;)
The Commentariat -- Dec. 14, 2015
Internal links & defunct video removed.
CW: I"m on the road again, so updates will be sparse. I'll try to get at least a skeletal Commentariat up each day, but I'm not sure I'll be successful.
Afternoon Update:
Tom Vanden Brook & Gregory Korte of USA Today: "President Obama said he's dispatching Secretary of Defense Ash Carter to the Middle East to help secure more help to fight the Islamic State, promising that his administration is 'moving forward with a great sense of urgency' against the terrorist group."
*****
Jim Fallows of the Atlantic: "... after the climate agreement in Paris, it would be wrong not to note three big things that have happened during [Barack Obama's] presidency that in all probability would not have happened without him:
- The climate deal itself, as explained in a NYT piece just now, and in unbelievable contrast to the utter collapse of the Copenhagen negotiations early in Obama's term;
- The rapprochement with Cuba, marking the beginning of the end of the single stupidest (but hardest to change) aberration in modern U.S. foreign policy; and
- The international agreement with Iran, which in the short term offers (as I have argued at length) the best prospects for keeping Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, and in the long run has the potential of beginning to end Iran's destructive estrangement from the international order."
Sewell Chan & Melissa Eddy of the New York Times: "With nearly every nation on earth having now pledged to gradually reduce emissions of the heat-trapping gases that are warming the planet -- a universal commitment that had eluded negotiators and activists since the first Earth Day summit meeting, in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 — much of the burden for maintaining the momentum now shifts back to the countries to figure out, and put in place, the concrete steps needed to deliver on their pledges. The task may prove most challenging for India, which is struggling to lift more than half of its population of 1.25 billion out of poverty and to provide basic electricity to 300 million of them. Rich countries are intent that India not get stuck on a coal-dependent development path." ...
... Clifford Krauss & Keith Bradsher of the New York Times: "If nothing else, analysts and experts say, the accord is a signal to businesses and investors that the era of carbon reduction has arrived. It will spur banks and investment funds to shift their loan and stock portfolios from coal and oil to the growing industries of renewable energy like wind and solar. Utilities themselves will have to reduce their reliance on coal and more aggressively adopt renewable sources of energy." ...
... Joby Warrick of the Washington Post: "The formal adoption of the accord late Saturday was greeted with applause and cheers by thousands of weary delegates to the climate talks here. But the happy conclusion was preceded by days and weeks of tough bargaining, along with occasional flashes of drama." ...
... Thomas Kaplan of the New York Times: "In a stark display of the partisan divide in the United States over climate change, the Republican presidential candidates have said almost nothing about the Paris Agreement, even though whoever succeeds Mr. Obama will be tasked with carrying it out. Of the nine who will participate in Tuesday's prime-time debate on CNN, only Gov. John Kasich of Ohio would provide an assessment of the deal when asked on Sunday. The near-silence among Republicans is a striking illustration of the vastly different roles that climate change is playing in the presidential primaries for the two major parties." ...
... Paul Krugman: "Republican attitudes haven't changed, except for the worse: the G.O.P. is spiraling ever deeper into a black hole of denial and anti-science conspiracy theorizing. The game-changing news is that this may not matter as much as we thought.... New technology has fundamentally changed the rules.... Costs of solar and wind power have fallen dramatically, to the point where they are close to competitive with fossil fuels even without special incentives -- and progress on energy storage has made their prospects even better. Renewable energy has also become a big employer, much bigger these days than the coal industry.... Maybe we're not doomed after all."
Brian Ross, et al., of ABC News: "Fearing a civil liberties backlash and 'bad public relations' for the Obama administration, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson refused in early 2014 to end a secret U.S. policy that prohibited immigration officials from reviewing the social media messages of all foreign citizens applying for U.S. visas, a former senior department official said.... A spokesperson for the DHS, Marsha Catron, told ABC News that months after [the official, John] Cohen left, in the fall of 2014, the Department began three pilot programs to include social media in vetting, but current officials say that it is still not a widespread policy. A review of the broader policy is already underway, the DHS said. The revelation comes as members of Congress question why U.S. officials failed to review the social media posts of San Bernardino terrorist Tashfeen Malik. She received a U.S. visa in May 2014, despite what the FBI said were extensive social media messages about jihad and martyrdom."
** Allyson Hobbs in the New Yorker: "... the scenes in 'The Birth of a Nation' from 1915 eerily reflect the deeply troubling realities of race in America in 2015.... Many of the stereotypes that fill the film persist; and, as we've learned over and over and over and over again, this is a still a country where people, and police, need to be reminded that black lives really do matter.... It isn't hard to see the themes of the film echoed in the current Presidential race, particularly in the words of Donald Trump, who has sounded a call for the birth of a new nation, one that he will 'make great again.'... For some Americans, President Barack Obama's two terms in office appear to resemble the period of misrule portrayed in 'The Birth of a Nation.'"
Mike Brunker & Polly Defrank of NBC News: Since Sandy Hook, an American child "has died by a gun every other day." CW: Yes, and Republicans are so afraid you'll find this out that they won't authorize the CDC to do research on gun violence.
Fred Barbash of the Washington Post: "Twitter has warned an undetermined number of users that their accounts may have been 'targeted by state-sponsored actors,' according to news reports and some users who received the notifications.... The targeting may have been aimed at obtaining information such as email addresses, IP addresses and/or phone numbers; Twitter added that it had no evidence at this point that the hackers had obtained account information.... The email [from Twitter] did not specify which government or 'state sponsor' might be behind the targeting...."
Presidential Race
AP: "CNN is inviting Gov. Chris Christie back to prime-time in the upcoming Republican presidential debate. The New Jersey governor, who had been dropped from the main stage during the last debate, is one of nine Republican presidential candidates to qualify for the network's prime-time event on Tuesday. Also among them: Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, who was 'on the bubble' of qualifying late last week, the network said. Front-runner Donald Trump will appear at center stage, flanked by retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson and Sen. Ted Cruz, who is surging in Iowa. Other GOP hopefuls who qualified for the main stage include Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, former Hewlett Packard CEO Carly Fiorina and Ohio Gov. John Kasich." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... We Can All Breate a Sigh of Relief. Thomas Kaplan of the New York Times: "Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky will retain his place on the main stage when the Republican presidential candidates debate on Tuesday, CNN said on Sunday, sparing Mr. Paul from what could have been a setback for his campaign. On Saturday, aides to Mr. Paul had indicated they would fight any decision by CNN to drop the senator to the so-called undercard debate when the candidates gather on Tuesday in Las Vegas. Mr. Paul was at risk of falling out of the main event because of his low poll numbers." (Also linked yesterday.)
It Ain't Over Till It's Over. Al Hunt of Bloomberg in the New York Times: "Voters can choose either party's primary in New Hampshire, and knowledgeable Republicans suggest that a heavy influx of independents could help push a mainstream conservative to the top spot. There is no movement yet, and it's possible that this vote could split rather evenly, with no candidate breaking out." ...
... Ted Cruz, Uniter! Brian Beutler: "If you believe Trump's robust lead both nationally and in every early primary state suggests he can actually win the nomination, none of [the jostling among other candidates] matters. But if you believe he will ultimately give way and his send his supporters defecting to the next-best thing, then Cruz is the guy to watch -- both on the debate stage Tuesday and as the debates give way to actual statewide contests just over a month from now."
Pity the Poor Billionaire. Gabriel Sherman of New York: "... the most important lesson the billionaires are learning this year is that they aren't much better at politics than Karl Rove. Well, not true. There is one billionaire who seems to have contemporary Republican politics figured out": Donald Trump.
Ambassador-at-Large Daniel Benjamin & Steven Simon in a Politico Magazine opinion piece: "In their jockeying for the Republican presidential nomination, GOP contenders -- Donald Trump above all -- have managed to exacerbate dramatically the two U.S. weaknesses most likely to erode our country's safety: fear and Islamophobia."
Kevin Robillard of Politico: "Donald Trump seemingly laid fault for the rise of ISIL and the Syrian civil war directly at the feet of ... Hillary Clinton on Sunday, claiming the former secretary of state 'killed hundreds of thousands of people with her stupidity.' Trump, appearing on "Fox News Sunday," shocked host Chris Wallace with his comments. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... Sean Sullivan of the Washington Post: "Donald Trump sharpened his criticism of Republican presidential rival Ted Cruz in television interviews broadcast Sunday morning, lambasting Cruz's approach to the Senate and expressing doubts about whether the senator's "temperament" is fit for the presidency.... 'I don't think he has the right temperament,' Trump said of Cruz on 'Fox News Sunday.' 'I don't think he's got the right judgment.'" CW: Because Trump is the picture of tranquility & discernment. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... Bradford Richardson of the Hill: "... Donald Trump says he does not agree with comments from Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia questioning the efficacy of affirmative action." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... Benjamin Wallace-Wells in the New Yorker: Donald "Trump undoes the modern presidential campaign.... There's probably no organizing genius to the Trump campaign. But maybe there's a kind of accidental genius. That Trump had opted out of the machinery of the modern campaign freed him to chase a group of voters who were traditionally hard to reach. With no need for donors, he could go all in on economic nationalism; with no inclination to woo party élites, he could simply decline to assemble policy proposals; and with no aspirations ever to run again, he could demonize multiple minority groups." ...
... E. J. Dionne: "... most Americans would reject Trumpism when they finally got to have their say in a voting booth -- perhaps in the Republican primaries and certainly in the general election. Yet to ignore his ability both to win a following and to mesmerize the media is to wish away what is a real threat to democratic tolerance across the world's free nations.... For the first time in decades, the word 'fascism' is being used seriously by non-hyperbolic people in countries with a history of temperate politics."
Kevin Robillard: "Florida Sen. Marco Rubio repeated his concerns about Donald Trump's fitness to be commander-in-chief during an interview airing Sunday on NBC's 'Meet The Press.'" (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... New York Times Editors: "Senator Marco Rubio of Florida is boasting about his efforts to sabotage a program intended to keep health insurance markets stable and premiums low during the start-up years of the Affordable Care Act.... The big losers [in Rubio's sabotage efforts] were small insurers without ample reserves. More than a dozen nonprofit cooperatives that were new to the business have closed or soon will, in part, some of them say, because the government provided less money than they were counting on.... This has left hundreds of thousands of consumers scrambling to pick other plans.... His riders will benefit big insurers by driving out their smaller competitors. They could also drive up premiums for some people, as insurers try to recoup early losses or replenish their reserves. The Senate should block his new rider and find other sources of funds to pay companies what they were promised." ...
... Judd Legum of Think Progress: "... after numerous deflections, [Marco] Rubio [told Chuck Todd] he would simply appoint new Supreme Court justices who would overturn Obergefell," [the landmark marriage equality decision]. ...
... CW: As I wrote yesterday, there's no need to slime Rubio with his tenuous connection to a drug ring for which he bears no responsibility. He is plenty slimy in his own right.
Bradford Richardson: "Ben Carson doubled down on his stance that he will leave the GOP if party elite are planning to mount a floor fight at the nominating convention. 'Well, one of the reasons that I got into this is because I heard the frustration in the people who are so tired of back-room deals, of subterfuge, of dishonesty,' Carson said on ABC's 'This Week' on Sunday. 'And, you know, if that is the case, then you know I'm out of here.'"
Steve Chapman of the Chicago Tribune in Real Clear Politics: Ted Cruz's "patented formula is a mix of repellent ingredients: misrepresentation of facts, baseless smears, exaggerated sincerity and pretended solidarity with the average person. If Cruz tells you it's raining, you can leave your umbrella at home." CW: I'm not familiar with Steve Chapman, but he's been on the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune for a long time, so I'm guessing he's a conservative. Thanks to Citizen 625 for the link. ...
... CW: The topic of Cruz's discussion with Steve Inskeep of NPR was climate change. So to bolster his creds, Cruz set at the outset, "I believe that public policy should follow the science and follow the data. I am the son of two mathematicians and computer programmers and scientists." His upbringing gives Teddy a real interest in facts, doesn't it? So I thought I'd check to see what kind of "mathematicians, computer programmers & scientists" his parents were. Why, they worked in the oil & gas industry. As for young Ted, he works in the snake oil industry.
Beyond the Beltway
Michael Miller of the Washington Post: A "spate of anti-Islam vandalism comes as Muslims in southern California have rallied in support of the victims of the San Bernardino attack.... Southern California's simmering cauldron boiled over on Friday when a blaze erupted at the Islamic Society of the Coachella Valley.... Friday evening, authorities arrested Carl James Dial Jr. for arson, hate crime, and burglary." ...
... Margaret Hartmann of New York: "The FBI and police in Southern California opened a hate-crime investigation into the vandalism of two mosques in Hawthorne, California."
Ian Lovett & Adam Nagourney of the New York Times: "A man who was killed by sheriff’s deputies in a hail of 30 bullets in front of a gas station here was brandishing a gun at officers and passers-by, and he apparently fired it into the air at least six times during the encounter, the police said Sunday. The man, identified as Nicholas Robertson, 28, of Lynwood, was seen carrying a gun during the entire encounter on Saturday, the police said, displaying photographs and videos in which the gun was clearly visible in the suspect's hand. They said he had been acting erratically and had ignored the instructions of deputies from the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Office to drop his weapon, which officials described as a .45-caliber semiautomatic handgun."
Raw Story: Sparta, Missouri, "Police Chief Andrew Spencer resigned this week after it was revealed that he shot and killed an innocent dog that was in a cage and meant no one any harm. To make matters even worse, he took the puppy to a firing range and killed it there because he did not want to deal with finding its home."
Share Article
Reader Comments (11)
While I am pleased about the climate agreement in Paris, I see nothing that involves the major reason for this mess: there are way to many people on this planet. If we keep growing the number it will overcome any energy changes. Of course dealing with this issue would involve religion so there is no problem killing a couple of billion rather than admit the story is wrong.
Years ago, even then put off by the practice of giving participation ribbons to every loser, something that certainly did not occur in my own youth, and fearing to offend the delicate--in my work I had to develop a PC sense before PC existed--I never wrote that piece for the local paper I was going to call "Greater and greater awards for smaller and smaller accomplishments."
Maybe because my very competitive and equally Republican father (wonder what he'd think of the current crop) insisted I learn how to lose by losing, I have always associated the R's with tooth and claw, never-give-up competitiveness, sometimes crazy at its extremes but also often grittily admirable.
I did not always measure up, I know. Others were smarter, faster, stronger, cuter and had more winning ways. It was a occasionally painful lesson my competitive father taught, that of measuring everything by some yardstick of success, of learning when I won and telling when I lost.
But Christie? Rand Paul? And Carly Fiorina, for good measure? All wanting (and being awarded) participation ribbons? Losing and still expecting to be featured on the stage with the winners?
As I have asked myself a thousand times in the last few decades: Where did they get these people? These loser? These whiners?
What has my father's party come to?
It is a measure of our broken society when a police chief resigns over the killing of a puppy, but there are no consequences for killing a young man. How have swathes of our society become so callous?
The rules of engagement for the military in combat are considerably tougher than those the US police have to justify firing on people. Soldiers are not allowed to just "be scared". And - if all you need to be is scared by your own judgement, why can't one just shoot a guy carrying an AR-15 down the street? I'd be scared of someone so obviously unhinged.
If I lived in Missouri I'd send a big bouquet to one Stacy Newman, a Missouri State Rep. She has come up with a whole different way of looking at gun laws–– has introduced legislation that would treat Missourians seeking to buy firearms the same way it treats Missourians seeking to end a pregnancy. Good for Gail Collins to have caught this sly move by this wily gal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/10/opinion/republicans-guns-and-abortion.html?smprod=nytcore-iphone&smid=nytcore-iphone-share
@ Martin Schwalb -
I am so in agreement with your offering . . .
I can recall - while a *very* young gal - being handed a paperback titled "The Population Bomb" by Paul Ehrlich (perhaps my parents were reading it?), followed some years (or decades) later by the joint effort, with his wife, Anne, "The Population Explosion". (I believe they have authored other books as well.)
From A Google Blurb:
"The Ehrlichs, articulate and respected advocates of global population control, present an unequivocal message: the world's growing population dwarfs the ecosystem's capacity to sustain life--either humanity will implement massive birth-control programs, or nature will intervene and greatly reduce the number of people through famines, plagues and ecodisasters."
Among my closest friends is one who works for the United Nations Population Fund (their 2015 World Population Report recently launched). One of their *many* contributions/actions is the providing of contraceptives (to both men & women) where such options and/or devices are non-existent.
So . . . There are books & institutions that both recognize - and labor to address - the matter of population control.
Yet how often have we heard the topic mentioned?
Perhaps a "debate" moderator could locate (rent?) a set of balls or ovaries and pose direct questions - to *both* R & D candidates - concerning a topic that has long been on many minds, yet "dare not speak its name": Over Population
(A gal can dream, can she not?)
Rand Paul is not one of the Little People, dammit!
Apropos of Ken's comment about GOP losers and whiners demanding ribbons and special treatment for simply being able to remain upright in a stiff breeze, I was thinking of Li'l Randy's wheedling, grumbling, demands to be allowed to sit on the stage with the big kids. or else. The Littlest Loser doesn't see himself as the kind of regular person (the Little People) who have to play by the rules. Whenever Bad Toupée runs up against an inconvenient rule that won't let him have his way, he demands that the rules be changed to suit his royal whims.
He wants to practice medicine (poking sharp objects in peoples' eyes) without going through the bother of board certification so he creates his own "certification": "I, myself, declare myself certified. Hand me your money and step right this way."
He wants to run for both the White House and the senate at the same time but Kentucky rules won't allow it. He demands the rules be changed to suit his needs. He promises to pay a lot of money to effectively bribe state party bosses. They give him what he wants and he stiffs them.
CNN debate rules say that candidates on the big stage have to get to a certain level. He doesn't. He whines about unfairness and they change the rules for him.
The Littlest Whiner is best at whining about how things are unfair for him without the slightest sense of the many breaks with which he has been unfairly rewarded.
Kidnapping and drug use in college? Boys will be boys, they said.
Serial plagiarism? Nothing. Joe Biden, in 1988, paraphrased a single line from a British politician's speech. Not the kind of word for word plagiarism Li'l Randy does on a regular basis, but Biden was forced to withdraw from the '88 presidential race. Not the Little One. When he was called on his cheating, he groused that he wished dueling was still legal, then he'd show those guys what for. Such a fucking douchebag. His best friend and former campaign advisor is an unreconstructed, old-time virulent racist who hides behind the namesake "Southern Avenger". Any blowback for Bad Toupée? Nothing. A few days of backpage stories. He rips the Civil Rights Act and celebrates the goal of being able to tell blah people who want to have him poke sharp objects in their eyes to take a hike. Business closed to you, brother. Sure Rachel Maddow drilled him a new one for that but he walked clear. No one else called him on it. A campaign worker and friend of his beat up and kicked a woman expressing support for his opponent at a campaign appearance. Kicked her in the head when she was on the ground. Any problem for Rug Man? Of course not. He said it was "too bad". End of problem.
This whiny little turd has skirted more bullshit than a rodeo clown but still he demands more and more special treatment.
He has always been treated like royalty--he was an important congressman's kid, of course he's special!--always gotten out of jams and when things didn't go his way demanded the rules be changed just for him.
He might think he's not one of the Little People. He's not. Most of those people have integrity and a reasonable semblance of honesty.
He wants a medal? Here's one: Biggest Little Shit.
@Ophelia & Marwin: Great insights...that mesh with thoughts long been gnawing in my head. I find there are conflicting pros and cons for which I can offer no resolution.
We're all familiar with what a Ponzi scheme is in the financial world...and in a way, our world is becoming what one might describe as Ponzi-fied. Over population does put extraordinary demands on agriculture, energy needs, infrastructure, and so forth. At the same time, re one 'small' thing, we are told that Social Security faces running out of funds...there are FEWER new worker who pay in toward benefits. The ratio of younger contributors to the older beneficiaries is not good.
I have seen the argument for increasing immigration, because the newcomers would get jobs, pay into the system, need homes, boost the economy, -- all sounds good to a point, but this means stress on energy, infrastructure, et al. Systems are over-stressed already. Landfills are re-configuring mountainous landscapes all around us, other toxic waste is dumped into our oceans affecting sea life, the fishing industry...so much for the 'bountiful sea.' Food handling, and the methods of food supply—that's a whole other topic.
I see arguments for more nuclear, yet no one knows what to do with that waste! Solar and wind energy are touted...yet I see issues to come here as well. The wind towers look sculptural and interesting from a distance...but, the impact of the noise for those living within some miles is distracting and annoying. What happens when these older towers begin to deteriorate? Replace? Maybe. When they rust or blades break, and getting to them becomes evermore difficult and costly in the future. Will they rot in place...as something newer and supposedly better replaces then elsewhere? Again, I don't have any good answer for this...just trying to think what makes sense.
Today, so so many things we use require batteries. I've got double AAs, triple AAAs, some wee ones for my small MAGlight, batteries for my Mouse, remote control and on and on. Plus C's and D's. Cars coming with the rechargeable batteries and the older ones. What battery graveyards will there be as these break down and leak their poisons?
When I say we are becoming Ponzi-fied I mean it is the ever increasing demand putting exponential pressure on every aspect. Decrease population. OK. Restrict/limit size of homes per individuals or families? Vouchers for a new car every 5, 10, or 15 years? Limitations on production likely mean less work for the workers who need to earn to buy and also pay into the SS systems to help retirees, etc.
Then for a truly ridiculous thought--(an argument I've been waiting to hear from the gun lobby). With gun control, with reduced gun ownership...oh dear, what will happen to the people who make a living via gun shows, gun shops ...and now GUN-TV. Companies such as Remington, Sig Sauer, Glock...would have to lay off workers! Can't have that! Military 'needs' more expensive aircraft—think of those families on Long Island employed by Northrup Grumman! Battleships...anyone seen the latest 'state-of-the-art' Zumwalt? Cancel the exorbitant contracts??? No. Can't do that say the local politicians. Think of all the shipyard employees? It goes on, it goes on....
We always need more, it seems we need more of everything to make this 'work, it's always more, more, more.
Again. Ponzi-fied!
(Geez! I think I just created an Akhilleus-long comment. Sorry for the infringement, Ak!)
@ MAG RE -
<< I find there are conflicting pros and cons for which I can offer no resolution . . . >>
Indeed!
All of your points - thought-fully articulated - are well-taken, MAG.
(The word "conundrum" springs to mind.)
Trumpy may be the blunderbuss blowhard but Ted Cruz is definitely the sneaky snake in the grass.
Wonder why Carpet Bomb Cruz has jetted to the top of the Iowa polls? He's stealing your data, that's why. At least that's one possible reason.
No kidding. Cruz has hired a data analysis company in Britain (support those American businesses, right Teddy?) that has been harvesting and collating personal information from Facebook sites. The initial collection portal was opened by Facebook users who took a seemingly innocent online survey. Cruz has been using this company "...to gather detailed psychological profiles about the US electorate using a massive pool of mainly unwitting US Facebook users built with..." information stolen from these users.
The fine print apparently asks that these people allow some use of their personal data. But Cruz and his snakes don't stop there. Once you get onto someone's Facebook site you also have immediate access to all their friends' personal data as well. Estimates are that the average user has well over 300 Facebook friends. This means for every user's information Cruz gains access to, he also steals information from hundreds who have never given such permission.
This incredible invasion of privacy and theft of personal data has been funded by shady and secretive far-right billionaire Robert Mercer, who has funded similar underhanded data harvesting for other winger pols. The Kochs get all the press as underwriters of Right-Wing perfidy, but Mercer has been described by Bloomberg as a guy who can out-Koch the Kochs.
So, okay, besides the über loathesomeness of having a conniving little creep like Cruz rifling your personal files and digging through your laundry, what can he do with it?
Subjecting this personal information on likes, dislikes, comments, political and social leanings, Cruz's researchers develop sophisticated psychological profiles that allow him (and the other candidates--nearly all Right Wing--who use this information) to shape "...highly targeted campaign messages. This allows candidates like Cruz to campaign on specific issues, but communicate them in multiple ways to different audiences depending on the personal information the company holds about them."
This guy is so fucking creepy and slimy I can't even properly put into words my level of disgust.
Just your average "winger guy next door" peeking in your windows and writing down everything you say and do, the better to whisper sweet Confederate lies (well crafted lies) in your ears.
MAG wrote: "(Geez! I think I just created an Akhilleus-long comment. Sorry for the infringement, Ak!)"
I can safely say that you will not be hearing from my lawyers. I hold no patent on a proclivity for prolixity. Or something.
You may, on the other hand, be inviting Ted Cruz and his snoopers to copy your comments and place you on his Official Enemies of Capitalism List if he ever gets to slide his slippery ass into the Oval Office.
Donald Trump, on the other hand, will just have you arrested outright and deported as an undesirable.
RE: the overpopulation discussion: Lots of old people now hanging on for dear life whilst in older times people died much younger––and faster. Modern medicine keeps these elders going at a snail's pace, but going like those batteries that were mentioned. If more states would have the "Dying with Dignity" mandate we may see less of the nursing home inmates whose time has run out, but are still ticking and the government is still paying for. But this probably is a drop in the bucket when we view the world's population. At least we are starting to do something about this planet's climate change, but if that isn't sufficient the human species may just become extinct like some of our other species. That'll solve the overpopulation problem, won't it?