles before stepping off the road their footsteps made. Seven hundred miles is a million and a half steps. After weeks of wading rivers, crossing state lines, and climbing mountain roads, and even boarding boats and ships and then disembarking, they moved their bodies across the frontier between the old slavery and the new.”

[Too be continued…]