David Weigel | April 25, 2008
The primary season is churning again, finally, with a mere 11 days until the next Democratic primaries, and a bit month than a month til the utter end of the primaries.
Unconvincing Quote of the Week
"Well, I didn't know anything about it." - Hillary
Clinton on her husband's infamous pardons of Weather
Underground members.
The Week in Brief
- Hillary Clinton chose to re-enact Rocky II instead of Rocky, and
won
Pennsylvania. (The analogy collapses if you consider PA a round
of a fight and not a fight all on its own.)
- "Screw it," said Obama. "I'm going to dump my money on ads in every remaining primary."
- Fred Thompson sat up (almost) straight in his sofa bed to disclaim interest in joining the GOP ticket.
- John McCain followed in LBJ's footsteps to talk poverty. (There actually were massive poverty reductions in the 1970s in the area McCain's visiting, but they were wiped away in the 1980s.)
- The North Carolina GOP engaged in one of the most obvious rope-a-dopes in recent political history: Announce an ad, get people to condemn it before it even airs, raise money on the outrage, then finally run it.
- Alan Keyes went to New York to battle for the Constitution Party's nomination, and a November Obama rematch. UPDATE: Keyes lost the nomination in a landslide to Chuck Baldwin. "Who's Chuck Baldwin?" Somebody far less spent and pathetic than Alan Keyes.
Below the Fold
-
Kos argues that mayoral endorsements can win the next primaries
for Obama. (They didn't too a ton for him in Ohio.)
- Suddenly infamous Nazi candidate Tony Zirkle responds to critics.
- Robert VerBruggen reviews Matt Yglesias.
- R.W. Apple (circa 1992) muses on the unelectability of Bill Clinton. I'm torn on whether Clinton '92 was more electable than Obama '08. Obama's scandals seem pale next to Clinton's womanizing and draft-dodging, but Clinton was, well, a white Southerner.
This week's Politics 'n' Prog band is Genesis, from their first
and best batch of songs in the post-Peter Gabriel era. Its title is
superficially relevant to the Democrats' situation.
SUNDAY UPDATE: This Mike Ferguson
video with Alan Keyes, the first after his career ended
(again!) on the floor of the Constitution Party convention, is
priceless. 14 or 15 minutes of it are Keyes's typical gibberish
about "God's breath" and "the fruit pointing you in the right
direction," but this piece of nonsense was really
special:
In the act of procreation, people are joyfully, ecstatically, with great joy in every fiber of their being, saying "yes" to the coming of that new life. And then in abortion, they kill it. So what, in fact, my political career is, is the paradigm and pattern of that which I am trying to stop for the child. I kind of represent, in political terms, the abortion. You're invited in, then they kill you. You're invited in, then they kill you.
I would quibble with one part of this: Sex is far more satisfying than inviting Alan Keyes to a party.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Winners this week: John McCain, Hillary Clinton, the
Republicans
Losers: The Democrat Party
Best Genesis post Peter Gabriel is inferior to worst Genesis
with Gabriel...
I'm just saying.
So, again, I will promote better music.
My favorite NM artists doing DIY music:
http://fezdispenser.com/
and
http://www.beirutband.com/
I don't want to be the turd in the punch bowl, but the Democrat primaries are over. Obama has clinched it. It's been that way for 2 months. None of the bombshells since then have changed the fact that it's going to be Obama vs. McCain. I understand that politics is a game that a lot of people enjoy playing, but it's over. The conventions will be as scripted, dull and predictable as ever, and the only excitement will come on election day itself. Wake me up then.
Ed Clinton will try to score a behind-the-scenes deal. If she cant get it shell stay in just to destroy Obama and make him unelectible so she can run again in 2012.
Back in my conservative days I had respect for Alan Keyes. Any remaining respect I had for him was lost when he made that now famous crack about Dick Cheney's daughter. Whatever one may think about Dick Cheney his daughter did not deserve that. She has a right to be who she is.
"The conventions will be as scripted, dull and predictable as
ever,"
You are wrong about that. The fight for the DNC nod will be close
enough that, without Florida and Michigan counting the looser will
consider the contest unfair. Who can blame them? It is.
Its title is superficially relevant to the Democrats'
situation.
You screwed the pooch on that one, Weigel. Showcasing "Land of
Confusion" would have been a homerun. Swing and a miss.
"The moral of the story is -- government isn't always the answer."
...McCain said he hoped his plans for tax cuts and expanding high-speed Internet in rural areas could offer a new path for fighting poverty in places such as Inez.
My friends, wacky government bullshit isn't the answer. However,
with an Intertubez in every pot, your troubles will magically
disappear.
"Well, I didn't know anything about it." - Hillary Clinton
on her husband's infamous pardons of Weather Underground
members.
She now has to stop braying about her experience and return her
co-president certificate.
I really, REALLY want to see a Nader/Keyes ticket. The ELP (Egomaniacal Loser Party) shoud give them both a call.
Its title is superficially relevant to the Democrats'
situation.
Some of the lyrics are more than superficially descriptive of how
the Democrats sell their wares.....
Well if we can help you we will,
You're looking tired and ill.
As I count backwards
Your eyes become heavier still.
Sleep, won't you allow yourself fall?
Nothing can hurt you at all.
With your consent
I can experiment further still.
You are wrong about that. The fight for the DNC nod will be
close enough that, without Florida and Michigan counting the looser
will consider the contest unfair. Who can blame them? It
is.
And it is also impossible to fairly count those states.
Another fine mess you've gotten us into, as it were.
BTW, I admire your nom de plume, Yahoo Answerer.
It occurred to me that this election is like the 2007 MLB
playoffs:
Barack Obama = Boston Red Sox
Hillary Clinton = Cleveland Indians
John McCain = Colorado Rockies
I think it's terrific that the Rockies won the pennant last year.
Really, they should proud.
There actually were massive poverty reductions in the 1970s in
the area McCain's visiting, but they were wiped away in the
1980s.
Wow, are you allowed to write this on a libertarian web site?
ed,
Slight edit on the wording: the Democratic primaries are a foregone
conclusion, but they are not over. The process playeth out.
(That's the late great and lamented Alan Owen on lights, ladies and gentlemen.)
Winners this week: John McCain, Hillary
Clinton, the Republicans
McCain managed to lose 27% of the PA vote to two guys *who aren't
running*.
What exactly did John McCain win, again?
I'm surpised that VerBruggen's review fails to mention that Yglesias supported invading Iraq at the time, along with other ideologicallly similar folks, for entirely orthodox liberal internationalist reasons. The main distinction was that they were interested in going through the UN process that the Bushies didn't really care about. Since UN approval wouldn't have made Iraq any less of a clusterfuck, his own analysis at the time, as well as that of many other liberal internationalist types, provides a pretty compelling argument that liberal internationalism isn't a particularly effective filter for trying to stay out of ill-fated conflicts. I don't mean to fault Yglesias for changing his mind on the war (I was more sympathetic to the pro-war view than I should have been myself) or say that he can't effectively voice criticism of the Iraq War because of his initial support, but it does undermine the argument for adopting the same line of thinking that only allowed him to see it's flaws in hindsight.
Apparently Alan Keyes' daughter Maya Keyes is both a supporter
of gay rights and an anarchist. She says he threw her out of the
house when she came out of the closet as a lesbian.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_Keyes
Hey Joe what do you think about Hillary staying in just so she
can tear down Obama and make him unelectable then she runs in
2012?
BTW, did you see the interview of Pastor Wright? Doesnt look like
its a dead story huh?
"What exactly did John McCain win, again?"
He won by not being involved in a bloody primary battle. Hes
rested, refreshed, envigorated, and looking more and more
Presidential all the time while the Democrat candidates tear
eachother down.
"BTW, I admire your nom de plume, Yahoo Answerer."
Thanks J Sub D. The last day on which I posted I had a horrible
spelling problem. This is why I added the "Now with
Spell-check"
Yahoo Answerer: Now with Spell-check© | April 25, 2008,
6:16pm | #
Back in my conservative days I had respect for Alan Keyes. Any
remaining respect I had for him was lost when he made that now
famous crack about Dick Cheney's daughter. Whatever one may think
about Dick Cheney his daughter did not deserve that. She has a
right to be who she is.
The fact that Keyes' daughter is also a lesbian makes this all the
more amusing.
Suddenly infamous Nazi candidate Tony Zirkle responds to
critics.
I went to the link, started to read it. I'm shaking my head in
amazement as I type this. Runaway prostition caused WWII. Who
knew?
Apparently Alan Keyes' daughter Maya Keyes is both a
supporter of gay rights and an anarchist. She says he threw her out
of the house when she came out of the closet as a
lesbian.
But Yahoo Answerer: Now with Spell-check©, Cut to the chase. Is she
hot?
"Runaway prostition caused WWII. Who knew?"
President Woodrow Wilson prostituted himself before the American
voters. So, yea, in a strange way it did. But that probably is not
what he meant.
The fact that Keyes' daughter is also a lesbian makes this
all the more amusing.
Amusing, yes. But putting it over the top would take a video of hot
lesbian action featuring the two.
Yes, but judge for yourself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Face7yc.jpg
As to Alan Keyes, many of you mock him based on lies and
deliberate distortions, without doing your own research for truth.
And yet you repeat the lies and disparage an honest, courageous
patriot.
I challenge anyone who is open to truth (does anyone here fit into
that category?), to listen to the speech Alan Keyes just gave at
the Constitution Party Convention.
Alan Keyes Constitution Party Speech
Link: http://archives.alankeyes.com/play.php?mp3=222
C'mon! Hot interracial lesbian action between the Keyes girl and Jenna Bush might inspire a demonstration at the GOP convention in Minneapolis - plus keep the GOP Senators in the airport mens room where they can recruit the next "values" oriented Minnesota Gov'nor.
Keyes is courageous, all right. I mean, he moved all the way
from back East to Illinois to get his butt kicked by Obama.
Is courageous the right word?
Katrinka, I cannot listen to the speech right now (I am at work)
but I will.
Are you saying he did not disparage Dick Cheney's daughter for
being a lesbian? Are you saying he did not kick his daughter out
for her lesbianism? Are you saying he actually supports gay
rights?
Neil.
Why can't presidential-looking John McCane, enjoying a victory lap
while his possible opponents tear each other down, manage to pull
ahead of them? He's been stuck in a tie for a month, even in what
has been the worst month of the entire campaign for Hillary and
Obama.
So, what's' up with his inability to create any lead at all? Do you
think it's more his dullness and lack of charisma? Or is he just
suffering the same malaise as every other Republican in this
incredibly lop-sided election year?
Oh, and doesn't the Republican candidate losing a Congressional race in a Bush +16 district in Mississippi warrant a reference on the Friday political thread?
"So, what's' up with his (John McCain's)inability to create any
lead at all? Do you think it's more his dullness and lack of
charisma?"
John McCain has alienated much of his potential base by supporting
[insert any law with McCain as part of a hyphenated name].
I should have known... the entire Reason editorial board is in
thrall to the Great Porn Dragon. Wake up people! Your libertarian
permissiveness will lead to the next great anti-Jewish
pogrom!
Who the fuck is this Tony Zirkle fellow and when did he become so
infamous?
Hey Joe what do you think about Hillary staying in just so
she can tear down Obama and make him unelectable then she runs in
2012?
My wife thinks that's what she's doing. I think she's just trying
to beat him and win the 2008 nomination.
Whatever her plan, she certainly is irritating.
"Hey Joe what do you think about Hillary staying in" etc.
Doesn't scan - how about:
Hey, joe, where ya goin' with that ballot in your hand
I said hey, joe, where ya goin' with that ballot in your hand
I'm goin' to vote against Hillary
Gonna vote for that Obama man
Hey, Neil, what blog ya gonna post on now?
Hey, Neil, what blog ya gonna post on now?
Gonna post on a real American blog
They won't make fun of my spelling no-how.
Joe, if Hillary Clinton somehow miraculously got the Democratic nod would you vote for her?
Wow, Fred Thompson popped up again. Now that is an empty-headed
mofo.
Hold on! If-then-else logic tells me that Neil or TallDave will
drain this zombies fluid really soon.....
I've been wondering that, Answerer-dude. I always used to think
that, regardless of my dislike of her on executive power, at least
she would be better than McCain on foreign policy and Iraq.
But that answer about extending our nuclear umbrella to Middle
Eastern monarchies and dictatorships really threw me. If that's
what she thinks, what's the difference between her and McCain? It
makes me wonder if her entire anti-Iraq War argument is completely
phony.
The logic of invading and permanently occupying Iraq is based on
the idea that we become safer and more powerful by engaging in
Great Game-style involvement in Middle Eastern politics. The logic
of withdrawing from Iraq is based around rejecting that theory.
With her answer in the debate, Hillary Clinton demonstrated to me
that she believes in the former, and not the latter.
I've wondered what pissed Keyes off more: that his daughter is gay or that she's a leftie.
Who knew that six million Jews were murdered because of
porn?
Perhaps Zirkle should inform Dr. Broun of this "fact."
Give the guy a break. He's not blaming the Jews.
He's more like using them as hostages.
Colin, anarchists are neither left nor right. They fall outside the normal right-left political spectrum. As to which one angered him more? Probably her lesbianism, because of his strong religious beliefs.
KCRW plays Beiruit and they have a pretty distinct sound. I didn't know they were from New Mexico.
Personally, Hillary or McCain?
My #1 issue is the war.
OK.... Hillary or McCain?
No! That is why I wanted Ron Paul!
Fuck Hillary and McCain.
I support Obama or Ron Paul - no one else.
Speaking of the weekend thread, I'm kinda surprised there's been no mention or coverage of the NYPD shooting acquittals. Balko? Anyone?
Elemnope: I emailed Balko earlier today about that. Remind me to never have a wedding in New York City. All pretense is now gone. It is now OK for cops to shoot innocent people.
anarchists are neither left nor right.
No, collectivist anarchists are "left"
Individualist anarchists are "right"
Then there are the phony communist anarchists who are authoritarian
statists
Hey, joe, where ya goin' with that ballot in your hand
I said hey, joe, where ya goin' with that ballot in your hand
I'm goin' to vote against Hillary
Gonna vote for that Obama man
Too early to declare a thread winner, but the standard for the
weekend has been set by Mad Max.
I've wondered what pissed Keyes off more: that his daughter
is gay or that she's a leftie.
That is considered a plus by me. I know lots of teams would like a
southpaw closer.
Barack Obama is going on Fox to be interviewed by Chris Wallace,
aka, the Washington Generals of Journalism.
Hey, look at me everybody, I'm going to sandbag Bill Clinton! This
is gonna be so awesome! Hey, hey, you looking? Everybody watching?
OK. Here goes...
"No, collectivist anarchists are "left" Individualist anarchists
are "right""
SIV, this distinction is not significant. Once anarchy is achieved
(assuming it ever is) whether someone wants to join a Hippie style
commune or a capitalist "Dispute Resolution Organization" will be
up to the individual. In a state of Anarchy these two organizations
can live in peace as neighbors. This is why I say anarchy is
outside the normal right-left political spectrum.
Listening to Alan Keyes bloviate about God Almighty is enough to make me realize what a fuckbag he is. Thanks for the link, though.
I thought the Genesis song more relevant to the Democrats'
situation was "Dance on a Volcano", the track right before
"Entangled"...
Holy Mother of God
You've got to go faster than that to get to the top
Dirty old mountain all covered with smoke
She can turn you to stone so you better start doing it right
You're halfway up and you're halfway down
And the pack on your back is turning you around.
Throw it away, you won't need it up there, and remember
You don't look back whatever you do.
Better start doing it right.
Steve, Pete - get on the horn with Phil, Tony and Mike and get a
proper reunion tour going. We kids here in the States
never got to see much of "Supper's Ready".
Yeah Joe for us over on the right wing Hillary is the gift that
keeps on giving LOL!
I cant wait for the riots in Denver, how bout you Liberal Joe?
"Barack Obama is going on Fox to be interviewed by Chris
Wallace, aka, the Washington Generals of Journalism."
ABC debate part the second!
"Uh...uh...Chris...uh....like..uh...yeah."
I think the distinction matters until anarchy is achieved. I
agree with you after that.
The issue is somewhat confusing as there are a lot of "fake"
anarchists on the collectivist side who use anarchism as a front
for marxism.
Yeah Joe for us over on the right wing Hillary is the gift
that keeps on giving LOL!
Laugh it up. She'd kick your ass, too.
The imaginary riots certainly seem to play an outsized role in your
mind. You certainly do chase magic bullets and tricks a lot, Neil,
in your discussion of how the campaign is going to play out.
Why do you think that is?
Fake anarchists make this issue harder to explain to those not
familiar with real anarchy. So does every news report featuring an
"anarchist" who damaged private property. That may actually be
their goal.
Why do you think the distinction between "individualist" and
"collectivist" anarchists matters now? I think such silly divisions
only make anarchy harder to achieve. The way I look at it is this:
Not everyone can be convinced of the beneficial nature of anarchy
in the same way. So the job of convincing people is split up. Some
people are best convinced in one way, others can only be convinced
in another way. In reality they are allies although they sound
radically different to those not familiar with anarchist
thought.
"Laugh it up. She'd kick your ass, too."
Yeah whatever shes so completely alienated the black and youth vote
if she steals the nomination shes dead meat!
"The imaginary riots certainly seem to play an outsized role in
your mind."
Imaginary? Theyre going to be very real in August you watch. It
will make 1968 look like a walk in the park for the Democrat
convention. Burn baby, BURN!
So you really think Hillary Clinton drops out Joe? When? How?
Anarchy is the Communism of the right-wing. It sounds good on paper but in reality its a god-awful living hell.
Hey BTW Joe did you see the bill Moyers interview with Barack Obama's racist preacher? Gives the issue new life!!
"Anarchy is the Communism of the right-wing. It sounds good on
paper but in reality its a god-awful living hell."
I am willing to bet that the vast majority of actions you take in
your everyday life are NOT dictated to you by government fiat.
These are probably also the most joyful aspects of your life are
they not? Would they not be far LESS joyful if dictated to you from
on high? Those aspects of your life are as joyful as they are
because they are personal to you, you choose them. I simply want to
extend that choice and that joy to the rest of your life.
"
Communism doesn't sound good on paper."
It does in THEORY is what I mean you know it promises complete
happiness and whatnot.
All it takes is one or two or ten jackasses and we all have to lock our doors.
Above comment by Neil confirms he is not a "Right Winger", just some kind of troll.
"All it takes is one or two or ten jackasses and we all have to
lock our doors."
Funny, when government was less intrusive in the United States
fewer people had to lock their doors.
I don't expect anarchy or a libertarian society to be a utopia. That isn't the point.
I'm shocked that there hasn't been a post about McCain opposing
a new GI Bill because troops might not re-enlist if they had the
option of going to college instead.
You know, the same brave young men and women who McCain claimes
want to stay in Iraq as long as it takes to "get the job done".
Yeah SIV Im not a conservative thats why I was for Fred Thompson in the primary and volunterred for Ronald Reagan in the 80s.
Am I the only one who thinks that Ken Blackwell might just be
some misbegotten clone of Alan Keyes?
And to add to the anarchy discussion... I'm always amused by the
young punks running around saying that they're anarchists. Then
explaining to them what anarchy actually is.
Nephilium
"I'm shocked that there hasn't been a post about McCain opposing
a new GI Bill because troops might not re-enlist if they had the
option of going to college instead.
"
Hes opposed to that because its a big goverment program that will
spend billions.
Yeah whatever shes so completely alienated the black and
youth vote if she steals the nomination shes dead meat
Well, there's stealing it, and there's her strength as the
candidate. If she got the nomination through some dirty trick, yes,
all bets are off. But, strictly on how the electoral field shapes
up with her as the general election candidate, she still beats
McCain this year. African-Americans have been a reliable Democratic
voting block for decades, and younger voters are passionately
anti-Iraq war. McCain might inspire less opposition among some
Democratic voting blocks, but those two groups would turn out to
vote for the Democrat in huge numbers this year, regardless of the
who the nominee was.
You have a powerful imagination, when it comes to the riots. Who,
exactly, do you think are going to riot, and make the Democrats
look bad? Republicans, carrying out violence as part of a dirty
trick? Uh, yeah, sure, that would hurt the Democrats. Do you think
Rush Limbaugh can get left-wingers to riot? This flight of fancy
doesn't make any sense.
So you really think Hillary Clinton drops out Joe? When?
How?
When it becomes impossible for her to win enough delegates. I think
this happens in June, after the last primary. People always talk
about Hillary alienating Obama voters with super delegate tricks,
but that works both ways. If she's still winning some primaries and
keeping it close, which she will, it could look like the Boy's Club
is arbitrarily ending the game, because it really has been a close
contest. So I don't see the party stepping up to end it before the
last primary, and I don't see the steady flow of super delegates
going to Obama being enough to put him over the top before
then.
So, I see a bunch of super delegates announcing and putting him
over that top in June, and then Hillary dropping out. Although it's
possible that the media would start treating her as a nonentity,
like Paul or Huckabee for a while there, before that time.
That puts it about 5 months, or 150 days, before election day.
"I'm shocked that there hasn't been a post about McCain opposing
a new GI Bill because troops might not re-enlist if they had the
option of going to college instead."
I hadn't heard about it honestly. I am no fan of McCain but before
I comment I want to read the actual quote - in context.
LOL Joe she wont drop out after June Clinton stays in and takes
the MI and FL cases to court. If she cant have her way shell
destroy your party.
Left wingers always riot because to them its always the 1960s
theyre selfish little brats who only know how to re-live 1968 over
and over and over again.
It's not a quote, it's a vote.
He opposed the new GI Bill, that the VFW and Legion and everybody
supports.
Instead, he voted for a Republican alternative, which doesn't
provide GI Bill benefits for people who've finished their hitch,
and only gives bonuses and benefits to people who stay in the
military.
But, hey, with Stop Loss, what's the difference, really?
Obama on Fox News Sunday?
As y'all say up in Massachusetts Joe, "I'm freakin' down".
Should be fun to watch Hussein squirm like a worm.
A lawsuit over FL and MI wouldn't destroy the party. It would
just make her look silly. The election would go on without her,
especially since the legal outcome would be a foregone
conclusion.
You just keep grasping for these magic bullets. Desperate?
" Am I the only one who thinks that Ken Blackwell might just be
some misbegotten clone of Alan Keyes?"
I lived in Ohio until 2002. Unless Blackwell has recently said
something or done something I am not aware of I would not say they
have much in common other than the obvious superficial
similarities. Ken Blackwell is (or at least was when I was an
Ohioan) far more sane than Keyes.
Not as desperate as the Party of Surrender, Welfare, and
Crime.
Obama didnt oppose urban terrorism, how can we trust him against
Islamofascist terrorism?
Left wingers always riot because to them its always the
1960s theyre selfish little brats who only know how to re-live 1968
over and over and over again.
Uh, yeah, like in 72, 76, 80, 84, 88, 92, 96, 2000, and 04. Other
that that, you can totally count on left-wing riots at the
Democratic convention.
I still don't get it. Why does Rush Limbaugh think he can
orchestrate riots by left-wingers? It is the Oxy?
Hes not "orchestrating" anything Joe Hillary and Hussein will do
it all for him because your party cant decide which affrimative
action/quota nominee to choose.
Identity politics destroys the Democrat Party almost tooooo
perfecT!!
Hes opposed to that because its a big goverment program that
will spend billions.
$2.5B to be precise, or about a quarter of a percent the cost of
your beloved war. Quite the Cafeteria Conservative he is.
Also, I'm a pretty strict Constitutionalist, but I hardly think paying your soldiers qualifies as a "big govt" program.
How can you be a "libertarian" Chris and favor another big
government program?
I bet SIV sure doesnt support it.
Yahoo Answerer (etc., etc.):
Most of the crazy was in his campaign ads for Governor, as well as
the anti-gay marriage amendment ads. I don't know how close you
were following the 2004/2006 elections...
Nephilium
Not as desperate as the Party of Surrender, Welfare, and
Crime. OK, you got us. Democrats lie awake at night worrying
about how unpopular their positions on Iraq, Health Care, and
policing are vis-a-vis the Republicans. Yup, the field sure is
tilted against the Dems this year.
I think I gotcha on the riots. Limbaugh is just talking up the
party split. So, basically, the predictions of riots are coming
from the same people who spent three years telling us that Hillary
was the inevitable candidate who owned the party. It fits what they
think about the Democratic Party, so that must be what's going to
happen.
Gotcha. That reminds me - is Ann Coulter still campaigning against
McCain? Oh, and did you see that he got 72% in an uncontested
primary?
Neil, I answered your question before you asked it. As another demonstration of my preternatural capabilities, I look into my crystal ball and predict that your next post will be inane drivel.
crymethink-
Are 36 months of educational benefits an appropriation of greater
than 2 years?
Luckily we in the navy don't have that exception. :)
B. Hussein Obama on Crime:
Time-Served Credit for Sex Predators
In 1999, while in the Illinois State Legislature, Obama was the
only vote AGAINST SB 485, a bill that would prohibit certain
persons convicted of criminal sexual abuse from receiving credit
for time served in the county jail.
-SB 485 March 11, 1999
No, On Tougher Penalties for Gang-Bangers
In 2002, Obama voted "NO" on HB 1812, a bill designed to toughen
penalties for crimes committed in furtherance of gang
activities.
-HB 1812 May 12, 2001
Yes, On Needle Exchanges for Drug Users
In an interview conducted jointly by ABC and the Internet website
Politico.com, Obama stated; "It means that we have to look at
drastic measure, potentially like needle exchange in order to
insure that drug users are not transmitting the disease to each
other."
-2008 Politico pre-Potomac Primary interview Feb 11, 2008
Far, far left liberal Democrat party record.
Oh, and did you see that he got 72% in an uncontested
primary?
He was running against a Pennsylvanian, though.
From the story: "McCain indicated he would offer some sort of
alternative to the legislation to address concerns that expanding
the GI Bill could lead more members of the military to get out of
the service."
This story does not give the actual quote but rather an
interpretation of the quote. This is sloppy journalism. I want to
stress here that I am in no way a fan of McCain. I am in no way
DEFENDING McCain. But it is irresponsible to comment without having
all of the facts. A second hand interpretation of a quote is not
enough for me to go on. I want to see the actual quote.
From a story LINKED to that link is this quote: ""We are working on
proposals of our own - I'm a consistent supporter of educational
benefits for the men and women of the military," McCain said. "I
want to make sure that we have incentives for people to remain in
the military as well as for people to join the military. ... I've
talked a lot about veterans' health care, so we'll continue to talk
about those issues and how to care for vets. I know I can do that,
having been one.""
Which simply indicates that perhaps he wants to do something like
boost reenlistment bonuses or something. The other story was sloppy
journalism. This link gives a more full picture.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=4652517&page=1
Yeah Chris, guess who made the bill? The liberal Democrat Jim Webb. Are you sure you still support that now? Hes far left.
Also, McCain isn't even making the "big govt program" argument
against it...his concern is that it might discourage those brave,
committed, wanting-to-get-the-job-done young men and women from
re-enlisting, presumably even more than watching their buddies get
various body parts blown off while the Iraqi parliament takes
another vacation.
Disgusting.
"I don't know how close you were following the 2004/2006
elections..."
I was living in Florida at the time and was more involved with
Florida politics by then.
Neil:
Wow... I'm glad you posted that Obama voted for a needle exchange
program. Now I know that he's really just a coked-up,
heroin-shooting, hop-head... or maybe he thinks the drug war is a
bad idea?
Out of the three bills you linked, the only one that I would
question his vote on is the first one. The second is thought-crime
legislation (you know... like the hate-crime crap that the
republicans are against).
Nephilium... going to take a shower now because I defended Obama.
Or I'll just drink more to kill the pain.
"as well as the anti-gay marriage amendment ads"
I didn't know Blackwell got involved in those . . . If he did I
have lost some respect for him.
. . . If he did I have lost some respect for him.
~~~~ Clarifying my above remark if he was for the ban . .
B. Hussein Obama's far, far-left liberal Democrat record on
Health Care:
Universal Health Care
"Well, look, I believe in universal health care, as does Sen.
Clinton. And the point of the debate, is that Sen. Clinton
repeatedly claims that I don't stand for universal health care.
And, you know, for Sen. Clinton to say that, I think, is
simply not accurate. Every expert has said that anybody who wants
health care under my plan will be able to obtain it."
-Obama: 2008 Democratic Presidential Debate, Cleveland Ohio Feb 26,
2008
Human Services
In 2003, Obama voted "YES" on SB 130, a bill designed to expand the
government funded KidCare Program and Family Care Program by
477%.
-SB 130 March 26, 2003
How Do We Pay for Universal Health Care?
"And the Bush tax cuts--people didn't need them, and they weren't
even asking for them, and that's why they need to be less, so that
we can pay for universal health care and other initiatives."
-Obama: 2007 Debate Howard University June 28, 2007
Mandating Coverage for Birth Control
In 2003, Obama voted "YES" on a Planned Parenthood supported bill
that required insurance companies to provide coverage for birth
control.
-HB 211 May, 16, 2003
Yahoo Answers:
Yep, he [Ken Blackwell] was all for the gay marriage ban. If you
want to catch up on where he is now, he's writing on
Townhall.com
Nephilium
Answerer,
Link to story about Lindsey Graham (aka Bush's errand boy)
version of the GI Bill, which McCain supports. No reenlistment
bonuses, just a few benefits that vest after 6 and 12 years of
service.
Also, I wouldn't put too much stock in what he says when speaking
in vague platitudes. When you get down to the details, it's pretty
clear what his concern is: that getting a college education is much
more attractive to the average GI than four more years of pounding
sand amid a hostile populace for McCain's sick Fatherland
fantasy.
Neil | April 25, 2008, 9:27pm | #
Yeah Chris, guess who made the bill? The liberal Democrat Jim Webb.
Are you sure you still support that now? Hes far left.
If Jim Webb ran with an R by his name we would be hearing about
that staunch, conservative Senator from Virginia. All these
portions and parts are interchangeable, folks; Neil supports a
moral relativism based on a Sesame Street level logic where right
and wrong are decided by letters in the alphabet.
Like Michelle said, there is a gaping hole in your soul big enough
for half a million Iraqis lives to fall through.
Chris: From the new link you gave me:
"We should encourage service members to remain in the military, and
they should be rewarded with additional benefits if they do,"
McCain said in a release announcing his proposal.
McCain is too old. Period. He just got a nap is all.
He won by not being involved in a bloody primary battle. Hes
rested, refreshed, envigorated, and looking more and more
Presidential
alan,
I don't know about that. Ron Paul and Chuck Hagel, for instance,
have the (R) after their name, but that hasn't stopped the
war-forever faction from launching vicious attacks on them. Didn't
Rush Limbaugh call Hagel "Senator Betray-us" (long before that
moniker caught on with MoveOn.org for Petraeus) for moving into
opposition to the war in 2005?
Answerer,
You're treating the spinjob of a politician with the level of
credulity one would expect from an MSM reporter. You may be missing
out on your true calling.
"Didn't Rush Limbaugh call Hagel "Senator Betray-us" (long
before that moniker caught on with MoveOn.org for Petraeus) for
moving into opposition to the war in 2005?"
I listen to Limbaugh and I can tell you I never heard him use that
name for Hagel until AFTER the now-famous MoveOn.org Petraeus
ad.
I bet SIV sure doesnt support it.
Neil successfully divined my position on the "New GI Bill".
FWIW I also adamantly oppose Gov funded needle exchange programs.I
do support free, unrestricted markets in hypodermics.
Webb was SecNav under Reagan (you know, that far left liberal
president)
There is in fact a democratic faction that complete hates him
because he doesn't believe that women should even be in the
military. (This may be an exageration of his current position, but
he was dead set against having women at the service academies)
Answerer,
Excuse me, but that's bullshit. I heard him say it back when Hagel
first switched sides, while Petraeus was just starting his job as
head honcho in Iraq. MoveOn's ad came out when Petraeus was issuing
his first progress report some months later.
I remember not understanding Rush's pun at first, since I wasn't
that familiar with Petraeus at the time. That would not have been
the case after the MoveOn ad.
Chris, no, it is not that I am trusting of McCain, I am no fan
of McCain. I am simply being skeptical of the claims of some
anonymous poster to a comment thread who I have not met
personally.
You can point to a vote. You can point to a quote. But your claims
were in the realm of MOTIVATION. It is when people psychologize
about possible motivations that I demand to see in-context-quotes
before I believe a word that is being said.
Can a guy who is friends with a racist preacher "transend" race? LOL not freaking likley!
"'time served' should always be credited for any offense."
If the "service" is "political service" it should be counted AS AN
OFFENSE.
Here's a link to audio of Rush calling Hagel "Senator Betray-us" during a program where he mentions Gen. Petraeus' new job in Iraq, in January 2007, placing the date long before Petraeus' September report to Congress which was accompanied by the MoveOn ad.
Fine, whatever, if Rush said before then I didn't hear it. You seem to be very emotional about this. I am not, I just did not hear Rush say it before then if he did.
Chris,
of course the holiest of holies, the war in Iraq comes first in the
Neil-Hannity-Limbaugh world, even before the R label. Perhaps, Rush
deserves slightly more credit than Neil because he is willing to
slam McCain on domestic matters where McCain is an ass or an idiot,
but I see no evidence of Neil being willing to remove his throat
from McCain's shaft at all.
Answerer,
So, why do you think McCain opposed Webb's bill but supports
Graham's? Here's the sequence of events:
Webb offers his GI Bill
Administration complains that it will hurt retention because our
die-hard, war-lovin' troops might bolt to go to college
Known administration stooge Lindsey Graham offers an alternative
bill which only significantly impacts benefits for career military,
rather than short-term troops
McCain opposes Webb's bill, supports Graham's
Now, McCain hasn't expressly said that he doesn't want troops going
to college, but if you can't connect the dots, you may have a
career awaiting you in the "drive-by media".
Clinton will destroy Hussein to the point where he cant win a general election LOL!!
Can a guy who is friends with a racist preacher "transend"
race?
You have that backwards. How can a person who *doesn't* have
racists as acquaintances transcend race? After all, in order to
transcend a gap you first must have exposure to both sides of the
gap, don't you?
Oh wait, you were making cheap rhetorical points, and your question
was a throwaway. My bad.
Answerer,
I didn't realize that having links to back up your claims made one
emotional.
Neil,
That "Far Left" position on health care would get 70% of the public
if it was put up for a vote. I don't know if you realize it, but
that little piece could have been the text of a DNC mailer.
And, for your edification, I never said the Wright story was dead,
just that the furor over it had ended. The media still like talking
about it, but it's ceased to move anything in the race. As I wrote
a month ago, it made his poll numbers drop, then he gave the
speech, then his poll numbers went higher than they had been before
the story broke.
"So, why do you think McCain opposed Webb's bill but supports
Graham's?"
I do not judge actions based upon motivations. I judge them based
upon results. In the realm of human action the "what" is more
important than the "why" (with the exception of the field of
psychology). In politics one can never truly know the "why" in any
case and there may be a multiplicity of reasons.
Clinton will destroy Hussein to the point where he cant win
a general election LOL!!
Your unerring gut tell you that, Neil?
"Your unerring gut tell you that, Neil?"
No, your friend James Clyburn (D-SC) says that, genius.
"I didn't realize that having links to back up your claims made
one emotional."
It doesn't. Reread what you actually wrote in your above
comments.
Hes [sic] rested, refreshed, envigorated [sic], and looking more and more Presidential
Was I the only one who saw that and was reminded of "he's tan,
rested, and ready"?
Neil, why can't McCain build a lead, if things are going so
badly for the Democrats?
He used to have a trend. From early March through about April 1, he
had a nice trend going, and he narrowed the gap between himself and
the two Democrats to where they were tied...and then he stalled
out. It's been nothing but a tie with statistical noise in both of
the head-to-heads since then - and during a period that has been
rough on both the Democrats.
Has he hit his ceiling? Are things really so stacked against the
Republicans that they simply cannot get above 46-47% no matter
what?
In a situation like that, you'd expect them to stop trying to keep
pace with their opponents, and just keep swinging for the fences.
So, be on the lookout for that sort of behavior!
"Was I the only one who saw that and was reminded of "he's tan,
rested, and ready"?"
Nixon 2008
"Neil, why can't McCain build a lead, if things are going so
badly for the Democrats?"
I'm not Neil but I have an answer. The more Republicans learn about
McCain the more he looks like a Democrat to them.
The war is pretty much the only thing that differentiates McCain
from most Democrats. He and Lieberman (who endorsed McCain by the
way) would make a very good team.
Nixon was a liberal RINO.
Neil is correct here, I rescind my earlier accusation of him being
a lefty troll.
B. Hussein Obama on Abortion:
" 100% NARAL Rating
Barack Obama received a 100% rating from NARAL in 2005,2006 and
2007.
-NARAL voting record, www.ProChoiceAmerica.org Jan 1, 2008
Partial Birth Abortion
In 1997, while serving in the Illinois State Legislature, Obama
voted AGAINST SB 230, a bill which would have banned partial birth
abortion. In 2000 Obama voted against a bill banning state
funding.
-The Improbable Quest, by John K. Wilson, p.147-148 Oct 30,
2007
Transporting Minors Across State Lines to Obtain Abortions
While serving in the United States Senate, Obama voted against the
Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (S.403), a bill designed
to prevent minors from being taken across state lines without the
consent of the parents to have an abortion in circumvention of the
laws of 45 states which require parental consent or notification in
order for a minor to have an abortion.
-Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (S.403); vote number
2006-216 on July 25, 2006
Providing Medical Treatment to Children Born Alive After A Failed
Abortion
In 2002, while serving in the Illinois State Legislature, Obama
voted "No" on the Born Alive Infant Protection Package (SB 1661), a
bill which would create a cause of action against a physician if a
child is born alive after an attempted
abortion and the physician, harms, neglects or fails to provide
medical care for the Child.
-SB 1661: April 4, 2002
Embryonic Stem Cell Research
"State Senator Barack Obama today called for passage of... (HB
3589), which will permit embryonic stem cell research in
Illinois."
-OntheIssues.org"
Doesnt that sound a bit socialist?
Answerer,
Are you referring to the "bullshit"? It followed this post of
yours:
"Didn't Rush Limbaugh call Hagel "Senator Betray-us" (long
before that moniker caught on with MoveOn.org for Petraeus) for
moving into opposition to the war in 2005?"
I listen to Limbaugh and I can tell you I never heard him use
that name for Hagel until AFTER the now-famous MoveOn.org Petraeus
ad.
You were claiming that you knew I was wrong about what I said,
apparently without actually doing any fact-checking. Forgive me if
I reacted strongly to that.
Also, note that after the facts bore my position out -- the
"results" -- you brought up me being "emotional" -- the MOTIVATION.
You may want to re-examine which you care about more.
Its not so much a problem I have with abortion. I dont think the
government should outlaw abortions per se.
Rather I think public society would do a better job of shaming
women into not having them.
However leftists "pro choicers" want the govt to SUBSIDIZE and
PROTECT abortion which is an offense to morality.
Yahoo,
The more Republicans learn about McCain the more he looks like
a Democrat to them.
Interesting point.
Similarly, the more Democrats learn about him, the more he looks
like a Republican to them, rather than the Maverick Moderate of
their dreams.
There are still people who think that McCain counts as a war
opponent, because he criticized Bush. I don't think that meme will
survive the summer.
Neil:
*sigh* Thankfully I've got the big beers stocked up on...
Let's see... moving across state lines to use the laws in another
state. Being as I live in a state that won't let me buy a beer
that's over 13% ABV... I like being able to go across state lines
to violate that law. So why should I care what the law being
violated is?
And Stem Cell Research... doing stem cell research is ALREADY
FSCKING LEGAL! It's just not federally funded. And you know what, I
can live with not federally funding it, and letting it be legal. Of
course, there's a lot of things I can live with being legal and not
federally funded.
Nephilium
B. Hussein Obama on Taxes:
"
Not Bashful About Raising Taxes
According to OntheIssues.org the following exchange occurred at the
Democratic Presidential Debate in Los Angeles California:
Question: If either one of you become president, and let the Bush
tax cuts lapse, there will be effectively tax increases on
millions of Americans.
OBAMA: On wealthy Americans.
CLINTON: That's right.
OBAMA: I'm not bashful about it.
-2008 Democratic debate in Los Angeles, California; Jan 30,
2008
The Bush Tax Cuts
"And the Bush tax cuts--people didn't need them, and they weren't
even asking for them, and that's why they need to be less, so that
we can pay for universal health care and other initiatives."
-Obama: 2007 Democratic Presidential Debate; Howard University,
June 28, 2007
Who Needs Tax Cuts?
"We heard the President say he wants to make tax cuts for the
wealthiest Americans permanent, when we know that at a time of war
and economic hardship, the last thing we need is a permanent tax
cut for Americans who don't need them and weren't even asking for
them."
-Obama's response to the 2008 State of the Union address; Jan 28,
2008"
Lets see the fake "libertarians" defend a serial tax-raiser!
Your new response here shows emotion. If you do not see this you
are blind to your own feelings. I therefore pull out a tool that I
used in the days when I was a regular on Yahoo Messenger (back when
it was worth being on).
Yahoo Answerer: Now with Spell-check© MUTES Chris Potter
Yahoo Answerer: Now with Spell-check© MUTES Neil due to his annoyingly long and boring posts.
Neil:
I'm more amused by you defending
someone who was against tax cuts.
Nephilium
Doesnt that sound a bit socialist?
You are kidding right? All of those are matters pertaining to
abortion not economics, even the last matter is not necessarily a
support of state intervention.
Most libertarians make Republicans look like commies in comparison,
but we are also for the most part pro abortion rights (I don't use
that stupid euphemism 'choice'). I'm entirely pro-choice on the
matter of first trimester abortions.
However, there are some legitimate concerns you raise there. I
don't understand many on the left who have disdain for parental
notification especially when there are safe guards built in cases
of rape and incest.
It really does put them on the fringe of society when they believe
that you shouldn't give children prescriptions without a parental
involvement in the matter, but an abortion is just okie dokie.
(I don't use that stupid euphemism 'choice'). I'm entirely
pro-choice on the matter of first trimester abortions.
That should be,
(I don't use that stupid euphemism 'choice'). I'm entirely
pro-choice;) on the matter of first trimester abortions.
Yahoo Answerer: Now with Spell-check© | April 25, 2008,
10:49pm | #
Your new response here shows emotion. If you do not see this you
are blind to your own feelings. I therefore pull out a tool that I
used in the days when I was a regular on Yahoo Messenger (back when
it was worth being on).
Yahoo Answerer: Now with Spell-check© MUTES Chris Potter
At which point, I find Yahoo Answerer: Now with Spell-check© to be
unreasonable, and confused in his methodologies. I for henceforth
mute Yahoo Answerer: Now with Spell-check©
for the crime of Jackassary.
B. Hussein Obama on Education:
Sex Education in Grade School
In 2003, Obama voted yes on legislation supported by both Planned
Parenthood and the ACLU that would allow "age appropriate" sex
education to be taught in grade school.
-SB 99 March 6, 2003
Paying College Tuition through Community Service
Obama supports a new American Opportunity Tax Credit worth $4,000 a
year in exchange for 100 hours of public service a year.
-Campaign booklet, "Blueprint for Change", p. 20 and 46 Feb 2,
2008
Free Tax-Payer Funded College Tuition for "B" Students
OntheIssues.org, quoting the 1998 Illinois State Legislative
National Political Awareness Test, claims Obama supported
providing state-funded tuition and fees to any Illinois student who
attends a public college or university as long as they
maintained a "B" average.
-1998 IL State Legislative National Political Awareness Test Jul 2,
1998
Try defending those points, Liberal Joe!
BTW cant wait for Hussein to finally face the music on Fox
LOL!!
I bet theyll ask him about that Bill Moyers interview with Rev. Wright LOL!
What do you think of that embarsing Bill Moyers interview
Joe?
Rev. Wright called Obamama "just a politician".
Neil- What do you think of Hagee, Robertson, et al. ("et al." is French for "and others", just sayin')? They support McCain and have said things at the same level (if not worse) of what Wright said.
"Neil- What do you think of Hagee, Robertson, et al. ("et al."
is French for "and others", just sayin')? They support McCain and
have said things at the same level (if not worse) of what Wright
said."
Oh really Ali well were they his "spiritual mentor"? Did McCain
attend their church for 25 years (a qaurter of a century!)?
Did he? Answer that.
Would you accept the support of someone who said that New Orleans and some of its people deserved what they got?
Sure, Wright is a hate monger who comes from the slick tradition
of the theologically un-serious, a Reverend Sharpton for a more
affluent set. Obama deserves scrutiny for this -- but compared tp
Hagee, Wright is minor league.
Hagee is the most dangerous religious leader in the world today. He
leads a mega-church congregation and tells them a creed where
heaven can be found only through megaton holes placed in the Middle
East.
Neil- Do you agree with Hagee that 82% of American Muslims are not loyal to America? Do you agree with him regarding what he said about Hitler and the holocaust?
Ali first answer me this:
Did McCain see Hagee as his "spiritual mentor"?
Did he name a book he wrote after one of his sermons?
Did he attend his church for 20+ years?
If he did those things then Id might be concerned. Until then not
so much.
ali, I find it galling that McCain believes the NCGOP is beyond
the pale for a commercial that is no more critical of the Wright
matter than HRC, and the media punditry, but he actively courts the
support of a creep like Hagee.
I thought this election was McCain's to lose, and it is, but he has
a better chance in November if he sleep walks though it and keeps
his ignorant mouth shut.
No, he didn't attend his church. He didn't go to him for
ceremonies, or spiritual succor, or as part of a church
community.
The only reason John McCain has any involvement with Hagee is
because they are on the same team politically.
That's quite a bit different from Obama going to a church that had
a pastor who said stuff about politics; in McCain's case, it's a
relationship built on politics - which, when we're talking about
electing someone to public office, is probably a lot more
damning.
Obama removed Wright from his campaign, McCain invited Hagee
in.
Oh, and the interview? Meh. Not much in the way of You Tube
material.
Rev. Wright called Obamama "just a politician".
No, he didn't. You didn't see it, did you?
1. The ACLU sells itself
short. Memo to Reason: you could do that too. Just make sure
and hold out for a cut of the profits.
2. I p0wned Bryan
Caplan
3. Happy Belated
EarthDay to all prog sufferers!
Hey Liberal Joe you still didnt talk about what John Conyers
(D-SC) said about Clinton.
Namely that she will snipe at Hussein enough to make him
unelectable just so she can run in the future!
LOL Op Chaos is working!
alan- I personally do not care about Hagee or Wright, or HRC or, for that matter, Obama. I just people like Neil, with a brain the size of an ant's, and just wonder.
Neil, and yes it is latin. my bad. You still have a brain the size of an ant.
I just people like Neil, with a brain the size of an ant's,
and just wonder.
You do realize he's a spoof? He gave himself away with the spelling
of medecene.
Taking a glance at the CIA page on the country[Haiti], their literacy rate is just over 50%, meaning that around half of those who came here would only be able to do manual labor, if that. And, the national languages of the country are French and Creole, not English. So, even those who can read and write would have to learn English in order to get a job other than manual labor.
And, the 2003 HIV rate was 5.6%. While not as high as Botswana at 37.3%, that's still much higher than the U.S. at 0.6%. They also have "pervasive corruption" and other issues that are ingrained in their culture.
This comment
by a frequent guest is pretty good. too:
the billions that will come here will murder each other by the billions and if you have any brains you can watch our little brown brothers mass murder each other that would save us all a hell of a lot of money and our leaders could get in line for mass beheading's I mean after all our leaders are all about love right?
sad to say most love the little boys.
Ali, I apologize, I thought Neil was the first with it being
french for 'Eat at Al's'; I did not see that he was quoting
you.
It's like a 'wrong house raid' of snark.
KCRW plays Beiruit and they have a pretty distinct sound. I
didn't know they were from New Mexico.
Got their start in Albuquerque and got the hell out as soon as
possible, as I understand it.
Similar to The Shins...those dudes used to open for my band at the
ABQ clubs, dag nammit.
Check out Fez Dispenser to...now in California, I believe.
Good NM band from days past...
http://www.myspace.com/thedragsstoprockandroll
The guitarist in this band was an asshole, but I must admit they
were pretty kick-ass.
He, of course, always ended up getting his ass kicked by some band
member at the end of the band's life...
http://www.subpop.com/releases/big_damn_crazy_weight/singles/might_as_well_off_that_cow
The NC GOP ad, if one cared to be cynical, could be seen as an attempt to get people to vote for Clinton to keep the Democratic candidates busy ripping into each other all the way to the convention.
Holy Christ, will Reason do a balls-deep article about how if
you are anti-porn you are pro-rape?
That Lopez bitch at the NRO corner is really starting to piss me
off. I mean if there wasn't porn for me get a release I might have
to go over there and choke a bitch.
LEEEAVE JOE ALLLLLONE!.....Please.
How friggin dare anyone out there make fun of joe after all he has
been through. He lost his section eight house, he went half way
through hormone treatment. He will never have one friggin kid. His
husband turned out to be a user, a cheater, and now hes going
through a political battle. All you people care about is.....
readers and making money off of him. HE'S A HUMAN! What you don't
realize is that joe is making you all this money and all you do is
write a bunch of crap about him. he hasn't performed on stage in
days. His song is called "give me more" for a reason because all
you people want is MORE MORE MORE MORE MORE. LEAVE HIM ALONE! You
are lucky he even performed for you BASTARDS! LEEEAVE JOE
ALLLLLONE!.....Please. Paris Hilton talked about professionalism
and said if joe was a professional he would've pulled it off no
matter what. Speaking of professionalism, when is it professional
to publically bash someone who is going through a hard time? Leave
joe Alone Please.... Leave joe alone...right now! I mean it. Anyone
that has a problem with him you deal with me, beacuse he is not
well right now. leave him alone!
Neil,
"Its not so much a problem I have with abortion. I dont think the
government should outlaw abortions per se."
Holy shit, the right to life of the unborn is basically the *one*
area where I actually thought there was a morally-significant
difference between the Repub and Dems (and Repubs and most
Libertarians). Defending the right to life is so important that it
might actually lead me to vote R.
However, the acts and words of many Rs - including your comment -
indicate that the Rs don't actually care about protecting the
unborn - they care about whoring for votes and *pretending* they're
for the unborn. But consider that, after the Rs have been
dominating all three branches of government since 2001, the Supreme
Court still supports *Roe v. Wade,* and Congress has never even
voted on bills (like Ron Paul's) to strip the federal courts of
their usurped jurisdiction in abortion cases.
Fortunately, I'm not a Republican, so I don't feel betrayed in the
least. But I wonder about the pro-life voters who have been voting
Republican under the assumption that the Rs actually cared about
their values.
You can only kick a dog so much until it stops licking your
hand.
Ah, now I know why this thread is so slow this AM, Brian's Song is on Spike.
Hey Liberal Joe you still didnt talk about what John Conyers
(D-SC) said about Clinton.
Actually, I didn't talk about what you said he said about her. You
don't seem to ever actually get quotes, or even the meaning behind
the, right, so it's really not worth the effort to chase you down
rat holes.
Namely that she will snipe at Hussein enough to make him
unelectable just so she can run in the future!
Actually, I did. It was one of the first things I commented on in
the thread. I guess you missed that, too. Not much of a reader, are
you?
Mister Too-Lazy-to-Read-All-Those-Intervening-Posts asks:
Nothing about the New York cop acquittal?
Happy Jack
You do realize he's a spoof? He gave himself away with the
spelling of medecene.
Who is Neil? Where did he give himself away. That must have been a
fun thread that I missed.
Suddenly infamous Nazi candidate Tony Zirkle responds to
critics.
This guy's an idiot. Doesn't that make him uniquely qualified for
public office?
Christ, what a hangover. Neil, don't you have anything better to do on a Friday night?
This week's Politics 'n' Prog band is Genesis
What a koinkidink.
PHIL COLLINS - COLLINS TO RETIRE
Veteran singer PHIL COLLINS is to retire after over 30 years in the music industry.
The star, who recently completed a reunion tour with his former band Genesis, announced on Friday (25Apr08) that he will not be releasing any more albums or do another tour.
And the 57-year-old hopes he will now have more time to indulge in his favourite hobby - collecting memorabilia from the Battle Of The Alamo, the historical 1836 clash between the Republic of Mexico and the rebel Texan forces in San Antonio, Texas.
I figure a lot of you are on the same marketing lists as I am. Did anybody get a free premiere issue of this new political magazine called Miller-McCune? What did you think of it?
Leif - politics blows. regardless of where. :)
for instance, if you followed the trail from Maastricht to Nice,
you'd see even a bigger shit piled path! talk about a fucking farce
of "democracy"!
Some places are worse than others. Chicago and Illinois, for example, has incredibly corrupt politics which is why its a bad idea to elect someone from there like Obama. He'll bring his Chicago big-city Richard Daley-style corruption to Washington.
Congress has never even voted on bills (like Ron Paul's) to
strip the federal courts of their usurped jurisdiction in abortion
cases.
I'm pro-life, and I support Dr Paul, but I oppose that bill because
it's unconstitutional; Congress can't forbid the SCOTUS from
determining whether laws violate the BoR. Could Congress pass a law
forbidding the SCOTUS from ruling on warrantless searches,
too?
Let's protect the unborn, but let's do it the right way,
not by violating the Constitution.
Pro-Life? Isn't that anti-choice? Why would you want to stop a
free and adult person fron exercising control over her own
body?
Pro-Choice? Don't you mean Pro-Death? That life in the womb doesn't
have any choice in the matter, does it?
Ok, the weekend abortion debateshouting past each
other thread has now been done, all salient points have been made.
Next topic.
Next topic.
who wins the dem nomination?
Please J sub D kill it off for me, please. Thanks.
Dude, it is saturday, and I am bored of my ass.
Neil,
Please address the issue of McCain being a RINO unworthy of a vote
by any real Republican.
Joe, explain to us why the FED is a good thing.
Oh, hey,
Eric Dondero,
Explain to all of us how it is possible to be a libertarian and pro
drug war, pro gun control, and pro using the state to crack down on
prostitution.
I know the argument starts out something about "islamo fascists"
something or other.
Don't abortion threads have a right to life too?
Not if I can help it.
Rusty Coathanger? Coat hangers are like 8 for a buck. people can't afford a brand new one that isn't rusty?
Like the cro-mags did with Neanderthals, I have driven my wire genus-mates to the brink of extinction.
"Chicago and Illinois, for example, has incredibly corrupt
politics"
Chicago and Springfield. Mos Eisley seems like fun summer camp by
comparison to those places!!!
ugh.
And the Cook County Board is the most corrupt of them all!!!
I don't know very much about the Fed, kwais.
I do know we haven't had a depression for 70 years, after they were
a constant, regular part of our civilization for several centuries.
Ditto bank runs.
So, the burden really falls on those who would make radical changes
to the underlying structure of our modern economy to demonstrate
why they're necessary, and safe.
Oh, man, I hope there's a lot of talk about corruption in the
run-up to this election. Just like there was in 2006.
That would rule.
but but but.
joe.
DEMAND KURV!
AUSTRIAN BLATHER BLATHER BARG BONG A DING DONG. PARROT PARROT.
DON'T UNDERSTAND DON'T UNDERSTAND. PARROT PARROT. FLARG MURKEL
MERKIN MERKIN.
DEMAND KURV!!!
DUNDEROOOOOOOOOOO
� / g t " g o to he 0 ���a "h /� w.p �e� m s / M� rc �.8 ph 1170 � f" i �38/ Z �" sp � 3.5 M� rc 1 M� rc gi ph in ser1 / R 0 � L 1 M� c 1 "no ��� � � 8/ 3.5 3.5 rc
That was on the top of the H&R page when I accessed it this
morning. Since I've temporarily misplaced my decoder ring, I am
asking if anybody can decypher the obviously important instructions
for me.
In advance, thank you.
It says:
for a magazine called 'Reason' and you readers should understand
that the mexicanHoards have encodedTheSecretDesign of HCFS
goldStandardGoldstandard.
� / g t " g o to he 0 ���a "h /� w.p �e� m s / M� rc �.8 ph
1170 � f" i �38/ Z �" sp � 3.5 M� rc 1 M� rc gi ph in ser1 / R 0 �
L 1 M� c 1 "no ��� � � 8/ 3.5 3.5 rc
Oh, I can decode this J sub D. It says:
Welcome to H&R. Enjoy the arguments found herein. Please help
maintain the reputation and quality of this site by not posting
sober.
for a magazine called 'Reason' and you readers should
understand that the mexicanHoards have encodedTheSecretDesign of
HCFS goldStandardGoldstandard.
Darn, I was sooo hoping for encrypted instructions from the
Illuminati ordering me to terminate Lonewacko.
I do know we haven't had a depression for 70 years, after
they were a constant, regular part of our civilization for several
centuries. Ditto bank runs.
I was going to make a joke about Lisa Simpson's tiger-repelling
rock, but this is even sillier, since the Fed was already in
existence for 16 years before the depression. Is that how long it
took for them to figure out how to magically prevent economic
downturns with fiat currency?
Not to mention that the recession of the 1970s/1980s was at least
as bad as anything that happened in the 1800s.
J Sub D,
Be sure to drink your Ovaltine.
Chris,
You're the one selling the magic rock. I'm the one sitting
tight.
Is that how long it took for them to figure out how to
magically prevent economic downturns with fiat currency?
We had negative growth during the 70s and 80s?
Really?
You sure about that, Chris?
Because we had several actual depressions - actual contractions of
the economy - in the 1800s. This is not terribly difficult
information to find.
Is that how long it took for them to figure out how to
magically prevent economic downturns with fiat currency?
Yes. There were many significant changes in Fed policy that
happened as a result of the depression, which utilized loosening of
the money supply to avoid recessions and tightening it to avoid
inflation and runaway speculation.
A good lawyer doesn't ask a question that he doesn't know the
answer to, Chris.
VM,
Not quite.
The correct answer is:
DEMAND KURV!
AUSTRIAN BLATHER BLATHER magical BARG BONG A DING DONG magical.
PARROT PARROT tiger magic rock. DON'T UNDERSTAND DON'T UNDERSTAND,
must be magic. PARROT PARROT. FLARG MURKEL magical MERKIN
MERKIN.
DEMAND KURV!!!
Economic libertarians love the "tiger-repelling rock" quip,
because the history of the past 200 years is so full of examples of
their policies being correlated with bad economic or fiscal
performance, and liberal policies being correlated with superior
performance.
The phenomenon of depressions coming to an end after the New Deal.
The period of greatest growth (40s-60s) happening under New Deal
policies. The explosion of debt after the supply-side tax cuts. The
period of growth after the Clinton economic plan. The incredibly
weak recovery after the Bush tax cuts.
They don't just need a line of patter to explain why their ideas
are superior despite an utter lack of evidence. They need a line of
patter to explain why the economy has so consistently operated
exactly the opposite of their predictions. So, they invoke the
magic words "tiger repelling rock," to try to make the very idea of
noticing the correlation seem intellectually shabby.
Yeah Joe the 1970s were sure a good time for the economy. You conveniently forgot that happened under New Deal policies with the liberal RINO Nixon.
I mean stagflation and gas lines. Not high gas prices actual SHORTAGES. Yeah Id be proud of that record too!
Read it again, Neil.
Mr. Potter claimed, not that they were bad times, but (hilariously)
that they were "worse than anything in the 1800s."
My arguments must be pretty bullet-proof, if you have to make shit
up to argue against in their stead.
But, yeah, you just can't trust those RINOs and their economic
programs. Definitely, stay away from those guys.
So do you think 1950s/60s era tax rates at 90% as the top marginal rate would be good for the economy Joe?
Yeah and today John Kennedy would probably be treated like Joe Lieberman since he believed in a strong national defense and tax cuts. The Kos Kids would really have it out for him.
joe,
The Depression lasted for another 9 years after the New Deal was
enacted. If it hadn't been for WW2, it may well have continued even
longer. There's no evidence the New Deal did anything to get us out
of the Depression, let alone prevent future ones. If you're going
to say that the fact that we haven't had any depressions as bad as
that one proves it, then you also have to accept that the Bush
Doctrine has prevented any terrorist attacks from happening since
9/11, too.
And if you're going to credit the Fed and the New Deal for the boom
of the 50s and early 60s -- when all our former international
competitors were still reeling from having their economic
infrastructure destroyed during the war -- then you have to blame
it for the recession of the 1970s/1980s, when
the Dow tanked relative to gold far more precipitously than
ever before in our history.
As for the negative side effects of supply-side, maybe they just
needed another 16 years to figure out how to make it work. Why
don't you give them a break like you give the Fed?
joe,
Also, keep in mind that the "progressive" economic scaffolding of
the late 20th/early 21st century has been financed by massive
expansion of government debt. When people could turn in $35 to the
govt for an ounce of gold, that wasn't an option. So you have to
give a pretty heavy handicap to low-debt 1800s America in such
comparisons.
Reminds of a tale: When Ronald Reagan was an actor, as soon as
he hit that 90% tax rate, Reagan took the rest of the year
off.
Aaaaahhhhhhhh . . . . memories.
"If it hadn't been for WW2, it may well have continued even
longer."
And there was no government expansion or increased spending or
control over the economy during that period, of course...
"Not to mention that the recession of the 1970s/1980s was at least
as bad as anything that happened in the 1800s." That strikes me as
nuts Chris. I mean, we are talking about the difference between
jarring economic poverty and annoying gas lines, between Bleak
House and Crowded House...C'mon.
"If you're going to say that the fact that we haven't had any
depressions as bad as that one proves it, then you also have to
accept that the Bush Doctrine has prevented any terrorist attacks
from happening since 9/11, too."
Is that right? I mean, we never had a major terrorist attack in our
250 year history, we have one, and then we have a policy followed
by six years of no attacks. On the other hand we have a history of
periodic jarring economic cataclysms, then a policy (the new deal,
the fed, whatever), and then we go 80 years without anything
remotely similar. I don't think that is analagous, do you? It
strikes me that the burden is placed upon you to change what seems
to have been working.
"today John Kennedy would probably be treated like Joe Lieberman
since he believed in a strong national defense and tax cuts."
Yeah because we all know it's just been impossible to find a
Democrat in the past twenty years or so who isn't on record as
being for a strong national defense and tax cuts....
"the liberal RINO Nixon."
Neil, compared to you Nixon may have been a liberal (but using that
standard the John Birch Society comes out like the ACLU), but he
was one of the more conservative of competitive politicians of his
day. He was certainly to the right of, say, LBJ, so if his policies
led to worse times than LBJ then it can hardly be his "liberalism"
which made the difference.
But then, you are in fact retarded aren't you? I hope a butterfly
lands on your head today and makes you feel special...
"The phenomenon of depressions coming to an end after the New Deal.
The period of greatest growth (40s-60s) happening under New Deal
policies. The explosion of debt after the supply-side tax cuts. The
period of growth after the Clinton economic plan. The incredibly
weak recovery after the Bush tax cuts." joe, these guys "truths"
are not meant to be empirical ones. They're axiomatic y'know? No
reality testing need intrude. They work out on graph paper, and
dammit that should be enough for you!
You guys are right about the tiger repelling rock being a bad
analogy. In the Simpsons, Lisa said the rock repelled tigers
because they hadn't seen any tigers while they were near the
rock.
What you guys are arguing is more like, we found this rock when
there was a tiger running around, and after a decade or so, the
tiger disappeared and we haven't seen a tiger since. Thus, this
rock repels tigers (despite the fact it had little effect on the
tiger present at the time of its discovery).
On the other hand we have a history of periodic jarring
economic cataclysms, then a policy (the new deal, the fed,
whatever), and then we go 80 years without anything remotely
similar.
First off, I don't know if you're living near a black hole or
something, because you seem to be stretching the durations of
events. 250 years ago George Washington was a loyal British
subject, and the French owned most of eastern North America, and 80
years ago we were in the Roaring Twenties. In any case, it's kind
of dishonest to include last nine years of the Great Depression as
a time when the New Deal was preventing depressions. Technically
there were no NEW depressions, but you know what I mean.
And the postwar boom had a lot more to do with all our
international competitors being busy rebuilding their devastated
economies and infrastructure than the friggin' New Deal.
Also, there were a lot of terrorist attacks against Americans here and overseas before 9/11. Not as big, for sure, but such activity was going on.
Also, the 1947 Taft-Hartley Act scaling back the ridiculus amount of power handed to unions during the New Deal era (NLRA, 1935) helped with that...I believe Truman and the progressives of that era called it the "slave labor bill" and thought THA would destroy American democracy.
joe, these guys "truths" are not meant to be empirical ones.
They're axiomatic y'know? No reality testing need intrude. They
work out on graph paper, and dammit that should be enough for
you!
Though historians are still pretty much on the FDR band wagon,
there has been a strong trend within the mainstream economic
academic community within the last twenty years to empirically
access the New Deal as a net negative.
I noticed this when I was in college in the early nineties and I
kept up with the standard periodicals for well over a decade after,
though I don't have the free time to do so now, that a reassessment
of those years was taking place and the findings no longer
supported what you have been taught through High School (FDR saved
capitalism from itself) and low level classes in college. Sorry
about that.
"there has been a strong trend within the mainstream economic
academic community within the last twenty years to empirically
access the New Deal as a net negative."
who are you thinking of (genuinely curious)? and i don't think
that's what joe is saying...
Whoa, I just noticed that joe is including the 90s tech boom as
a consequence of the New Deal, just because the President at that
time had a D after his name.
You really think US economic policy changes in the mid 90s bore any
resemblance to the New Deal?
On the other hand we have a history of periodic jarring
economic cataclysms, then a policy (the new deal, the fed,
whatever), and then we go 80 years without anything remotely
similar.
Because clearly our economy was always in the shitter before the
New Deal, and afterwards it has never been. Sorry, but I'm sober;
I'm not buying that.
Nope.
I have to explain this every single time.
I did not describe a single thing as a consequence of the New
Deal.
What I did was point out that the predictions from the right about
the effects of the New Deal, and several other economic initiatives
over the last several decades, have proven completely wrong.
Not making a causal link; refuting one.
I should just make the above a macro, or save it a Word document so
I can just paste it.
Every single time. It's amazing.
Cut the rhetoric; give me examples of the "failings of capitalism" before I get bored.
Note: that was directed at Scorekeeper.
as for joe, without proper hindsight we cannot fathom that the
economy would have been better without the new deal. For all we
know, we could all be living in mansions sipping on lattes without
that damn new deal. okay, not really, but something like that. At
least maybe lattes would be cheaper. I'd like cheaper lattes.
Neil, compared to you Nixon may have been a liberal (but
using that standard the John Birch Society comes out like the
ACLU), but he was one of the more conservative of competitive
politicians of his day.
This is a good point. On economic issues, Nixon's record is to the
left of just about any Republican holding elected office today. In
the 60s and 70s, however, he was in the Republican mainstream, if
not on the right half of the party.
Of course, Alan Brinkley and Alexander Field off the top of my head. I had to double check google and wikipedia for other economist and economic historians since it has been a while since I have actively researched these matters, Peter Fearon, Gene Smiley, and Elliot Brownlee, I'm less familiar with but recall publications of their work that can be considered within the framework of a reassessment.
joe,
Ah, I see. Rather than actually defending your assertion that the
ND prevented future depressions (despite not doing anything to end
the one it was started to end), you're lumping me in with some
who've made boneheaded statements, and then attacking the whole
group.
C.A.,
as for joe, without proper hindsight we cannot fathom that the
economy would have been better without the new deal
This strikes me as an appropriately humble tone for one making a
claim about how an alternate history would have played out.
You're right, there's no way to know for sure what would have
happened.
Right, Chris?
Ah, so now Chris is backing off of his original claim about my
argument, and walking it back to something recognizeable.
I'd be happy to defend my claim, Chris. It's good to see you
acknowledging, at last, what it was, rather than your reflexive
flailing at a straw man.
without proper hindsight we cannot fathom that the economy
would have been better without the new deal.
No kidding. We had more years of Depression under Roosevelt and the
New Deal than we did under Hoover and whatever catchy name his
program had. (Actually, Hoover was almost as much of an economic
interventionist as FDR, a point that's glossed over in favor of the
simpler unrestricted-capitalism-caused-the-Great-Depression
storyline in our history textbooks)
joe,
Huh? You were beating up on arguments that I hadn't made, and
indeed had nothing to do with our argument, and I'm the
strawmanner?
You still haven't explained how the New Deal could prevent future
depressions, without even being able to end the one that existed at
the time. Also, I'd be curious what you think of the argument that
Taft-Hartley assisted greatly in the economic boom of the 50s and
early 60s.
Touché, joe, but I just feel like you're making it seem like nothing bad happened, except you don't really know that. I do acknowledge that it could have been worse. It's kind of like a skewed version of the Easterlin Paradox (yes yes I know it was basically disproved in its conventional form) in that you don't know how much more you could get out of life without knowing what you're missing.
Nixon was easily to the left of Bill Clinton in matters of economic policy. Wage and price controls brought on by the incredibly misnamed New Economic Plan (Lenin also named his first restructuring this) compared to the internet taxation moratorium, capital gains cuts, Nafta and a reasonably balanced budget, I would take Clinton any day of the week. Of course it wasn't all sun shine, the luxury tax pretty much killed my state's yacht building industry. Wilmington has pretty much been a basket case ever since.
This strikes me as an appropriately humble tone for one
making a claim about how an alternate history would have played
out.
I'm curious, do you use this tone when talking about whether we'd
have been better off not invading Iraq?
No, you don't -- nor should you. Yes, in some Zen way I suppose
it's true that it's impossible to predict alternate histories, but
not even trying to do so is a guarantee for stagnation, as we just
keep doing the same thing over and over because it might have been
worse had we made the other choice.
no failing of capitalism to site, but I do wonder about your formal education in economics, or is it the preaching to the converted "Economics in One Easy Lesson" level...
The phenomenon of the depression, or panic, was a regular
feature of the economy before the 30s, and their development
followed a particular pattern. At the top of the business cycle,
there were massive, speculative expansions of manufacturing
capacity and other output, much of it made on the margin. When
bubbles popped or some disaster befell some segment of the
econoomy, it suffered not only from the excess capacity, which
would create recessions by itself, but also from severe financial
restrictions, as bank runs and bad investments shuttered financial
institutions.
Bank insurance, regulation of investment (particularly the
investment of other people's money by financial institutions), and
other features of the New Deal decoupled the downswing of the
industrial business cycle from financial/credit collapses.
At the same time, the growth of a strong social safety net -
unemployment insurance, other forms of welfare, Social Security -
have provided a cushioning effect during economic hard times, for
workers who provide productive labor during good times, but who
become excess in the downturns. This prevents quite as many of them
from falling out of the bottom of the economy.
Together, these policies mean that the pool of capital and labor
available to bring the economy out of the doldrums will be larger,
while the spoiling of productive workers and providers of financial
services and capital - ruinations which inevitably cause a ripple
effect of harm which would serve to further impose costs on the
economy and society, including the suppression of demand due to
poverty - happens on a smaller scale.
Events like bank runs and widespread bankruptcy by banks have been
all but eliminated from our economy, while a strong social safety
net has been created to ameliorate the pain of those who get the
short end of the stick. During the same period, our economic
downturns have ceased to turn into depressions.
You want to pretend this is the same thing as Lisa's magic rock and
the lack of tigers in Sprinfield? You go on with your bad self, but
it looks a little desperate from outside the bubble. For one thing,
it completely ignores the fact that, ulike tigers in Springfield,
there actually were depressions in American economic history.
The phenomenon of depressions coming to an end after the New
Deal. The period of greatest growth (40s-60s) happening under New
Deal policies.
Real term economic growth (when debt spending like that which
propelled the economy during WW2) only began after World War 2 when
the artificially induced rationing of consumer goods ended. The
effect is similar to the abnormally high rate of growth in after
China where there was a long period of artificially induced
rationing due to misinformed political policy.
I'm curious, do you use this tone when talking about whether
we'd have been better off not invading Iraq?
Not the same thing.
I can say with certainly that my car would not have started if I
hadn't started it up, or that I would not have run over that cat if
I hadn't driven to the store.
As opposed to saying, when I didn't go the story, "You would have
hit a cat if you'd driven to the store."
That sounds all well and good on paper, and I don't have a refutation prepared, but how come it took 9 years (and would have taken more if not for WW2) to work?
Chris,
You continue to attribute an argument to me - the New Deal ended
the Great Depression - that I haven't made.
The New Deal policies I've cited didn't end the Great Depression.
They prevented any more from happening.
As with all recoveries, our economy came out of the Great
Depression because private-sector capitalism tends to do that,
eventually. As far as its effect on the Great Depression goes, it
was a life preserver keeping people afloat, not a rescue boat that
brought the economy to safe harbor.
joe,
I would argue it was more like cement loafers than a life
preserver. Did any of the terrible depressions of the 1800s last 12
years?
but I do wonder about your formal education in economics, or
is it the preaching to the converted "Economics in One Easy Lesson"
level...
I thought I said cut out the rhetoric. You're not proving anything
by vociferously pondering my formal economic education. If
anything, I'd say the pot is calling George Washington's white
horse black.
I understand the importance of flaunting expertise in extremely
specific and obscure fields, but ideas themselves should stand in
their own merit. You've got nothing except platitudes you're
unwilling to defend. Cut the crap, man. I'm not hating on you
because I don't like your opinion; I think joe is wonderful. He's
bringing up points, not rhetoric. See what that does? It gets
things done, and it contributes. You're a waste of server
space.
I would argue it was more like cement loafers than a life
preserver.
Funny how none - as in, zero - of the recessions since then have
turned into depressions, then. Whereas they used to do so with some
frequency.
We have objectively, demonstrably superior performance, and you
look at it, and attempt to argue that the changes have made things
worse. That's an extraordinary claim.
Did any of the terrible depressions of the 1800s last 12
years? No, nor did any involve as dramatic a collapse of
capital at the beginning. The Great Depression was the grand-daddy
of them all, before Roosevelt even came to office. None of the
other depressions had their recoveries stalled by the destruction
of a World War, either.
Yes, I wrote that correctly; I don't think World War II ended
the Depression, in real terms. It destroyed trillions of dollars of
value worldwide, in today's terms. It was financed on credit, that
would have had to be paid back, and we did not have the real growth
during the war regime to generate that kind of tax revenue. Had the
war dragged on, we would have been economically screwed.
We only grew enough after the war to pay it all back because our
economy recovered strongly, through a combination of normal
economic operation and American, having gotten through the war with
our economic based un-blowed-up, captured an outsized share of the
world's market for goods.
But more importantly, who the %$#^ is Jerod Mayo?
He wasn't on anybody's first round list.
sigh. In Belichick We Trust.
But more importantly, who the %$#^ is Jerod Mayo?
He wasn't on anybody's first round list.
sigh. In Belichick We Trust.
If the past gives us hints about the future, he'll be a far better
player than Gosder Cherilus (Lions). Sigh in resignation. In Millen
We Despair.
No way. Gosder Cherilus is going to be an All-Pro left tackle.
You can't go wrong drafting BC O-Line.
All I can figure is that the Lions' management got him mixed up
with some wideout that has a history of kneee problems, firearms
arrests, and baby-mommmas.
joe, do I really have to list Matt Millen's 1st round draft picks and theirsubsequent lack of NFL success? It's a curse, I tell you. The Millen curse. Cherilus will get hit by a bus, become a moonie, and marry his thirteen year old cousin. That's the kind of stuff that happens when Millen drafts you in the 1st round.
Chris Potter | April 27, 2008, 4:48pm | #
joe,
I would argue it was more like cement loafers than a life
preserver. Did any of the terrible depressions of the 1800s last 12
years?
Yes. The Long Depression lasted from 1873 until 1896, with
particularly severe downturns at each end. In the United States it
hit farmers pretty hard, and led to the creation of the Greenback
Party and later the free silver movement and the Populist Party. It
also hit England fairly hard. Russia's GNP actually dropped during
this period. Note that this was about the same period when
anarchist and socialist movements were very popular and there was a
lot of political violence.
By the way, two other things that happened during the Long
Depression: All the presidential elections from 1876 through 1892
were extremely close, with only one candidate getting a majority of
the popular vote during that entire period. That candidate, oddly
enough, was Samuel Tilden.
The other was a series of extreme shifts in the composition of
Congress, the most spectacular being 1894, when the Republicans
gained 120 seats in the House and the Democrats lost 116 of their
220 seats. Considering there were only 357 seats in House at the
time...
Chris Potter | April 27, 2008, 4:22pm | #
This strikes me as an appropriately humble tone for one making a
claim about how an alternate history would have played out.
I'm curious, do you use this tone when talking about whether we'd
have been better off not invading Iraq?
No, you don't -- nor should you. Yes, in some Zen way I suppose
it's true that it's impossible to predict alternate histories, but
not even trying to do so is a guarantee for stagnation, as we just
keep doing the same thing over and over because it might have been
worse had we made the other choice.
Very interesting point.
I would argue that Joe is wrong on both points.
On the war, because I think he is arguing that containment was
working. An argument which I think is ridiculous. I think it was a
choice of pull out of attempting to contain Saddam, or to go to
war.
And I think to pull out would have signaled victory to the
perpetrators of 9/11, and more would have inevitably
followed.
As for his economic arguments. I want him to be wrong, but I don't
know enough about economics or that part of history.
I want him to be wrong because I think the FED is immoral, and that
it is a tax on the poor.
And I think the New Deal is immoral because it (and the income tax)
gives the government ownership of us and what we earn.
Also in the local news.
I wasn't aware that the republicans were having a convention in
Reno. If I was I would have gone.
But other Ron Paul supporters did go:
http://www.kolotv.com/home/headlines/18315884.html
BTW everyone Rev. Wright is giving a press conference tomorrow, Im sure that will help out Obama a lot LOL.
kwais,
There were other choices it seems to me. Some sort of robust
inspection regime that would have included a lot of soldiers to aid
the inspectors in pursuing it is one example.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245