Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
The Friday Political Thread: "We Are All Neville Chamberlain Now" Edition
I'm on Inside Washington Weekly with esteemed Orange Line Mafia members Jamie Kirchick, Amanda Carpenter, and host David White. (I don't think any of us actually live on the Orange Line.) And if you live in or close to D.C., be sure to RSVP for reason's forum on the libertarian vote with Mike Gravel, Bobb Barr, Wayne Allyn Root, and Vern McKinley.
Unconvincing Quote of the Week
"Conservatism is alive and well in America; don’t let anyone tell
you differently. And by conservatism, I don’t mean the warmed-over
'raise your hand if you believe …' kind of conservatism we see
blooming every election cycle." -
Fred Thompson, making his... uh... comeback.
The Week in Brief
- Bob Barr officially tossed his chapeau in
the ring for the Libertarian Party nomination.
- Hillary Clinton ground Barack Obama
into dust in the West Virginia primary, carrying all 55
counties.
- Republicans lost their third
straight special election of the year as Democrat Travis Childers
took Mississippi's first district—a seat whose voters went 62-37
for Bush over Kerry.
- John Edwards endorsed Obama. (The
only ex-candidates who haven't endorsed so far are, I think, Biden
and Kucinich.)
- The Senate passed
the farm bill.
- George W. Bush baited Barack Obama
into a three-way battle on foreign policy with John McCain. One of
these guys, of course, would pop Cristal if his approval rating
broke 30 percent.
- The Huckabee for vice president
boomlet came to a thudding end.
- Mike Gravel and Wayne Allyn Root
debated on Fox Business:
Below the Fold
- The people behind "Stop Her
Now," claiming they've "cancelled her show," launch "Stop Him
Now."
- Congress's lone atheist endorses
Obama.
- RiShawn Biddle takes on
the black church.
- Bill Kauffman
reviews Ron Paul.
- Wayne Allyn Root, Bob Barr, and three other LP candidates get
profiled (briefly) by Fortune.
- J. Patrick Coolican talks
with Rick Perlstein, author of the brilliant
Nixonland.
- FDR never talked to Hitler, except
when he did.
- Brian Beutler accuses McCain
of selling out vets.
I couldn't find a copy of the Robert Fripp-produced and enhanced
"Hammond Song" by the Roches, so he's a folkier version for
Politics 'n' Prog.
SATURDAY UPDATE: Bob Barr responds to Mike Huckabee:
Mike Huckabee showed incredibly poor taste when he joked about a gun pointed at Senator Barack Obama. His words were reckless, callous and harmful to the sports men and women of America and to those of us who fully support the Second Amendment.
Every candidate for public office inflames the passions of people who fervently disagree with them. To suggest, as Governor Huckabee did, the misuse of a fire arm toward a political candidate is reckless. His attitude toward proper, legal and safe use of fire arms was demeaning to all of us who advocate the right to bear arms. His reprehensible use of a threatening and violent scenario involving a firearm at the NRA's National Convention was vile beyond belief.
I call on all supporters of the Second Amendment and all supporters of civil discourse in our political races to demand a public apology from Governor Huckabee.
He knows whereof he speaks.
Elemenope|5.16.08 @ 6:03PM|#
FDR never talked to Hitler, except when he did.
A judicious application of salt in the wounds of
historically-misinformed retards; well done.
|5.16.08 @ 6:10PM|#
This just in: Huckabee jokes about Obama diving for cover because someone is aiming a gun at him. Remarks are made at an NRA fundraiser.
Kolohe|5.16.08 @ 6:11PM|#
When FDR talked to Hitler, McCain was almost 2 years old. And
Obama's *mother* hadn't even been born yet.
The only point of the sentences above is to link to this.
My latest favorite: The area code is younger than John McCain.
Kolohe|5.16.08 @ 6:15PM|#
I reversed Aug and Sept when I looked at the dates, McCain had already had his 2nd birthday when the telegram was sent.
|5.16.08 @ 6:25PM|#
I'm no fan of FDR, but I have to admire his use of language in
that document.
It is clear without oversimplification, does not attempt to
intimidate, and does not contain bluster.
One wishes that either the current president or any of his would be
successors were half so eloquent.
Jorgen|5.16.08 @ 6:32PM|#
Why does anyone take Wayne Allen Root seriously? His whole candidacy is based on the idea that he's the only one who can communicate effectively, but listening to him talk makes me want to smash my own head in with a hammer.
JimmyChanga|5.16.08 @ 7:01PM|#
listening to him talk makes me want to smash my own head in with a hammer
Effectiveness: judge only by the amazing results.
Plant Immigration RIghts Suppo|5.16.08 @ 7:54PM|#
"The two points I sought to emphasize were, first, that all
matters of difference between the German Government and the
Czechoslovak Government could and should be settled by pacific
methods; and, second, that the threatened alternative of the use of
force on a scale likely to result in a general war is as
unnecessary as it is unjustifiable. It is, therefore, supremely
important that negotiations should continue without interruption
until a fair and constructive solution is reached."
Damn Neville Chamberlain - oh wait - I forgot, that is FDR. It's OK
then I guess.
Plant Immigration Rights Suppo|5.16.08 @ 7:57PM|#
"The Government of the United States has no political
involvements in Europe, and will assume no obligations in the
conduct of the present negotiations."
How odd it is to read those words.
jtuf|5.16.08 @ 7:57PM|#
Some of people make a big deal about age during elections, but I don't buy it. Remember, don't trust anyone over 30? Now it's don't trust anyone over 70. I'm sure around 2015 the newspapers will be full of articles about how fit people in their 70's can be.
Adolf Hitler|5.16.08 @ 7:58PM|#
I suppose it's okay to admit it now: Franklin and I were gay lovers.
The People\'s Righteous Friday|5.16.08 @ 8:09PM|#
1. Dave Weigel should get drunk and then ask McCain about
one of his fun foreign links.
2. Then, he should take a cab to a BHO appearance and ask Obama
one of these questions.
3. Then, he should top up and ask Bob Barr why
he sounds like McCain on McCain's most vulnerable issue.
4. The preceeding three suggestions will, of course, never happen.
Weigel is no MaxBlumenthal!
4. Prog sufferers will note that RickWakeman used to dress
like this, he just didn't look anywhere near as good.
Squeal|5.16.08 @ 8:46PM|#
I can't wait to hear Neil when the ads come out attacking drug-addict-thief Cindy McCain. The wives are fair game now, right?
|5.16.08 @ 8:49PM|#
For the entire adult lives of every Republican holding office,
all they had to do was raise military or foreign policy issues in a
way that cast aspersions on the Democrats, and they carried the
day.
And now it doesn't work.
What happens to a one-trick pony when it can't do it's trick
anymore?
Plant Immigration Rights Suppo|5.16.08 @ 8:54PM|#
"I can't wait to hear Neil when the ads come out attacking
drug-addict-thief Cindy McCain. The wives are fair game now,
right?"
One way John McCain could deal with this is to come out against the
War on Drugs and cite personal experience with the unintended
consequences of the Drug War as what opened his eyes on that
issue.
Elemenope|5.16.08 @ 9:20PM|#
One way John McCain could deal with this is to come out
against the War on Drugs and cite personal experience with the
unintended consequences of the Drug War as what opened his eyes on
that issue.
But he won't, because this isn't Bizarro America.
Travis|5.16.08 @ 9:47PM|#
"Adolf Hitler | May 16, 2008, 7:58pm | #
I suppose it's okay to admit it now: Franklin and I were gay
lovers."
I knew it! A country full of hot german chics & Hitler goes for
a old crippled man.
|5.16.08 @ 10:23PM|#
I can deal with an obsession about MexicanInvaders. I can deal with an obsession about Boston Market cornbread. But Natalie Merchant, now that is what I call aural terrorism.
BakedPenguin|5.16.08 @ 11:33PM|#
...think [Obama is] responsible for bringing millions of new voters, new Democrats into the party, and I haven't seen that kind of movement among young voters since I first ran and saw (George) McGovern do the same thing in 1972...
Wow. I don't know if that's the best example for Pete Stark to
use.
|5.17.08 @ 1:26AM|#
Well, here is why I could never vote for Obama then. I actually
didn't dislike the guy that much before this.
From the link:
Obama supports extending the assault weapons ban, limits on gun
sales, and a national law against carrying concealed weapons, with
exceptions for retired police and military personnel.
|5.17.08 @ 1:39AM|#
Travis | May 16, 2008, 9:47pm | #
"Adolf Hitler | May 16, 2008, 7:58pm | #
I suppose it's okay to admit it now: Franklin and I were gay
lovers."
I knew it! A country full of hot german chics & Hitler goes for
a old crippled man.
Well, they were pretty with their clothes on and all, but they had
nasty hairy armpits, and big hairy unkempt bush.
Every watch any old school European porn? It is not pretty.
|5.17.08 @ 1:44AM|#
The studio version of the Hammond Song - with fripperies - is
available from You Tube. nothing to look at except the album cover
- so not much fun to look at - but it does exist.
roches never equaled that first album as a trio.
|5.17.08 @ 2:29AM|#
I just watched the debate between Wayne Allen Root, and Gravel.
Man that was about a disappointing debate. Various orders of
magnitude more disappointing that Ron Paul's most disappointing
debate performance.
And I was very disappointed by many of Ron Paul's debate
performances.
Seriously those two said NOTHING. I don't think anyone anywhere was
interested in what they were talking about.
|5.17.08 @ 2:39AM|#
Edward, why the vitriol?
I didn't insult your favorite ambulance chaser for president.
Are you disappointed that I won't be voting for Obama?
Or that I think the Bill of Rights is important? Like maybe a
constitutional scholar should have read the constitution?
Or maybe you are married to a hairy German chick? Aah, yes, if that
is what floats your boat, more power too you.
shecky|5.17.08 @ 2:51AM|#
Kwais:
Does Obama actually support those things? I know the CNN page says
so, but one thing I've noted so far from him is the general lack of
specifics regarding gun control issues, this would seem a major
revelation. I'm wondering if that was just a laundry list of
standard rallying cries from the NRA convention, instead.
|5.17.08 @ 3:34AM|#
On the issues: Obama
on gun control.
Doesn't sound like your kind of guy, kwais.
|5.17.08 @ 6:05AM|#
Why does Reason sponsor a debate regarding the Libertarian
Party's presidential nomination without inviting any of the actual
libertarians seeking the nomination?
Instead you pick a Leftist, a neocon and a theocon. No
libertarians. This is the first time I've really be disappointed
with you guys.
|5.17.08 @ 10:20AM|#
Obama now has ads in Montana touting his devotion to preserving
some nebulous "western way of life." An obvious reference to guns;
it's all about the "sportsmen."
Somehow, I suspect if you asked him point-blank(!) if he favors the
individual's right to keep a handgun in easy reach, he would run,
stuttering and stammering, for the hills.
|5.17.08 @ 10:24AM|#
kwais,
I don't think any new gun control laws are in the cards, regardless
of Barack Obama's personal opinions. The Democrats owe their
majority to pro-gun candidates in the mountain west, southwest,
midwest, and the outlying areas of blue states.
I also wouldn't take anyone's prognostications about his position
on issues at face value. He's spend the primary season being the
cipher, so people just project their own opinions onto him,
favorable or un-.
|5.17.08 @ 10:46AM|#
It sounds to me like Obama's main concern with guns is stopping
all the inner-city shootings. He doesn't sound like a Brady-style
anti-gun crusader type. His rhetoric sounds pretty
reasonable.
However, the bottom line is "how does he vote" - and his track
record there is pretty definitively anti-gun. Perhaps he'll
moderate his views now that he's seeking to represent rural/western
people as well as inner-city Chicagoans, but it would be wishful
thinking at this point to count on that.
I don't think gun legislation is a high priority for Obama, but if
an overwhelmingly democratic congress passes some harsh anti-gun
legislation, it's a pretty fair bet that he'd sign it.
|5.17.08 @ 11:19AM|#
Meanwhile, the Pentagon is planning to spend sixty million dollars building a big new prison in Afghanistan; a monument to American exceptionalism, one might say.
|5.17.08 @ 11:36AM|#
I can't wait to hear Neil when the ads come out attacking
drug-addict-thief Cindy McCain. The wives are fair game now,
right?
The London blitz ----> Dresden.
Yeah, it's gonna get really ugly. The McCain Feingold
Campaign Finance Reform Incumbent Protection Act is
partly responsible for the coarsening of political advertising.
|5.17.08 @ 11:52AM|#
I don't think gun legislation is a high priority for Obama,
but if an overwhelmingly democratic congress passes some harsh
anti-gun legislation, it's a pretty fair bet that he'd sign
it.
Nancy Pelosi would never allow that to happen.
|5.17.08 @ 12:00PM|#
Obama could lock up the election tomorrow, if he gave even a moderately-pro-gun policy speech. Expand on his vision of the 2nd Amendment as protecting an individual right, and explaining the limits that such a right puts on that "common sense gun regulation" he likes to make vague references to.
Guy Montag|5.17.08 @ 2:51PM|#
Anybody have anything on FDR having an open dialogue with any of
the Axis Power leaders after Germany began sinking American ships
in the North Atlantic on the way to England?
Especially interested in any dialogue with Hitler after 11 Sep.
1941.
Thanks in advance!
Elemenope|5.17.08 @ 3:46PM|#
Anybody have anything on FDR having an open dialogue with
any of the Axis Power leaders after Germany began sinking American
ships in the North Atlantic on the way to England?
I normally wouldn't say this to anyone (but Neil), but you, sir,
are a fucking idiot.
No, we did not have top level (i.e. FDR did not fucking visit
Germany during WWII) talks with a country who was perpetrating
blatant casus belli. Which, idiot, is nothing at all like what
Obama is suggesting he would do.
However, oddly enough, we *did* have top level talks with Japan
right up until Pearl Harbor. Oops, was that the sound of your
idiotic historical parallel being deflated like a blown-up condom
which got pinholed? I think it was.
SIV|5.17.08 @ 4:12PM|#
# Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:Ban the sale
or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.
Well that should increase sales of doubles after the ban.
Travis|5.17.08 @ 4:22PM|#
"joe - he's soft on the Second Amendment! Soft!"
It's a stupid position for Obama to take the gun control folks are
going to vote for him anyway. Most people including democrats and
independents are against gun control. If McCain is smart he will
exploit this issue.
|5.17.08 @ 4:44PM|#
Elemenope - well, to the neocons, we cannot delineate and define
our "enemies"...if you talk to Iran, well, because Iran has *some*
radical Islamist leaders, that means You're Talking to The
Terrorists...because, you know, the Middle East is just one angry,
nebulous Brown Arab Mass of Hostile Forces, doncha know.
Seriously, Guy, no one said anything about sitting down and talking
to Osama Bin Laden, did they?
|5.17.08 @ 4:46PM|#
That was a stupid thing for Huckabee to say, but it obviously
wasn't premeditated or malicious.
He made a stupid joke, realized it flopped, tried to make it
topical for his audience, and stuck his foot in his mouth.
You can tell, watching the video, that he knew it as soon as the
words were out of his mouth.
|5.17.08 @ 4:51PM|#
Because piling on Tuff Gai is so much fun:
Anybody have anything on FDR having an open dialogue with any
of the Axis Power leaders after Germany began sinking American
ships in the North Atlantic on the way to England?
We had open diplomatic relations with Sweden, Switzerland, and
Turkey - each of whom provided services to Germany throughout the
war - throughout the war.
And since Iran isn't actually at war with us, just providing
support for parties in Iraq, some of whom are at war with us,
that's the more appropriate parallel.
I love this debate. It's like watching a fat kid who used to be
able to dive scream "Look at me everyone, look at me!" and then
belly-flop off the ten-meter platform.
Neil|5.17.08 @ 5:50PM|#
Obama is squishy soft on terror Joe.
He wants dialogue with Iran--a country that wants to wipe Israel
off the map and whose President called Israel a "stinking corpse"
and whose buildings in their capital city have DEATH TO THE USA
printed on their sides.
I know you and your Democrat Party thinks is all one big
misunderstanding but we are realists and know there are many evil
leaders in this world who actually do mean what they say when they
threaten us harm.
Obama=Carter.
Neil|5.17.08 @ 5:51PM|#
Was there any dailogue with Hitler after he started sinking our
ships in the Atlantic Joe?
Tell us. Did he talk after that?
This is before the DOW on Germany, mind you.
Find one example. ONE!
Neil|5.17.08 @ 5:57PM|#
Hey Joe Gallup Tracking today McCain +2 and tied in Rasmussen
Tracking.
So much for your Obama surge, McCain and Bush's speech must've
worked!!
|5.17.08 @ 7:21PM|#
"And since Iran isn't actually at war with us, just providing
support for parties in Iraq, some of whom are at war with us,
that's the more appropriate parallel."
"Seriously, Guy, no one said anything about sitting down and
talking to Osama Bin Laden, did they?"
Yeah, I thought Obama's point was that we would talk to Iran,
Syria, Cuba, and the like. Not so much those who we are directly
"at war" with.
But you know what? Wouldn't it be fucktarded not to talk even to
people we are at war with? For example, the Israeli's and the PLO
must have talked sometimes, they would initiate prisoner exchanges
and what not. I for one hope we talk to our friends, enemies and
everyone. I can't see how that would hurt our interests...
"Obama=Carter."
Man I hope so, Carter is a great American. When he was President we
did not have thousands of American boys dead or the Constitution
fucked right up the ass on a daily basis...He also seems to be a
Christian, which would be nice in a President for a change...
|5.17.08 @ 7:23PM|#
"Hey Joe Gallup Tracking today McCain +2 and tied in Rasmussen
Tracking.
So much for your Obama surge, McCain and Bush's speech must've
worked!!"
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/
Neil, WTF are you talking about?
Elemenope|5.17.08 @ 7:33PM|#
I know you and your Democrat Party thinks is all one big
misunderstanding but we are realists and know there are many evil
leaders in this world who actually do mean what they say
when they threaten us harm.
What are they gonna do? Switch out our falafel with a less tasty
and filling substitute?
Honestly, intending someone harm has nothing to do with having *the
ability* to do that person harm. Talking with countries that are so
weak that a single aircraft carrier could obliterate their entire
armed forces before dinner is *never* a threat to our security. (I
mean, geez, the only difficulties we've even had have to do with
*invading and occupying*, which is not necessary if you just wish
to set the country on fire.)
Unless we give them the super secret codes to Area 51 or something.
Then there might be a problem.
Elemenope|5.17.08 @ 7:39PM|#
He also seems to be a Christian, which would be nice in a
President for a change...
I maintain that true fidelity to Christian principles is
unavoidably incompatible with the duties of national office.
Mostly, to be president you have to be a shitty Christian, both in
getting the job and in doing the job.
B|5.17.08 @ 7:46PM|#
"George W. Bush baited Barack Obama into a three-way battle on
foreign policy with John McCain. One of these guys, of course,
would pop Cristal if his approval rating broke 30 percent"
Whoowhoowhooo, non sequitur alert. Whoowhoowhoo non sequitur
alert.
B|5.17.08 @ 7:55PM|#
"For the entire adult lives of every Republican holding office,
all they had to do was raise military or foreign policy issues in a
way that cast aspersions on the Democrats, and they carried the
day."
Joe, you are such a fucking dummy, why do you even bother to wake
up in the morning? The generalizations you make are so fucking
broad, they are fucking worthless, just like you. Exactly where did
you earn that masters you used to brag about? Beverly Hills
Upstairs College? I remember back in 1994 when the Republicans
swept into office because they capitalized on national security
fears. Oh wait, that didn't happen, once again proving that you
don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, you fucking
nitwit.
Not to mention you are wrong, unless one believes you instead of
about ten polls that show McCain has more than a 2:1 lead when
people are asked about who is trusted more on national security.
Who knew that promising to sit down and lunch with tyrants could
make one look like an ass on the issue of how best to secure the
United States?
B|5.17.08 @ 7:59PM|#
"What are they gonna do? Switch out our falafel with a less
tasty and filling substitute?"
Hahahahahaah, yeah, because those 3000 people killed seven years
ago by a STATE-sponsored terrorist group all died of rapid-onset
food poisoning.
Hahahahaah, you hilarious comedian you.
|5.17.08 @ 8:07PM|#
However, the bottom line is "how does he vote" - and his
track record there is pretty definitively anti-gun. Perhaps he'll
moderate his views now that he's seeking to represent rural/western
people as well as inner-city Chicagoans, but it would be wishful
thinking at this point to count on that.
Ummm, if you look at the blue population spikes on
this map
and note that Clinton generally thumped Obama in the rural, red
areas of this map and lost the big cities to him, Obama likely
knows who his base supporters are and will pander to them -- which
means trashing the Second Amendment if given the chance.
Neu Mejican|5.17.08 @ 8:08PM|#
Some music that has the organ included...
http://cdbaby.com/cd/mrgriddles
|5.17.08 @ 8:08PM|#
" because those 3000 people killed seven years ago by a
STATE-sponsored terrorist group all died of rapid-onset food
poisoning."
Hey B, which STATE sponsored that hit? Afghanistan (yes)? Saudi
Arabia (maybe). Iraq (almost certainly not)? Iran (nope)? The
Palestiniant Authority (whoops, not a state, eh?)?
Now, who is Obama talking about talking to?
I have a premonition that you have little answer to this, so let me
go ahead and use this response, borrowed from you:
"Hahahahahaah"
|5.17.08 @ 8:12PM|#
It sounds to me like Obama's main concern with guns is
stopping all the inner-city shootings. He doesn't sound like a
Brady-style anti-gun crusader type. His rhetoric sounds pretty
reasonable.
Because, you know, disarming law-abiding innner-city residents so
they can't defend themselves against criminals toting illegal
firearms has resulted in Washington D.C. having the country's
lowest gun homicide rate.
/sarcasm
|5.17.08 @ 8:13PM|#
"Not to mention you are wrong, unless one believes you instead
of about ten polls that show McCain has more than a 2:1 lead when
people are asked about who is trusted more on national security.
Who knew that promising to sit down and lunch with tyrants could
make one look like an ass on the issue of how best to secure the
United States?"
You know, joe would probably say this, but let me say it first for
a change: go ahead and count on that strategy (and, uh, this is
joe's point). Count on the "Republicans are more trusted on foriegn
policy and national security issues." Shit, I'm on record that
Obama is a bad candidate for us, but if you think the GOP can
easily trump the Dems on these issues, post-the Iraq screw up, then
good luck buddy. Good luck...
|5.17.08 @ 8:15PM|#
prolfeed
Do you deny that the above average gun availibility in the US has
something to do with the above average homicide rate in the US?
Elemenope|5.17.08 @ 8:16PM|#
Hahahahaah, you hilarious comedian you.
Why, thank you!
Is it too early for the AIDS jokes?
Travis|5.17.08 @ 8:22PM|#
"Do you deny that the above average gun availibility in the US
has something to do with the above average homicide rate in the
US?"
As opposed to the above average homicide rates in Maynamar &
China?
|5.17.08 @ 8:28PM|#
Table 15.4: Homicide Rates per 100,000 people. Country
Rate
Lithuania 10.6
Latvia 6.5
United States 5.6
Bulgaria 3.9
Finland 2.9
Turkey 2.7
Czech Repub. 2.5
Hungary 2.3
Poland 2.1
Australia 1.9
Belgium 1.8
France 1.7
United Kingdom 1.7
Netherlands 1.5
Greece 1.4
Austria 1.2
Portugal 1.2
Germany 1.2
Spain 1.1
Switzerland 1.1
Norway 0.9
Source: Home Office Statistical Bulletin, 2003.
Elemenope|5.17.08 @ 8:28PM|#
MNG -
Switzerland and Israel (both with higher gun availability than US)
seem to do just fine.
Much as it pains me to say it, M. Moore's Bowling for
Columbine was on to something when it said that no one factor
can really explain the high incidence of violence (gun or
otherwise) in the US. It cannot be explained entirely by incidence
of gun ownership, racial or ethnic tension, cultural affinity for
violence, population density...but it is likely that each of these
and many more besides factor into why USians off each other at
ridiculous rates while equally or better-armed analogues in other
countries are not so homicide-prone.
Ali|5.17.08 @ 8:42PM|#
I haven't read all comments, but...
MNG-
How do you explain that VT has the lowest crime rates (I do not
have a reference, but it was mentioned on a NHPR show re gun
control) in the nation despite the fact that they have the least
gun control measures in the entire nation. In fact, the only gun
laws there are the ones litigated by the federal government. And
they do not enforce them, I think.
|5.17.08 @ 9:17PM|#
So, the probability of being a homicide victim is .004% higher in the US than in the UK (where handgun ownership is totally banned).
Guy Montag|5.17.08 @ 9:20PM|#
Wow E and A_R, hit a nerve there?
I normally wouldn't say this to anyone (but Neil), but you,
sir, are a fucking idiot.
No, we did not have top level (i.e. FDR did not fucking visit
Germany during WWII) talks with a country who was perpetrating
blatant casus belli. Which, idiot, is nothing at all like what
Obama is suggesting he would do.
However, oddly enough, we *did* have top level talks with Japan
right up until Pearl Harbor. Oops, was that the sound of your
idiotic historical parallel being deflated like a blown-up condom
which got pinholed? I think it was.
Who the hell said anything about visiting Germany? The eveidence
was presented that FDR sent a cable to Germany in 1938. I simply
asked (apparently, much too simply for you two to understand) if
FDR had talks with Hitler after Hitler was sinking our ships in the
North Atlantic. Unstated in my comment, but you know, like the way
Iran is supplying weapons right now to the insurgents.
So, if you bother to respond, please take a breath and respond as
if you are not on some sort of hormone therapy, like you did
earlier.
Quite simply, did FDR bother to chat with Hitler after Hitler was
attacking us.
Pretty easy deal there boys. Please refrain from your girlie
fits.
Guy Montag|5.17.08 @ 9:25PM|#
Ali,
How do you explain that VT has the lowest crime rates (I do not
have a reference, but it was mentioned on a NHPR show re gun
control) in the nation despite the fact that they have the least
gun control measures in the entire nation. In fact, the only gun
laws there are the ones litigated by the federal government. And
they do not enforce them, I think.
The stupid answer I got to that from some DC residents and a fed
cop about a decade ago had something to do with average population
intelligence. Then the DC guys got mad when I asked if rural VT
folk were incredibly more inteligent than retards from DC.
|5.17.08 @ 9:26PM|#
Also, I wouldn't be surprised if a large percentage of homocides in the US are related to the illegal drug trade. If so, we could chalk up a lot of the homocide difference to our drug laws.
Guy Montag|5.17.08 @ 9:27PM|#
Elemenope | May 17, 2008, 8:28pm,
Earth shattering news, E has something nice to say about
Israel!
|5.17.08 @ 9:57PM|#
Elemenope-I like Bowling for Columbine for exactly the same
reason: in a lot ways it is a "failed" movie, but as a movie that
suggests that something like Columbine is very complicated and not
amendable to easy answers, it is a great movie (whether it realizes
it or not!).
Israel and Switzerland, as you know, actually have gun ownership in
a very regulated way (most folks go through a militia
training).
I'm for gun rights. I think the interesting fact is, as I read in a
Wayne LaPierre book, 95%+ of legal gun owners in the US will never
do a crime with a gun...So making laws against that group, based on
the small percentage of folks who WILL abuse the gun laws in a way
that hurts people, makes little sense...
But it seems to me crazy to deny the empirical fact that the US is
a nation with a lot of guns AND a nation with a very high homicide
rate.
Those two seem obviously connected.
My problem is that so many people want their cake and to eat it
too: we have lots of liberty about guns AND we have much less gun
related crime.
That simply ain't true from everything I've read....
|5.17.08 @ 10:01PM|#
"Guy Montag | May 17, 2008, 9:27pm | #
Elemenope | May 17, 2008, 8:28pm,
Earth shattering news, E has something nice to say about
Israel!"
Remember what I've said about this:
You agree 100% with Israeli policy at whatever time: OK, you are
OK.
You don't agree with Israeli policy, no matter what small degree:
You are an anti-Semite who wants Jews to be eaten by
Cerebrus.
That's Guy's reasoning. What intellectual nuance...
You GO GUY! Go! Intellectual honesty is overrated, you're SPEAKING
FOR THE GOOD GUYS!
|5.17.08 @ 10:10PM|#
"Quite simply, did FDR bother to chat with Hitler after Hitler
was attacking us."
Uhh, Guy, did we talk with N. Korea after they had killed literally
thousands of our boys (I think we did, don't you?).
Did the U.S. have any diplomatic channels with Germany prior to
Pearl Harbor (which did not even involve the Germans)? None?
"Unstated in my comment, but you know, like the way Iran is
supplying weapons right now to the insurgents."
A nation whose military directly attacks your nation, and one which
sells a weapon that your enemy then uses upon your forces, which
happen to be occupying a neighboring nation, is the same thing,
eh?
|5.17.08 @ 10:16PM|#
prolfeed
Do you deny that the above average gun availibility in the US has
something to do with the above average homicide rate in the
US?
MNG -- Do you deny that the higher gun ownership rate in Canada
compared to the United States has something to do with the lower
homicide rate in Canada compared to the US?
Do you think that we should ignore any parts of the Constitution if
cherry-picked statistics would appear to show correlation (albeit
not exactly causation) for some posited negative consequence?
Are you willing to gut the First Amendment right to free speech
because the much average freedom to criticize others in the U.S. is
correlated to a much higher homicide rate, and someone posits that
this free speech angers the recipients and causes them to be more
likely to kill others in revenge?
There also is a higher statistical correlation between the
disproportionately high number of lawyers per capita in the U.S.
and the homicide rate. If I were to posit that the high
availability of defense attorneys encouraged homicides because it
increases the likelihood of getting acquitted, would you be willing
to remove the right to an attorney, gut the Fifth Amendment, and
dispense with Miranda rights?
|5.17.08 @ 10:26PM|#
MNG -- There appears to be a very strong statistical correlation
between carrying the XY chromosome pairing and homicide rates.
Should we pre-emptively deport or imprison all those people with XY
chromosome pairings in order to get lower homicide rates?
There appears to be a strong correlation between minorities and
urban living versus homicide rates. Do you propose bulldozing urban
cores and forcibly relocating those residents to the countryside?
How about preemptively deporting all those citizens who are
minorities because of that statistical correlation?
Are you willing to dispense with any Constitutional or civil rights
whenever a more or less plausible-sounding causation can be dredged
up to explain a statistical correlation?
Neil|5.17.08 @ 10:32PM|#
MNG Can you fucking read?
The very link you sent me says
Gallup Tracking: McCain +3
Rasmussen Tracking: McCain +1
Carer a great American? LOL and Chamberlain was a great Englishman!
Carter was a complete total and utter failure as President.
|5.17.08 @ 10:34PM|#
prolfeed
1. Are there more guns per person in Canada than in the US? You'll
have to provide me with some cites for that...
http://www.gallup.com/poll/7381/Right-Bear-Arms-US-Canada.aspx
2. "Do you think that we should ignore any parts of the
Constitution if cherry-picked statistics would appear to show
correlation (albeit not exactly causation) for some posited
negative consequence?" No, I'm just not sure the Constitution calls
for individual gun rights (you gotta admit its an unclearly worded
Amendment, as a gun owner I wish it were clearer!)
3. "Are you willing to gut the First Amendment right to free speech
because the much average freedom to criticize others in the U.S. is
correlated to a much higher homicide rate" I doubt you have any
evidence there.
But hey, prolfeed, I agree with you. Even if it were shown that
higher rates of gun ownership causes more bad outcomes, I would
still be against most gun control laws, because I think whether a
person uses a gun badly or well (i.e., self defense) cannot be
predicted on an individual level. If it were shown (as it could)
that blacks were more likely to committ crimes than whites, should
we have different procedures for the fromer than the latter? Of
course not, as these averages say little if nothing about any
individual...
My point is this: let's not pretend that allowing high levels of
gun ownership in the US makes the crime rate lower (or the homicide
rate lower). It actually makes the murder rate much higher, and
that's just facts...
|5.17.08 @ 10:43PM|#
Neil
You understand what an average is, yes (or is an average a liberal
mathematical plot to discredit the conservative candidate?).
Here it is:
Poll Date Sample Obama (D) McCain (R) Spread
RCP Average 05/07 - 05/16 -- 46.8 43.8 Obama +3.0
C'mon, I think Obama is a bad pick for us, but even in the middle
of a hotly contested nomination process he is 3 percentage points
ahead of your guy. You're just cherry picking results you agree
with here.
You heard my points about Carter, supra, if you have some specific
arguments to refute them, then make them. How many Americans died
under Carter, compared to Bush II? How much taxpayer money did
Carter spend relative to Bush II? Did Carter bend the Constitution
over and fuck it like a bitch like Bush II has?
Make your points my faggoty friend (I mean Neil).
Neil|5.17.08 @ 10:46PM|#
MNG that "average" includes polls like the WaPo poll which just
includes "adults" not even registered or likely voters just
"Adults".
The NYT/CBS poll is alsoo included. Thats a liberal-lefty
organization and shouldnt be trusted. Remember Rathergate MNG??
Remember Rathergate? Huh? Remember the MS Word "document" from
1970? LOL!
The average is clearly much closer to the Rasmussen/Gallup.
Poor Hussein still can't build a lead. Call a
Waaaaaaaaaambulance!
|5.17.08 @ 11:00PM|#
MNG,
It actually makes the murder rate much higher, and that's just
facts...
1. It's not "much higher". It's a difference of about 4 per
100,000, that is, 0.004%.
2. You still haven't proven the causation here, beyond asserting
that it's "obvious" and "just facts". If analysis showed that knife
ownership was higher in Lithuania than the US, would that prove
that widespread knife ownership increases the murder rate?
Neil|5.17.08 @ 11:00PM|#
I hope you liberal Democrat Party members remember
Rathergate.
Because it was the most influential moment of the last decade next
to 9/11. It finally exposed the liberal media for what it is and
pointed the folks towards more fair and balanced options. And
finally go that Democrat apologist Dan Rather fired! YEAH!
|5.17.08 @ 11:02PM|#
Neil
The Fox News poll is included, odd huh? Fox is way worse than CBS
could ever be imagined...Remember the CBS newsman that went on to
be the Democratic Press Secretary? No? Neither do I (Tony Snowe).
Or the Democratic official who became the President of CBS? No?
Neither do I (Roger Ailes, President of "Fair and Balanced" Fox
News.) Yeah, it's all the same, eh?
|5.17.08 @ 11:04PM|#
I hope you liberal Democrat Party members remember Rathergate.
Because it was the most influential moment of the last decade next to 9/11.
No way. Steve Bartman trying to catch that foul ball was way more
significant.
Neil|5.17.08 @ 11:07PM|#
I dont see any Fox News in the recent average.
Read Bernie Goldberg's book MNG.
He will tell you all you need to know about the liberal Democrat
media and their liberal bias.
Like Rathergate? Still, remember Rathergate MNG? Huh? Tell me what
Rathergate was MNG. Tell me now.
|5.17.08 @ 11:13PM|#
Chris
The US Murder rate is over 3 times the rate of a nation with a
comparable level of development.
Add to that that the majority of our murders are committed with a
gun.
http://www.albany.edu/sourcebook/pdf/t31182006.pdf
And add to that we have way more guns per person than Belgium (or
etc.) and do you really think there is no connection at all here?
Jesus...
Uhh, Neil, can you address the specific points I made concerning
FoxNews direct connections with teh GOP? Are or you, in truth, a
faggot?
Neil|5.17.08 @ 11:16PM|#
Tell me all about Rathergate MNG.
Tell me.
BTW, as Orin Hatch said, "The Democrat Party is the Party of
Homosexuality".
|5.17.08 @ 11:17PM|#
Do you have any connections between CBS or any of the
"so-called" liberal media and the Democratic Party like the ones I
have provided between Fox and the GOP? No?
Who got fired at Fox for the bullshit SwiftBoat reporting? No one?
Yes, because unlike CBS FOX will not fire anyone who is acting
against journalistic standards (that is why they hired them in the
first place!)
Take a break from the taste of cum (GOP flavored, a la Mark Foley,
I'm sure) and speak up on this.
|5.17.08 @ 11:21PM|#
"as Orin Hatch said, "The Democrat Party is the Party of
Homosexuality"."
I don't think there is anything wrong with that (a la
Sienfeld).
But you have to admit, the GOP seems full of famous queers lately
(Larry Craig, Mark Foley). The diffference: do as I say, not as I
do (GOP Motto)
Neil|5.17.08 @ 11:21PM|#
Rathergate proves the liberal Democrat bias in the MSM.
Again, have you ever read Bernie Goldnerg (former CBS
employee?)
Even Andy Rooney himself admitted CBS has a liberal Democrat Party
bias.
Hey, what about Barney "Fag" Frank? LOL!
|5.17.08 @ 11:24PM|#
MNG,
The US Murder rate is over 3 times the rate of a nation with a
comparable level of development.
Three times a tiny number is still a tiny number. You're five times
more likely to get struck by lightning than you are to win a state
lottery; that doesn't mean we need legislation to address the
dangers of lightning strikes.
So, if a country with higher rates of knife ownership also has a
higher murder rate, does that mean that knife ownership causes
higher murder rates? Knives have as much to do with murder as
guns.
|5.17.08 @ 11:49PM|#
No, I'm just not sure the Constitution calls for individual
gun rights (you gotta admit its an unclearly worded Amendment, as a
gun owner I wish it were clearer!)
I have to admit no such thing. It is quite clearly worded -- "A
well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be
infringed."
It gives individuals the right to bear arms, and says that right
shall not be infringed, and explains that the primary purpose of
the amendment is to allow individuals to band together in armed,
well-trained militias to assert their freedom against would-be
oppressors trying to take away their various freedoms.
The "confusion" has arisen from people who find this radical
assertion of individual freedom to bear arms to stop tyranny:
1) inconvenient
and
2) impossible to rescind via amending the wording using the
procedures spelled out in the Constitution.
|5.17.08 @ 11:59PM|#
"I hope you liberal Democrat Party members remember
Rathergate."
Actually, except for a few die-hard far right loons, most people
have forgotten it. It's certainly not the definitive media event of
this decade, or whatever hyperbole you're using to describe it. It
was a nothing story then, and it's less than a nothing story
now.
Tangentially: whenever I see the acronym 'MSM' used unironically, I
automatically lose respect for the person using it. Bloggers who
think they're being persecuted by the major media outlets... need a
hobby. Other than blogging.
(Also, fake edit: did you seriously just use the word 'fag' to
refer to a member of Congress?)
|5.18.08 @ 12:03AM|#
On further thought, I want to discuss this a bit more.
"Hey, what about Barney "Fag" Frank? LOL!"
This, to me, is identical to saying 'Hey, what about Barack
"Nigger" Obama? LOL!'
On any forum I have moderated, it would be an instant banning
offense.
|5.18.08 @ 12:06AM|#
"Hey, what about Barney "Fag" Frank? LOL!"
This, to me, is identical to saying 'Hey, what about Barack
"Nigger" Obama? LOL!'
On any forum I have moderated, it would be an instant banning
offense.
Fortunately, those who moderate this forum have seen fit to
preserve the right of posters to be obnoxious pricks -- a right I
heartily endorse, even if in practice it gets a bit messy.
|5.18.08 @ 1:35AM|#
Also, I wouldn't be surprised if a large percentage of
homocides in the US are related to the illegal drug trade. If so,
we could chalk up a lot of the homocide difference to our drug
laws.
I don't think so. Most countries out there have similar or stricter
drug laws than we do.
It might have something to do with the way we enforce drug laws
though.
|5.18.08 @ 1:37AM|#
prolfeed
Do you deny that the above average gun availibility in the US has
something to do with the above average homicide rate in the
US?
MNG
I do indeed deny that.
I am going to guess it has more to do with single parent
families.
tarran|5.18.08 @ 2:43AM|#
Actually, the number of murders committed using guns are
actually a subset of the far more critical source of violence:
hands.
Almost every murder committed in the U.S. is committed by a person
who uses their hands to effect the murder.
Why stop at half measures? We need a ban on hands. If we amputate
everybody's hands below the wrist, we can ave a safer society
without worrying about infringing on their right to bear arms,
since the arm is typically thought to end at the wrist.
Guy Montag|5.18.08 @ 4:22AM|#
Wow, drama night at H&R.
Okay, anybody rational have any info on the "dialogue" between the
US and Germany past the 1938 memo mentioned above?
What about with Italy? You know, the Axis power that ended up
voting out and jailing their leader before their mainland was
invaded.
Also, anybody want to expand on how well those open diplomatic
channels with Japan worked out, beyond it being a convenient way
for their diplomats to be sitting outside the office of the
President with a bit-too-late declairation of war in hand while
bombs were falling on Pearl Harbor?
Thanks in advance!
Shout out to Kasey Kahne, 2008 Sprint Cup All-Star Race
winner!!!
Guy Montag|5.18.08 @ 5:07AM|#
Appears that Sen. Kennedy had a seizure rather than a stroke. Latest reports are that he is in stable condition.
Mekong Boatman|5.18.08 @ 8:16AM|#
There was nothing factually incorrect in the swiftboat veterans
for truth campaign.
Why do posters here act is if it was a lie?
You can smear with the truth
If the hat fits....in cambodia...on christmas...
Elemenope|5.18.08 @ 9:05AM|#
There appears to be a very strong statistical correlation
between carrying the XY chromosome pairing and homicide rates.
Should we pre-emptively deport or imprison all those people with XY
chromosome pairings in order to get lower homicide
rates?
I *really* like this idea. I shall go undercover to survive the
purges, and then when I emerge, it shall be in a "target rich
environment"!
Elemenope|5.18.08 @ 9:15AM|#
Guy, re:Israel
I have lots of nice things to say about Israel. Also, lots of
critical things. But here, thousands of miles from the Middle East,
both your and my opinions are kind of like pissing in the
wind.
Israel has a "neighbor problem" the way someone who was
disemboweled has a "digestion problem". In such a hostile
environment, of course they have the absolute right to defend their
very existence. But that fact by itself does not justify *needless*
antagonism, which Israel has *occasionally* engaged in.
The actions of Egypt and Israel over the last 20 years or so have
demonstrated that their Arab neighbors are not as intransigent as
was originally assumed, and that there is a way forward for the
possibility of peace.
----------
None of this changes the fact that, at least for the past week or
so, you have posted consistently like 10 IQ points below Neil. Head
wound?
Elemenope|5.18.08 @ 9:16AM|#
That sentence was supposed to say "The actions of Egypt and
Jordan..."
Ah well.
Head wound.
Elemenope|5.18.08 @ 9:44AM|#
Done with your little cry E...
It would b helpful, I imagine, if your insults made sense.
Otherwise all they seem to do is impugn the intelligence of the one
speaking them.
Episiarch|5.18.08 @ 9:50AM|#
"Neil" is getting more...aggressive. Whoever is performing him
is changing the character a bit. This should be interesting.
Or they could have just been loaded, considering they were posting
at nearly midnight on a Saturday.
Fluffy|5.18.08 @ 10:05AM|#
Guy, you're an idiot.
Of course the US and Japan still had diplomatic relations in 1941.
On what basis should they not have had diplomatic relations?
Because FDR personally didn't like their China policy? Don't be
absurd.
Would you seriously demand the withdrawal of the ambassador to the
US of every nation with which you have any diplomatic disagreement
whatsoever? That's absolutely idiotic.
Basically you're saying that right now, today, we should throw the
Chinese ambassador out of DC. And the ambassador from Turkey. And
the Israeli ambassador, for that matter.
Good plan. I'm sure limiting our diplomacy only to states which are
completely subordinate to us and never act in a way contrary to our
demands will work out great.
Fluffy|5.18.08 @ 10:11AM|#
On the subject of Rathergate, since Neil wants to know what it
was:
Individuals used forged documents to trick CBS News into running a
story that was false.
Which means that it is very similar to the Judy Miller debacle,
which went:
Individuals used forged documents to convince CIA agents of certain
information, which they t hen leaked to Judy Miller, tricking her
into running a series of stories which were false.
Millergate seems like a bigger deal to me, since there's the little
matter of the 4000 dead US servicemembers and the trillion dollars
shat down the toilet because of the war hysteria Judy Miller helped
create. Tell me, how many soldiers died as a result of Rathergate?
How much taxpayer money was pissed down the drain?
And I think Dan Rather should be embarrassed to have been played
like a dumb bitch by whoever forged those memos, but it's not like
he used my money to spread his false story. OTOH, the covert
Pentagon propaganda campaign exposed by the NY Times DID use my
money. They stole my money and used it to lie to the public. I'll
get angry at Dan Rather only AFTER Donald Rumseld and Larry DiRita
FUCKING PERSONALLY come to my house and give me my fucking money
back. In cash, no checks.
|5.18.08 @ 10:15AM|#
I must admit that I agreed totally with something Huckabee said this morning on Press the Meat: "It's not the first stupid thing I've said, and I'll guarantee it won't be the last." (Regarding his attempted "joke" at the NRA convention)
Guy Montag|5.18.08 @ 10:21AM|#
Fluffy,
If you just read the questions then you will see who the idiot is.
Especially since I do mention the US/Japanese relationship.
Perhaps you can share a box of tissues with Elemenope and figure
out if it is at all possible for either of you to bother responding
to anything that anybody actually asks without tripping over your
incorrect biases.
|5.18.08 @ 10:23AM|#
On that subject, I wouldn't be surprised if he was trying to re-enact Bill Clinton's famous joke while he was speaking to disaster survivors in a church basement and there was a loud bang from above. He's probably been waiting this entire campaign for a loud noise during a speech, and he totally blew it.
|5.18.08 @ 10:27AM|#
Q: What do Guy Montag and Iran have in common?
A: Talking to them just makes things worse.
Fluffy|5.18.08 @ 10:30AM|#
Guy, there is no reason to ask your question about Japan unless
you are implying that the US should not have had diplomatic
relations with Japan prior to Pearl Harbor.
Which is fucking stupid, for the reasons I named.
By the way, you historically ignoramus, in 1941 most western
observers assumed that it was quite likely that Franco's Spain and
Turkey would enter the war on the side of the Axis. Franco was
under extraordinary pressure to do so and was seen as part of the
European Fascist movement overall, and Turkey was nearly surrounded
either by Axis powers, Axis occupied territory, Axis-sympathetic
territory like the Vichy French Levant, or historical enemies of
Turkey like the Soviet Union, and was therefore thought to be a
natural ally of the Axis. It was thought to be every bit as likely
that the US would be at war with Spain and Turkey in 1942 as it was
that we would be at war with Japan.
So, if you are going to have disdain for maintaining diplomatic
channels with hostile powers, tyrannies, or potential enemies, you
can't just pick out Japan. You have to include Spain and
Turkey.
But then you have to account for the fact that extraordinary
British and US diplomacy KEPT SPAIN AND TURKEY OUT OF THE WAR, and
in so doing probably won the fucking war.
|5.18.08 @ 10:40AM|#
But then you have to account for the fact that extraordinary
British and US diplomacy KEPT SPAIN AND TURKEY OUT OF THE WAR, and
in so doing probably won the fucking war.
Your points are valid, but I think you overestimate the importance
Spain and Turkey joining the Axis would have had in the war. The
Germans could have taken Turkey and the rest of the Middle East
with little resistance early in the war. It was his foolish
decision in 1940 to break his pact with Stalin and invade the USSR
that won the war for the Allies.
jtuf|5.18.08 @ 10:47AM|#
I don't see why some people think Obama should meet with Syria and Iran. They seem to think a visit from the US president is the default diplomatic relationship. Talks with the president are really the exception rather than the rule. US ambassadors in neighboring countries handle diplomacy with Andorra and Liechtenstein, because we do not even have embassies in either countries. When was the last time a US president held face to face talks with the leaders of Palau or Maldives? There is a wide range of diplomatic actions between sending a low level representative and holding talks between heads of state. No US president has met with the majority of countries in person.
Guy Montag|5.18.08 @ 10:50AM|#
Back to Germany, the notion from the Rs was that note even FDR
had a talk with Hitler, as many people, as we can see scrolling up
on this board, want to do with several so-called "Axis of Evil"
countries.
Some soert of great "revelation" is made when a well known cable is
pointed out as being some sort of "proof" that 'SEE! FDR DID TALK
TO HITLER!'
Hope this version of the same question is not too complicated: Is
this the same kind of "talk" that many Leftists, to include Sen.
Obama, plus a few on the other side of the fence, are talking
about? Sure did not sound like it.
For one thing, for quite a while Hitler was trying to keep the US
out of the war and going through a lot of hoops to do it, including
leaning heavy on the head of the American Bund when they made
noises of wanting the US to side with Germany.
As for the Japanese, they used the diplomatic channels, in part, to
hide a sneek attack that ended up with much of our Pacific Fleet
sunk. I am sure some would say they attacked us because we were
messing around in the Pacific where we did not belong. Have heard
worse.
No, Fluffy and Elemenope, we have already read your incoherant
rantings on this so just skip my posts since you can not manage to
respond without having a fit.
Episiarch|5.18.08 @ 11:27AM|#
Fluffy, Spain had just been through a brutal and devastating civil war. Even if they could have mustered up the will for more war, their resources and manpower weren't up to it. What was Franco going to do, force Catalan separatists to fight for the Axis?
Daniel Reeves|5.18.08 @ 11:39AM|#
"Neil" is getting more...aggressive. Whoever is performing him is changing the character a bit. This should be interesting.
Or they could have just been loaded, considering they were posting at nearly midnight on a Saturday.
I know this sounds hard to believe, but I really do think that
there are people as stupid as Neil out there, living amongst us. Is
it possible...?!
Elemenope|5.18.08 @ 11:41AM|#
Fluffy, Spain had just been through a brutal and devastating
civil war. Even if they could have mustered up the will for more
war, their resources and manpower weren't up to it. What was Franco
going to do, force Catalan separatists to fight for the
Axis?
No, the issue would have been twofold:
One, the North African front would have been a *total loss* for the
Allies if Germany could move troops and supply lines through
Iberia. Rommel would have fucked up the Allies' shit at El-Alamein
(1st Battle), and the Axis advance would not have been broken, and
Tobruck would never been in Allied hands for so long.
Two, control over the Mediterranean would have been much more of an
issue, allowing U-boat fleet an extended safe haven for a much
longer period. That includes closing off Italy as a reasonable
third front; the underbelly of Europe would not have been so soft.
With Tobruk in Axis hands, there would have been a natural harbor
basically impregnable to sustained air assault to serve as a sub
base.
And even if Iberia were an Axis power (and so available to invade),
taking it would have been next-to-useless (and a huge drain on
resources) because the Pyrenees would have made troop movements
into the mainland basically impossible.
Elemenope|5.18.08 @ 11:43AM|#
I know this sounds hard to believe, but I really do think
that there are people as stupid as Neil out there, living amongst
us. Is it possible...?!
I've been in the minority on this one for a while, but I'm fairly
convinced Neil is a for-real fucking idiot. I've met people like
him in real life, so he isn't much of a stretch.
Neil|5.18.08 @ 12:07PM|#
I'd like someome to post an example of US-Axis dialogue past
1939.
Everyone with a brain knows what we face with Iran is very similar
to WWII.
Episiarch|5.18.08 @ 12:10PM|#
LMNOP, you make many good points, but I think that it would have
been suicidal for Franco to get involved. He would basically have
have been inviting the Nazis to take over Spain, abuse an already
war-ravaged country for their ends, and probably kill him as soon
as they felt his usefulness was over in order to consolidate their
power structure. Look what happened to Italy.
Franco made the best choice for himself (unfortunately, the
bastard) but also ultimately the best choice for Spain.
Neil|5.18.08 @ 12:11PM|#
We shouldve just marched on Spain in 1945 after the war to finish off Fascism once and for all.
Episiarch|5.18.08 @ 12:12PM|#
Neil, what do think of the most recent season of Aqua Teen Hunger Force? Not my favorite.
Elemenope|5.18.08 @ 12:29PM|#
Franco made the best choice for himself (unfortunately, the
bastard) but also ultimately the best choice for Spain.
Absolutely agree. I don't put quite as much weight on US diplomatic
involvement as Fluffy for keeping Spain out of war (as you say, it
is very obviously a self-interested position to take). I just meant
to outline how horrible it would have been if Spain has done the
stupid thing and allied with the Axis powers.
---------
Honestly, your little pop culture exchanges are all that make me
doubt Neil's existence as a person. His responses re: Television
are too pat.
Episiarch|5.18.08 @ 12:35PM|#
I can't watch that show. I keep waiting for Beavis to show up
and say "heh heh...he said 'Hank'"...but he never does, to my great
disappointment.
Nothing can beat the first season.
1-4 were all great. "Global Grilling" is an example of later season
mastery.
"He's not melting, he's 'chillaxin'. If you can't speak the
language, go back to Mexico. Where you were born, and are
from."
"That was my Alton Brown saucepot! I use it to make my Balsamic
Reduction! Dammit! … You've seen me do it."
Neil|5.18.08 @ 12:55PM|#
Lincoln Chaffee is a RINO.
McCain is not a RINO. Sure, hes wrong on a few things (campaign
finance "reform", global warming)but hes "right" on so many others.
Judges, the war, fiscal conservatism, standing against socialized
healthcare, and gun rights.
Hes with us 80% of the time.
Fluffy|5.18.08 @ 1:33PM|#
I don't put quite as much weight on US diplomatic
involvement as Fluffy for keeping Spain out of war
But you have to consider the fact that Guy is asserting that we
should treat potential enemies the same as actual enemies, in
diplomatic terms. His evidence for this is the fact that Japan
engaged in diplomacy while preparing to attack the US.
But had the US and Britain treated Franco the way Guy apparently
thinks we should have treated Japan, it is pretty likely that Spain
would have felt forced to make the best deal with Germany they
could. And the best deal Franco could make with Germany was "we
give you access to attack Gibraltar by land, and then we sit the
rest of the war out". The loss of Gibraltar would have been a
strategic disaster on a par with the loss of Singapore. Maybe
worse.
And that doesn't account for the possibility of entry of Turkey
into the war. Turkey entering the war would have made Palestine,
Egypt and Iraq untenable for Britain strategically, and a loss of
Suez inevitable. It also would have probably been the straw that
broke the camel's back for the Soviets, who would have faced a
two-front war.
Read Churchill's WWII memoir. There was real concern - it might be
appropriate to call it "terror" - at the prospect of these events
happening. And if Britain and the US had behaved the way Guy seems
to think it would have been smart for us to behave diplomatically,
they would have been much more likely to happen.
And with regard to Guy's claim that the US was kept out of the war
by Hitler's diplomatic maneuvering - come on, that's simply absurd.
The US was kept out of the war by profound domestic isolationist
settlement, and by the fact that we had not been attacked by any
belligerent prior to Pearl Harbor. No diplomatic or propaganda
campaign by Germany had any effect on our presence in or absence
from the war. Talking to Germany and Japan may not have benefitted
the US in any way, but it's not like we were going to war before
Pearl Harbor anyway. FDR didn't have the votes, knew he didn't have
the votes, and sent telegram after telegram to Churchill saying
[paraphrased] "Look, bitch, I'm doing all I can, so stop whining -
I don't have the fucking votes!"
|5.18.08 @ 1:34PM|#
Neil,
So why is Rush Limbaugh so down on McCain then?
And do you have no theories on the 12th Cylon?
Neil|5.18.08 @ 1:36PM|#
Rush still realizes the importance of having a Republican in the
White House.
Half a conservative > liberal far-left Democrat.
|5.18.08 @ 1:37PM|#
Neil,
Also, on the judges, how do you figure that McCain is not a
RINO?
He was a member of the 14 Republicans that were bolting to the Dems
when Bush was appointing judges.
Don't you think that McCain is just pretending to be a conservative
now, so some R's will vote for him.
But then when he is president he will appoint another Seuter, or
Ginsburg in the "spirit of bipartisanship"
Neil|5.18.08 @ 1:38PM|#
Barack Hussein Obama would be a disaster for this country, kwix, and thats the bottom line.
|5.18.08 @ 1:45PM|#
Stepping over the bloody corpses of Neil and Tuff Gai,
Hey, B, you wrote an entire comment about how the Republicans used
to have an advantage on national security issues, as if it rebutted
my point that Republicans used to have an advantage on national
security issues and don't anymore.
But seriously, don't look at any polls or anything. Don't pay any
attention to, say, the news over the past week. No, it's still
1994, and every time Republicans bring up issues of war and foreign
policy in this campaign, they totally pwn. They just need to keep
doing it, and doing it louder.
Not one step back, B!
|5.18.08 @ 1:48PM|#
Neil,
You make the HIt and Run archives feature all worthwhile.
Neil | April 15, 2008, 1:46pm | #
And now, Joe, hes proposing a very popular "gas tax holiday".
I'd like to see BHO oppose that and tell Americans they should pay
more at the pump.
No, but seriously, you're right, McCain is totally pwning this
foreign policy debate.
Neil|5.18.08 @ 1:48PM|#
Still waiting for the example of "engagement" with the Nazis after they started sinking our ships Joe.
|5.18.08 @ 1:52PM|#
""Neil | May 18, 2008, 1:38pm | #
Barack Hussein Obama would be a disaster for this country, kwix,
and thats the bottom line.""
Maybe so, my concern is that McCain would be a bigger disaster and
he would do it under a Republican name.
|5.18.08 @ 1:55PM|#
None of this changes the fact that, at least for the past
week or so, you have posted consistently like 10 IQ points below
Neil. Head wound?
Theory: an IQ level exists where, if you go 10 points lower, you
become incapable of typing and thus can't post on H&R.
I will leave it as an exercise for H&Rers to determine examples
of people at that IQ tipping point.
Bonus points if the person giving the example IS at the tipping
point.
|5.18.08 @ 1:59PM|#
Still waiting for the example of "engagement" with the Nazis
after they started sinking our ships Joe.
AFter all of the beatings that Fluffy has been handing out on this
question, continuing to ask it while letting his arguments sit
there making you look like an idiot is the equivalent of covering
your eyes so the monsters can't see you.
There were no engagements with the Nazis after 1941, Neil. That's
because, unlike Iran, the Nazis weren't just unfriendly to us as we
were engaged in a war with a third party, but were actually the
hostile party in a shooting war against us.
This has been explained to you, what, a dozen times over the course
of the thread?
Please, keep asking the question that was put to be a day ago. It's
a really good way of drawing attention to your inability to defend
your argument.
|5.18.08 @ 2:12PM|#
"Conservatism is alive and well in America; don't let anyone tell you differently. And by conservatism, I don't mean the warmed-over 'raise your hand if you believe …' kind of conservatism we see blooming every election cycle." - Fred Thompson, making his... uh... comeback.
Did anyone else read this quote and envision it as a caption on a
Pluggers cartoon?
Neil|5.18.08 @ 2:19PM|#
Yeah Obama is doing so great, thats why hes surged after he got
the nomination.
Oh wait, he hasn't, hes tied with McCain in the tracking polls.
|5.18.08 @ 2:24PM|#
He's tied in two tracking polls, Neil.
He's ahead 5 points in the RCP average, and leading in 6 of the 7
most recent polls listed on Pollingreport.com.
But that's just the liberal media conspiracy. How brilliant you
must be, to have found the only two reliable polls in America. And
how fortunate, to find that they both list McCain as being tied. As
opposed to behind. Which he is in every other poll.
|5.18.08 @ 2:27PM|#
So, Neil, this theory you have about the foreign policy skirmish
helping McCain:
Would you say you are A) more sure about that, B) less sure, or C)
about as sure, compared to your theory that the gas tax holiday was
going to be a real winner, and Obama would take a beating for
opposing it?
Come on, Reverend Wrong, I need to know how much to bet!
Neil|5.18.08 @ 2:32PM|#
Joe the WaPo poll polled adults, not voters, just adults. A bit
unreliable don't you think?
Obama is going to be painted as soft on terror when th Republicans
and McCain are done with him.
Hes going down by summer, he will be way behind in the polls with
McCain surging to victory.
Neil|5.18.08 @ 2:33PM|#
Just admit it, Joe. Theres not going to be any Democrat
landslide.
This will be like 2000 and 2004.
Jon Rowe|5.18.08 @ 2:41PM|#
The following is "The Pinnacle" of prog-rock music if you ask
me. It doesn't get any better than this.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=5ZzLPf_zyKk
VM|5.18.08 @ 2:45PM|#
Hay, Kneel - I betcha you were simply the bestest Dungeon Master
evar.
Now do you think it was bad strategy of King Frederik II to
withdraw to Ringsted, instead of moving south through Nivaa? Or do
you think that the Frankfurter Diet and the German Confederation
were weak in their struggle against Weisswurst?
|5.18.08 @ 2:46PM|#
Bonus points if the person giving the example IS at the
tipping point.
The Orange Blossom Special, or whatever pseudonym LoneDipShit is
posting under this week.
These bonus points? Are they heavy? Voluminous? IOW, do I need a
wheelbarrow?
Guy and MNG - Although each display substandard reasoning skills
are still marginally above the barely able to type threshold. Neil
is just parody, who's work has been slightly improving. He's
presently at septic tank level. Thus, he is ineligible for this
competition.
VM|5.18.08 @ 2:48PM|#
Jsub -
TallDave & "dickhead2" are always in the running :)
AND DON'T FORGET THOSE EVIL FIZIKS TYPES. THEY TIP THE SCALE
TOWARDS "EVIL".
|5.18.08 @ 2:50PM|#
A bit unreliable don't you think?
I'm not sure what poll you're referring to.
I like to look at several different polls, and aggregates of polls,
to make up for the unreliability of only having one data
point.
Obama is going to be painted as soft on terror when th
Republicans and McCain are done with him. So, after the last
week, you still think that having Republicans read off their 2002
talking points about terror is a winning strategy. OK, you go on
with your bad self. Also, I do not wish to be thrown into a briar
patch.
Hes going down by summer, he will be way behind in the polls
with McCain surging to victory.
Remind me, is that before or after the gas tax holiday and Reverend
Wright kill him?
You know, Neil, I've been noticing something about this election;
the things that the Republicans say are the only thing, or even the
most important thing, going on.
This will be like 2000 and 2004.
In 2000 and 2004, the parties were roughly even in partisan
identification and preference. In 2008, the Democrats have a
double-digit lead. Oh, and remind me; how many special elections in
deep-red states in Dixie did the Republicans lose in 2000 and
2004?
|5.18.08 @ 2:52PM|#
Er, the things that Republicans say are "NOT" the only thing, or even the most important things, going on.
Neil|5.18.08 @ 2:56PM|#
Throughout the 80s Democrats won huge congressional victories
and had the advantage in party identification.
Of course, many of those were "Reagan Democrats" and you will see
the birth of "McCain Democrats" this year.
|5.18.08 @ 2:59PM|#
Throughout the 80s, the Republicans ran a genial Hollywood actor
while the Democrats ran people who appeared to be filmed in
black-and-white 8mm.
Throughout the 80s, the Republicans held commanding leads on the
most important issues.
But keep it up with the predictions about what's going to happen in
this election. You're, what, 0-for-Neil in elections
predictions?
Neil|5.18.08 @ 3:00PM|#
George H.W. Bush was a genial, Hollywood actor?
Because I think this election will be eerily similar to 1988.
|5.18.08 @ 3:02PM|#
Art-POG,
That's because you're one of those America-haters who can glean
meaning from context.
Were you a better American, you would have read the statement as
"...the things that the Republicans say are the only thing...going
on," and danced around whooping.
|5.18.08 @ 3:03PM|#
George H.W. Bush was a genial, Hollywood actor? No, he
was the heir-apparent to that genial Hollwyood actor.
Because I think this election will be eerily similar to
1988. Me, too. This is going to be all about the electoral
expressing their opinion about the outgoing president, just like
1988.
You can run, McSame, but you can't hide.
|5.18.08 @ 3:04PM|#
Of course, many of those were "Reagan Democrats" and you will see the birth of "McCain Democrats" this year.
|5.18.08 @ 3:06PM|#
VM, Let us not disqualify Dave W. Monomaniacal posters are not
expressly barred from the competition.
BTW, Are you getting royalties?
You made need an attorney.
Neil|5.18.08 @ 3:09PM|#
No, Joe, this election will be a referrendum on Obama once hes
shown to be the loony leftist from the far, far out left of the
Democrat Party that he is.
Its going to be an election about BHO, not GWB.
|5.18.08 @ 3:16PM|#
So, basically, Neil, what you're saying is that you watched
political events unfold over the past week, and the conclusion you
drew was that McCain and the Republicans are poised to make major
gains into Democratic constituencies by launching political attacks
on Democrats about terrorism, security, war, and diplomacy similar
to those they used in 2002-2006.
This will happen, because the Republicans in 2008 hold a strategic
advantage on national security as a political issue, similar to
that they enjoyed under Ronald Reagan.
Have I got that about right?
Neil|5.18.08 @ 3:20PM|#
Joe the Republicans may not be strong on any particular issue,
but they have the great ability (demonstreated over many years) to
make their Democrat opponents look even weaker than they are ,
every time.
Wait until the summer when those issues are defined.
Voters are going to think "Well, it hasn't been that good under
Republicans, but we just can't trust that loony far-left liberal
Democrat Barack Obama."
Culture will also help sink Obama. Its going to be a lot about
culture, and culture matters.
|5.18.08 @ 3:27PM|#
Oh, right, of course; it will all come together, because it will
be easy to use those national security issues to beat Barack Obama
in a PR war over his image.
Anyway, I'm glad to hear you're happy about the prospect of
spending the camapaign talking about Barack Obama, because really,
it's the Republicans' only option. The public has lost faith in
them on every issue that people are voting for in this election.
Lots of Republicans, too.
Neil|5.18.08 @ 3:28PM|#
The "bitter" and Reverend Wright issue may not have hurt him as
much as I thought it would among Democrat voters, but the general
election is a different ball game.
And theres more to come. I really hope his wife opens her mouth
more and more.
|5.18.08 @ 3:32PM|#
NASCAR Dad wants to punish the Republican Party.
NASCAR Dad might not vote.
Big voter registrations drives in Virginia and Mississippi, though.
In those neighborhoods.
Quick, print up some really expensive IDs, maybe that will stop
them!
|5.18.08 @ 3:39PM|#
NASCAR Dad hates the veto of the G.I. Bill.
If Bush is stupid enough to go through with it, I'm taking my piggy
bank, and bettin on Jim Webb being V.P.
Culture War crap, Neil? In 2008? The Culture War is a luxury that
we engage in when we don't have anything important to worry
about.
McCain/Graham "08: Because That Negro Will Give Your Son Teh
Gay.
I don't think that's going to work, Neil.
Neil|5.18.08 @ 3:40PM|#
Yeah Joe rely on the idiot youngsters that still live in their
parents basement (no wonder they love the Democrat Party since
they've never worked an honest job and see what its like to be
taxed) and blacks. The two least reliable voting groups,
ever.
Ask McGovern how that worked.
Neil|5.18.08 @ 3:42PM|#
"The Culture War is a luxury that we engage in when we don't
have anything important to worry about."
IOW we "Cling" to guns, religion, and traditional marriage Joe?
LOL!
Tell the NASCAR Dads culture isn't important and that they're just
stupid, ignorant hicks waiting to be enlightened by their coastal
liberal Democrat masters.
|5.18.08 @ 3:46PM|#
Reading through the thread posts about embassies, some very
different things seem to be equated:
1) Heads of state meeting
2) Underlings meeting in a formal, highly public manner
3) Covert, behind the scenes discussions between diplomats trying
to keep their leaders from doing something stupid due to a lack of
information
#2 may or may not be feasible in some circumstances, due to
political considerations. That does not mean that it is a good idea
to foreclose #3, which is why it pays to keep embassies open unless
an act of war has occurred, after which you need to expel the
diplomats because they will then be acting solely as spies.
Arguably, a bit more of #3 would have been useful prior to the
contemplated invasion of Iraq, if someone on the Iraqi side had
managed to convey the essential point that Saddam Hussein was
blustering and really wasn't intending to attack America, but was
trying to avoid appearing weak for the sake of dissuading internal
and external Mideast enemies from taking a swipe at him.
Course, it would also have helped if we had someone in the Oval
Office who wasn't pushing the IQ - 10 points tipping point.
|5.18.08 @ 3:48PM|#
Yeah Joe rely on the idiot youngsters that still live in their parents basement (no wonder they love the Democrat Party since they've never worked an honest job and see what its like to be taxed) and blacks. The two least reliable voting groups, ever.
Whoa.
I don't quite fit your descriptor because I work and don't live in
my parents' basement (anymore) but I don't think people have to
necessarily be fans of the Democratic Party. All they have to do is
look at the overall awfulness of the Republican party over the last
eight years and they'll be purty reluctant to vote for
McCain.
I especially liked how you said "never worked an honest job". You
sounded 60 years old.
Episiarch|5.18.08 @ 3:52PM|#
Neil, speaking of genial 80s Hollywood types, whatever happened to Judge Reinhold?
Neil|5.18.08 @ 4:02PM|#
I believe he became a born-again Christian IIRC Episiarch.
Score one for another Conservative in Hollywood.
Neil|5.18.08 @ 4:18PM|#
Joe, Bush will sign the GI Bill and claim credit for it,
brilliantly co-opting the issue and denying the turncoat Jim Webb a
VP spot.
Similar to Clinton and welfare reform in 1996.
Episiarch|5.18.08 @ 4:19PM|#
Thanks for the info, Neil. From jerking off to Phoebe Cates in the pool changing room to born-again Christian: the truly epic journey of Judge Reinhold.
VM|5.18.08 @ 4:40PM|#
JSub - I'm just glad they didn't test the jellybean action on
me!
Epi - never mind Kneel. He's just letting his Kirk Cameron fettish
get in the way...
BakedPenguin|5.18.08 @ 4:51PM|#
From jerking off to Phoebe Cates in the pool changing room to born-again Christian...
If Jimmy Swaggart's an example, those two aren't mutually
exclusive.
|5.18.08 @ 5:01PM|#
If Jimmy Swaggart's an example, those two aren't mutually
exclusive.
BP, did you ever have misfortune to view photos of Reverend
Swaggart's hooker? I saw some pics in some skin mag years ago. I
then stopped using the term "too ugly to be a whore". She is truly
a frightening skank.
|5.18.08 @ 5:18PM|#
Was it me or was Kirk Cameron laughing when Comfort explained how the 'nanner "curved toward the face"?
Episiarch|5.18.08 @ 5:20PM|#
Epi - never mind Kneel. He's just letting his Kirk Cameron
fettish get in the way...
Ok, Neil, a tough one: What band did Kirk Cameron's character Mike
Seaver listen to on Growing Pains?
Neil|5.18.08 @ 5:25PM|#
I never liked Growing Pains so I don't know Episiarch. I was much more of a Family Ties person.
|5.18.08 @ 5:30PM|#
I never liked Growing Pains so I don't know Episiarch. I was
much more of a Family Ties person.
IOW, Neil has a man crush on Scott
Valentine.
BakedPenguin|5.18.08 @ 5:43PM|#
...did you ever have misfortune to view photos of Reverend Swaggart's hooker?
Just the (fully clothed) ones they had on the news. I could sort of
see why he didn't want her touching him.
OTOH, Jim Bakker had better taste in mistresses.
|5.18.08 @ 5:54PM|#
OTOH, Jim Bakker had better taste in mistresses.
I was always willing to cut Jim Bakker some slack. If you had Tammy
Fay trying to carve your totem pole nightly, you'd likely wander
off the reservation yourself.
BakedPenguin|5.18.08 @ 5:59PM|#
J sub D - I basically agree, but why did he marry her in the first place? I don't have real great prospects myself, but I can do better than that.
|5.18.08 @ 6:31PM|#
I basically agree, but why did he marry her in the first
place?
Baked Penguin,
The sages say that "love is blind". From my own spotted record in
affairs of the heart, I'd amend that to "love is blind, deaf and
especially dumb".
Elemenope|5.18.08 @ 6:39PM|#
And theres more to come. I really hope his wife opens her
mouth more and more.
So, I imagine, does Obama. I mean, whatever party, the best thing
that a first lady can do for her husband and the nation is to keep
him happy.
Oh! You meant her opening her mouth *to talk*. Er, sure.
Ali|5.18.08 @ 7:45PM|#
DINOs for RINOs or RIA-EOs?
I demand that we talk about LINOs! Suggestions? I'd state the
obvious --his initials are E.D.
LarryA|5.18.08 @ 8:32PM|#
Do you deny that the above average gun availability in the
US has something to do with the above average homicide rate in the
US?
Given that the legal gun availability is highest
where the homicide rate is lowest, yes. Also, the homicide rate has
been dropping since the early 1990s, even though gun ownership is
rising rapidly. (The National Shooting
Sports Foundation is consistently reporting record sales for
firearm manufacturers and record numbers of background checks
through the National Instant Check System.) In related news,
according to our Department of Public Safety concealed handgun
license applications are up 40% in Texas.
Any country in the midst of a civil war (the one on drugs) is going
to have a high homicide rate.
Obama likely knows who his base supporters are and will pander
to them -- which means trashing the Second Amendment if given the
chance.
Really? The above-mentioned NSSF recently noted that consumer
spending on shooting sports has recently overtaken golf in amount
spent, leaving shooting sports in second place behind exercise
equipment in first. Pissing on all those folks to keep the anti-gun
vote would be like dissing all meat-eaters to secure the vegan
vote.
It might have something to do with the way we enforce drug laws
though.
Ya think?
|5.18.08 @ 8:49PM|#
TallDave & "dickhead2" are always in the running
:)
Dude, get over it. It's been like three years now.
SIV|5.18.08 @ 9:46PM|#
"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep
our homes on 72 degrees at all times ... and then just expect that
other countries are going to say OK," Obama said.
Obama takes a page from Jimmy Carter's 1980 campaign."The future is
going to suck, get used to it America".
|5.18.08 @ 10:02PM|#
Obama likely knows who his base supporters are and will
pander to them -- which means trashing the Second Amendment.
Really? The above-mentioned NSSF recently noted that consumer
spending on shooting sports has recently overtaken golf in amount
spent, leaving shooting sports in second place behind exercise
equipment in first. Pissing on all those folks to keep the anti-gun
vote would be like dissing all meat-eaters to secure the vegan
vote.
Really? Obama has said he'll protect the Second Amendment right for
sportsmen -- which is a clever way of saying he'll try to take it
away for all other users.
Remember, Obama doesn't have to pander to ALL Americans, just 51%
of those who bother to vote in presidential general elections,
which is maybe 25% of the voting-age population. For example, note
how blacks, who are about 10% or so of the general population, are
the majority of Democratic primary voters in some states. Then,
among that 25% or so, perhaps 70% can be more or less ignored
because they will vote for a Democrat no matter what, or live in
strong Red states which aren't in play, or otherwise won't swing
any states from Red to Blue or vice-versa.
So, the actual votes that matter are generally highly concentrated
special interests that represent single-digit percentages of the
voting total.
Successful political candidates at the national level, while they
may make a lot of noise about representing ALL their constituents,
in reality do no such thing. If you don't grasp that fundamental
reality, you won't win any elections.
SIV|5.18.08 @ 10:57PM|#
Clarence Page on Obama:
Ironically, despite Republican attempts to paint Obama as a
liberal, he is in many ways a cultural conservative.
Ahhh... economically liberal and culturally conservative.The
Reese's Peanut Butter Cup of communitarianism.
Kolohe|5.18.08 @ 11:53PM|#
Evveryone talks about WW2.
How about WW1?
A little jawboning would have avoided the 20th century that
was.
And Dick @11:12, love the address.
LarryA|5.19.08 @ 9:48AM|#
So, the actual votes that matter are generally highly
concentrated special interests that represent single-digit
percentages of the voting total.
Unless they are opposed by another highly concentrated special
interest that represents a double-digit percentage of the voting
total.
|5.19.08 @ 10:42AM|#
Neil | May 18, 2008, 3:49pm | #
If things are so bad, why isn't Obama +20 or at least +15 over
McCain? Huh?
Because Obama is just emerging from a hotly-contested primary
(remember all of those "Operation Chaos" comments you wrote,
cheif?), and because 15-20 is an absurdly high number.
He's at five and trending up. Back when the playing field was level
- when they were both involved in primary campaigns - Obama was ten
points up on McCain.
Neil | May 18, 2008, 4:18pm | #
Joe, Bush will sign the GI Bill and claim credit for it,
brilliantly co-opting the issue and denying the turncoat Jim Webb a
VP spot.
I hope so. That would leave McCain twisting in the wind even worse
than he already is.
|5.19.08 @ 10:43AM|#
IOW we "Cling" to guns, religion, and traditional marriage
Joe? LOL!
No, dimwit, exactly the opposite. Go back and read that again, and
see if you can do any better.
|5.19.08 @ 12:03PM|#
Ahhh... economically liberal and culturally conservative.The
Reese's Peanut Butter Cup of communitarianism.
*cough cough** Does that [ignorany]remind you [hillbilly] of anyone
else [whackjob] who ran for [preacher] president?
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