The Real Star of the Debates


"Marianne Williamson warned her fellow 2020 Democratic presidential candidates to stop focusing on the details of policies and put more effort into defeating the “dark psychic force” that is President Trump.

“This is part of the dark underbelly of American society, the racism, the bigotry, and the entire conversation that we’re having here tonight. If you think any of this wonkiness is going to deal with this dark psychic force of the collectivized hatred that this president is bringing up in this country, then I’m afraid that the Democrats are going to see some very dark days,” she said in the second Democratic debate Tuesday night.

Williamson’s remark came as she was commenting on the water crisis in Flint, Michigan."  Washington Examiner


I love this woman.

SWMBO commented that she appears to have been brought forward by the Hollywood branch of the Democratic Party, You know, the Robert De Niro wing. 

She is a New Age other worldly motivational speaker and writer and she is quite good looking as well.  What more could you ask for in a Democratic Party candidate for president?

Well, there are the two arm waving socialist zealots, Bernie and Warren.  Boring, Neither of them seems to have any grasp of classical economics.  You know, the supply and demand stuff that we all took courses about as undergraduates.   

The rest are just meat still on the hoof.

I hope the Democrats keep her in the game for some time.  I enjoy looking at her.

Tonight should be even more fun.  More on this tomorrow.  pl

This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to The Real Star of the Debates

  1. Jack says:

    I love this post. Reminiscent of the stories of Nero fiddling while Rome burned.
    What very few grasp is that we’ve financialized the economy. So its about supply and demand of financial instruments like stocks, bonds, structured products and currencies. And the scale of this “economy” is substantially larger than the economy of goods and services. This beast needs to be tamed but there’s no one on the horizon who even gets it, let alone has the ability to communicate what it means.

  2. Aristonicu says:

    Conservative journalist Robert Stacy McCain decided to follow her campaign back in March –
    He wrote at the time: “The best way to cover a presidential campaign is at the grassroots level with a long-shot candidate so low in the polls that they’re not surrounded by a swarm of major media.”
    He too noticed the reaction to the “Dark psychic forces” line –
    “Nobody thought she had a chance, but last night in the CNN debate, she got the biggest applause of the night with her advocacy of slavery reparation and her line blaming Trump’s success on “dark psychic forces””

  3. I’m sure it comes as no surprise, but I also find Marianne intriguing. I also hope she stays around for a while. One of the textbooks in my first anthropology classes was Carlos Casteneda’s “A Separate Reality,” his latest book at the time describing the world of a Yaqui Indian sorcerer named Don Juan. The teachings of Don Juan bear an uncanny resemblance to what Marianne has been saying. I doubt enough voters will have the courage to really listen to what she has to say. I also have serious doubts she could successfully deal with the Washington swamp, but who knows. Maybe she has some sorceress mind tricks up her sleeve. We have a national poet laureate. Why not have a national shaman? I’m game. As Don Juan said, “Seek and see all the marvels around you. You will get tired of looking at yourself alone, and that fatigue will make you deaf and blind to everything else.”

  4. JP Billen says:

    The real star of tonights debate is Tulsi. Our neighborhood group is betting she is going to get a big bump in the polls after tonight. I’m just sorry that it probably won’t be enough for the nomination. But she’d make a great VP. And she would even make a good SecState or SecDef in a Trump Admin. The senior senator from Kentucky would probably put a kibosh on that though.

  5. optimax says:

    I don’t know if this video of Marianne leading a group of white people in a spiritual apology for slavery, Jim Crow,blah, blah to a handful of black captives in the audience has been posted on SST before. She wants us to carry blacks on our backs to the Promised Land. She is earnest in her desire to lead Americans to the butterfly filled skies of Eden. And naive to believe her dream exists.

  6. MP98 says:

    “I enjoy looking at her.”
    An oldie but goodie.

  7. fanto says:

    let´s wait until “the dark psychic forces” will get labelled antisemitic…, if or when, her candidacy should gain speed…

  8. JamesT says:

    For the second time, Tulsi is the “most searched for on Google” after the debate. She was ‘most searched for’ after her first debate and Google turned off her ‘google ads’ account until everyone went to bed. They measure this state-by-state, and Tulsi garnered the most interest in every single state.

  9. Eric Newhill says:

    Don Juan was a hardcore conservative. He eschewed the ideology of victimhood and frequently unfavorably critiqued those who complained that others, fate, whatever are doing things to them as if they are a “leaf in the wind”. A warrior/sorcerer/man of knowledge was to be dependent on no one. He would have mocked the modern Democrats.

  10. DavidKNZ says:

    Marian Williamsons entry into public awareness came with a best seller ” A RETURN TO LOVE: Reflections on the Principles of A Course in Miracles ” and it remains the foundation for her subsequent rise to prominence. Probably the best exposition of A Course in Miracles itself is by daan dehn, an expat American now living in sunny Nelson, NZ ..

  11. shtoe says:

    Yes. I was about to make the point about supply and demand of money, but you put it better. I’m afraid classical economics is very distant in the rear-view mirror.

  12. rho says:

    I’m not into this New Age stuff. I just want to see Democrats nominate a cute and likable dog that can do some awesome tricks. That would be their best candidate in decades!

  13. Eric, I agree with your concise, accurate description of Don Juan except for the label of conservative. I see a fearless embrace of the future and change in his teachings while conservatives eschew change as much as the ideology of victimhood and the other. I looked at the Marianne2020 site yesterday. I was surprised to find a Teddy Roosevelt like fearless embrace of an optimistic, self-reliant future. It wasn’t all the butterflies and uniforms I was expecting. The one big difference between Marianne and Don Juan is her reliance on the power within the self and collective society (at least in her political platform) as opposed to Don Juan’s reliance purely on the power within the self.

  14. ex PFC Chuck says:

    Agreed! Michael Hudson’s Killing the Host: How Financial Parasites and Debt Destroy the Global Economy is the Must Read to understand how the process works.

  15. That’s unicorns, not uniforms.

  16. I hope Tulsi makes it to the next round. I think she’s solid all around. She would be a good VP, SecState or SecDef, but she’s far too progressive to be considered for the Trump administration.

  17. Eric Newhill says:

    Ok. That’s a different twist than I’d put on it, but I enjoyed reading how you handled it. Smiley face, etc. Don Juan was very traditionalist in conforming to, and passing along to apprentices, his system and knowledge, which he said came from ancient Toltecs. That is a conservative attribute.
    Additionally, Don Juan lectured about avoiding the folly of human kind and, especially, of what he called “The average man”. Once one is no longer controlled by fear and has obtained a certain level of knowledge and personal power and experience one finds oneself in a new and “separate reality”. Then it is natural for one to attempt to go back home to “Ixtlan” (or wherever one is from), but that home no longer exists for the warrior because he is so fundamentally transformed. Thus his only home is now with other warriors and amongst the wonders of the world.
    I’m pretty sure that Don Juan was disinterested in politics all together.

  18. casey says:

    Dear Mr. Colonel:
    As appealing as Williamson and, in my view, Gabbard are (despite her AIPAC boot-licking), I’m wondering whether the DNC long-term plan here is to allow this field of people to provide entertainment as they perform their Three Stooges routine, and have Biden maybe draw off some of Trump’s white make supporters, then, at the last possible moment, bring Michelle O in to thunderous DNC-type approval.

  19. Fred says:

    You left out the close italics on the last line.

  20. Seamus Padraig says:

    That’s been Mike Whitney’s thesis for months now:

    Face it: The Democrats aren’t going to change. They got a good thing going right now and they’re not going to mess with it. They already have Wall Street, Silicone Valley, most of the weapons manufacturers, and all the major media in their hip pocket, so what do they have to worry about? Nothing. All they have to do is keep the pressure on Trump until the economy tanks, then trot out Michelle Obama at the eleventh hour and, presto, they’ll be back in the oval office once again.

  21. Eric, I appreciate your highlighting of Don Juan to everyone at SST. You’re doing a great job. He was definitely a traditionalist as you described him and I’m also pretty sure he was disinterested in politics.

  22. Terry says:

    Interesting story about Father Benedict Groeschel, a Catholic priest, and Helen Schucman, the channel for ACM.

  23. Eric Newhill says:

    My pleasure.
    I also, once upon a time, wanted to be an anthropologist type and have always had an interest in spiritual matters. I spent a lot of time with both Apache and Yaqui medicine men when I lived in Arizona. These are great people and I learned a lot from them; some things you wouldn’t believe.
    Glad we can relate on this topic.
    That said, I think Marianne is an air head new ager. She probably keeps the unicorn in a stall at home. You can only see it if you pay $50 to gaze through the magic crystal.

  24. akaPatience says:

    After reading about Michael Moore’s recent remarks regarding Michelle Obama, I’ve been giving the issue some thought. IMO she’s the African American version of Hillary: the MSM, Hollywood, and partisan D’s love her and would promote her to the hilt, and she’d undoubtedly raise a lot of money. But just like Clinton, far too many others absolutely loathe her and would vote for just about ANYONE else.
    Some obvious similarities: both got off to bad starts (“I’m not some little woman standing by my man”/”For the first time in my adult life I’m proud of my country”); both have husbands who are softer, and much more politically adroit; both received politically-connected jobs as their husbands’ political careers advanced, etc.
    Bottom line: I just don’t think she’s the sure thing Michael Moore presumes her to be. He thinks if she goes for the jugular she’ll beat Trump, but IMO she’d alienate even more voters, particularly men.

  25. rho says:

    Michael Moore looks like he got a severe case of Trump Derangement Syndrome after the election and never recovered. Quite amazing, he absolutely nailed the mindset of Trump voters in 2016 in that little segment of his movie “Trumpland” – but that was before he went insane:
    How can one predict that Michelle Obama would so soundly beat Trump if nobody has a clue about her policies at all? Is being a black woman sufficient to be better than Trump? Seriously?

  26. John Minehan says:

    The point she is making was made (more rationally and with less chanting) by Drew Westen in his book The Political Brain (
    Politics is visceral and emotional; Warren’s (in particular) White Papers are unlikely to work at that level or persuade any voters.
    Further, as Mike Tyson used to say, “Everyone has a plan . . . until they get punched in the mouth.” Some “one over the world” plan, not made in concert with the people who have to execute it, just invites “sharpshooting.”
    As Polonius said in Hamlet, “Though this be madness, yet there is method in’t.”

  27. John Minehan says:

    Mrs. Obama is a very good health care lawyer, who has better options than politics.

  28. John Minehan says:

    “For the first time in my adult life I’m proud of my country”
    I don’t take that quote the same way others do.
    I always figured what she meant was that her husband’s election demonstrated to her that a lot of people, really, really believe in this country, something more than fireworks on July 4th.
    Only one person came to that realization by having her husband elected as our first Black President. But a lot of people have had that realization in simpler ways, leading American Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen or Marines in combat, for example.
    Sometimes, we just need to see something that reminds us . . . .

  29. SAC Brat says:

    Open the gate, close the gate. A rural practice.
    < / I > remove spaces to close italics

  30. Serge says:

    If I remember correctly you supported/voted for Bernie in ‘16,why the change if heart? His economics sure haven’t changed.

  31. turcopolier says:

    That is true. In the maelstrom of the democratic primary he and his wife appealed to us as essentially decent people. I detested Clinton. His commitment to what amounts to communist rule was not perceived by us. All that talk about democratic socialism on the Scandinavian model deceived us. Foolish. In the event neither I nor my wife would have voted for either he or Clinton. I voted for the Libertarian for lack of something better.

  32. John Minehan says:

    It’s odd to me that apparently well intentioned people (like Sen. Sanders & Rep. Ocasio-Castro) who support the Scandinavian Social-Democratic model don’t see that the model they embrace is based on a **VERY** decentralized approach.
    A bias towards extreme centralization seems to be the real unifying point for American Left; a real barrier to developing better approaches.

  33. Mark Logan says:

    I’ve read all of Castaneda’s stuff but will never admit it. I found it fascinating even if none of it ever happened. Saga’s are not devoid of truths.
    His later works are very different from his earlier stuff, IMO because after his colleagues at UCLA demanded to see his field notes (which he was unable to produce) he abandoned his dream of being considered a “legitimate” anthropologist. Good! This fully unleashed an awesome imagination. “The Death Defiers” was a chapter in one if those books, the best ghost story I’ve ever read. Unfortunately…it’s probably incomprehensible out of context. Like Rothko, he was diving head-first into that which can not be described with words.
    FWIW Juan Matus was a Nagual. He had to be both a Dreamer and a Stalker. That’s IMO as close as it gets to liberal and conservative in that world. Petty dichotomies in the immense shadow of The Eagle. In the classifications of personalities, Marianne is a classic East-wind Dreamer, Gabbard seems a Northerly woman, not sure if she’s a Stalker or a Dreamer though…

  34. Eric Newhill says:

    They are great tails aren’t they? Riveting, IMO.
    In my opinion the first three books were probably *based* on an amalgamation of real elements. After that Castaneda went into pure fantasy, but it is great fantasy.

  35. Fred says:

    Really? She was VP for Community and External Affairs at the University of Chicago Medical Center. There is not much health care lawyering in that job.

  36. Mark Logan says:

    It stuck in my mind too. When I heard this year that quantum entanglement essentially means that at the quantum level space is, incredibly, actually no space at all, that what we see as the universe is but a projection…I can’t help but remember.

Comments are closed.