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: You Betcha
Unconvincing Quote of the Week
"Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing
through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of
the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American
people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that
is supportive and cooperative with the president's agenda in that
position. Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of
flexibility in there, and we'll do what we have to do to administer
very appropriately the plans that are needed for this nation. And
it is my executive experience that is partly to be attributed to my
pick as V.P. with McCain, not only as a governor, but earlier on as
a mayor, as an oil and gas regulator, as a business owner. It is
those years of experience on an executive level that will be put to
good use in the White House also."
-
Sarah Palin, Republican vice presidential candidate, ostensibly
talking about the powers of the office she's seeking
The Week in Brief
- The Senate, then the House, rammed through the
multi-hundred-billion bailout (later reframed as a "rescue") of
Wall Street.
- A guy from Scranton and a chick from Alaska won a lottery to
star in their own 90-minute TV pilot.
- The McCain campaign right-sized its
operations in Michigan.
- Voters started
strutting their stuff.
Below the Fold
- Katie Halper
gets dirty.
- Wayne Allyn Root
takes on Palin and Biden.
- Declan McCullagh breaks
down the bailout.
- And so
does David Freddoso.
- Sean Scallon misses the
old, paleocon Palin.
This week's Politics 'n' Prog is all about the bailout.
|10.3.08 @ 6:19PM|#
The Senate, then the House, rammed through the
multi-hundred-trillion bailout (later reframed as a "rescue") of
Wall Street.
ummm...trillion?
Doug|10.3.08 @ 6:22PM|#
I don't know about anybody else but I have this sudden urge to change our national anthem to Sixteen Tons.
|10.3.08 @ 6:35PM|#
Good one Doug.
Hitting bottom is hard to do, but the more government gets
involved--too late now--the longer it will take to hit bottom,
therefore the longer it will take to get back on the path to
recovery.
Ol' pea-pickin' Ruthless
JMR|10.3.08 @ 6:46PM|#
"Think Cheney was a power grabber? I'm gonna be explicit about it! I might run TWO intelligence agencies from my office!!"
shecky|10.3.08 @ 6:55PM|#
via
Andrew Sullivan, this insane bit from NRO's Rich Lowry:
I'm sure I'm not the only male in America who, when Palin
dropped her first wink, sat up a little straighter on the couch and
said, "Hey, I think she just winked at me." And her smile. By the
end, when she clearly knew she was doing well, it was so sparkling
it was almost mesmerizing. It sent little starbursts through the
screen and ricocheting around the living rooms of America. This is
a quality that can't be learned; it's either something you have or
you don't, and man, she's got it.
What else can be said? Despite the result on Nov 4, McCain/Palin
will always be the winners at NRO.
Timon19|10.3.08 @ 7:02PM|#
Sweet Mary, Mother of God...that quote was utterly incomprehensible. I can't believe any of you guys sat through multiple hours of that.
Elemenope|10.3.08 @ 7:13PM|#
Biden dicked up the "what's VPOTUS's job?" question just as
badly, if more coherently, as Palin did.
It was the only point in the debate where I could see them
operating at the same retarded level.
Doug|10.3.08 @ 7:17PM|#
Incidentally, Sarah Palin's approval ratings back home have
slipped into the 60s. Granted, most governors would kill for those
numbers, but a 15 point drop is worth noting. From Wednesday's
Anchorage Daily News:
Moore said those numbers were likely driven by the harsher tone Palin has adopted on the national campaign trail, as well as the fallout from Troopergate, which involves the firing of the state's public safety commissioner.
She hasn't lost me yet, but she will if she doesn't lose the
caustic, arrogant attitude when she gets back.
|10.3.08 @ 7:25PM|#
I know anyone who follows a link to Allyn Root's site deserves
whatever they get, but...
I have to this is causing me to reconsider whether maybe we DO need
drug prohibition.
Oh. He WASN'T stoned when he wrote that?
They could actually make a good pair: Moose and Squirrel.
Z|10.3.08 @ 7:26PM|#
elemenope : "Biden dicked up the "what's VPOTUS's job?" question
just as badly, if more coherently, as Palin did."
are you a retard or what? Palin wants to expand the power of the VP
past cheney's wet dreams and you think they were equally lame on
this issue?
That was the single lowest point for Palin.
|10.3.08 @ 7:27PM|#
I have to this is causing me
I have to SAY this is causing me...
[always Preview, always Preview, always Preview...]
|10.3.08 @ 7:34PM|#
The more I read Weigel's material the more I am convinced that
he went to Tatnall, lived in Centerville and sneers at G.W. Bush as
being born on third plate and thinking he's hit a homerun. No doubt
Biden thinks that going to Archmere Academy was a typical working
class thing to do as well.
Palin may not be perfect, but Biden is a gasbag and a tool. Biden
is responsible for my slide away from a 17 year old anti-war,
hold-hands, sing kum-bi-ya Democrat to a cynical middle of the road
Republican. Christ, I am from Delaware. Biden came to speak at my
school when I was in eleventh grade. I can't remember if he
actually was Senator yet, but his first wife had died by then.
Biden waxed on about how we needed to not be selfish, protect the
environment, and conserve gasoline. After the lecture, he got into
a cherry Corvette Sting Ray, blue if I remember correctly, and sped
away - Asshole.
the innominate one|10.3.08 @ 7:34PM|#
Iho: in 2004, which party ran both houses of congress and held the white house? if they knew this was coming, why didn't they do something when they held power in congress?
voxpo|10.3.08 @ 7:41PM|#
Most thick-headed thing I've read all day award goes to Barney
Frank:
"Ever mindful of the danger that George Bush will lead us down the
road to socialism, we will be monitoring this closely," Frank told
the House.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/10/03/bail_out/
I guess he doesn't know much about paving roads or sulfur.
Orange Line Special: Go Easy o|10.3.08 @ 7:42PM|#
1. This is a must-read post: How to
Defeat Barack Obama. If someone doesn't back that
plan, they either want BHO to win or they really don't care. GOP
hacks should especially see the second update.
2. Here's the latest smear
from the BHO campaign and here's an earlier
smear.
3. Here's more on their
very questionable contributions.
4. And, here's the Reason theme
song.
* This is an extra special "Go Easy on Weigel Edition" because the
last time I left comments on one of his posts they were deleted,
and I don't want to make him crack completely or anything. MattW
has not replied to my request for more information.
|10.3.08 @ 7:45PM|#
I'm not the only male in America who, when Palin dropped her first wink, sat up a little straighter on the couch and said, "Hey, I think she just winked at me."
Yeah! I had a similar experience! I was listening to it on the
radio in my car, and I thought "now I'm jealous of that moose,
because she probably was sneaking up on him, and he didn't have her
voice peel the myelin off his auditory nerve. Lucky damn
moose!"
Yeah, it was like that.
|10.3.08 @ 7:46PM|#
Is Barack Obama the New World Man?
Nope, the effing messiah
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54tjbgJmLFg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exRH_ngVUVQ&feature=related
Change is not the same thing as progress
|10.3.08 @ 7:49PM|#
It has just occurred to me that our economy may be a little like
Wendy's after Dave Thomas died, except the key person who died was
Milton Friedman. I thought central bankers had finally learned
Milton's lesson that inflation is simply a function of money
supply, but now I'm not so sure.
My above was inspired by Justin Raimondo's latest in
Antiwar.com
Peaceful Anarchist Ruthless
Elemenope|10.3.08 @ 7:49PM|#
are you a retard or what?
Sometimes I am slow, but I like to think it is because I am
deliberate in my movements.
Palin wants to expand the power of the VP past Cheney's wet
dreams and you think they were equally lame on this
issue?
That's not how I read the answer. I thought that she was simply
fumbling about and settled on the crap about "leeway room" and
"flexibility" in the Constitution because she was
floundering.
That was the single lowest point for Palin.
No way. Her "faux folksy" destroyed many other answers far more
effectively by my (and several other people's) language parser in
my brain shutting down from a mishmash error, thus missing whatever
scraps of content that *might* have followed.
FWIW, she hit more of the technical points correctly than Biden
(who misidentified what Article of the Constitution defines the
Executive Branch, and also misstated the power of VPOTUS as "only
tie-breaking votes" obviously neglecting the power *to preside over
the Senate*.) Both gave some claptrap about an advisory role to the
POTUS (and frankly, Biden's "I'll be in the room every time the
president makes a decision" line was way creepier than Palin's
bumbling about.)
And technically, by statute the VPOTUS does have other defined
duties, such as managing NASA.
All around, a shitty clusterfuck.
|10.3.08 @ 7:49PM|#
...because the last time I left comments on one of his posts
they were deleted,...
Ah, he did go to Tatnall! ;-)
|10.3.08 @ 8:06PM|#
"Change is not the same thing as progress"
Iraq.
Katrina.
Budget Deficets.
Prescription Drug Benefit.
Harriet Meyers.
Bailouts.
I think change from all that would be progress. You don't?
BDB|10.3.08 @ 8:14PM|#
MNG, he'll say something about Jimmy Carter and Communists.
Srssly, that's what the right wing blogs have been using as a
"strategy" since they were down.
I guess next they'll talk about Atari 2600s and Eight Track
tapes.
Kolohe|10.3.08 @ 8:23PM|#
are you a retard or what?
Sometimes I am slow, but I like to think it is because I am deliberate in my movements.
And to your credit, you never go full retard.
Her "faux folksy" destroyed many other answers far more effectively by my (and several other people's) language parser in my brain shutting down from a mishmash error, thus missing whatever scraps of content that *might* have followed.
Speaking of parsing... :)
|10.3.08 @ 8:25PM|#
Let me check realclearpolitics.com. It's weeks to go
still.
You don't see a Wilder effect in the polls?
BDB|10.3.08 @ 8:27PM|#
"You don't see a Wilder effect in the polls?"
Can you give me an example of one that isn't from the 1980s?
BTW, McCain has pulled out of Michigan in case you didn't hear.
|10.3.08 @ 8:33PM|#
Mr. Nice Guy,
For sure we need a little more than change.
A light-hearted atheist associate of mine performs the mystical
hair-dryer ceremony to exorcise the baptismal water from the heads
of recovering religionists.
Is that what you had in mind?
Nudistic, atheistic peaceful anarchist, recovering USMC,
Ruthless.
|10.3.08 @ 8:34PM|#
Just got back from realclearpolitics and pollster.com. It does
look good for him. I'll note that many of the leads are not that
large. I'll also note that a stronger candidate would have bigger
leads in more states.
Was there any Wilder effect for Ford in TN?
|10.3.08 @ 8:35PM|#
Did I read those polls right that Obama is now ahead in FL? If that holds then that is it...
BDB|10.3.08 @ 8:37PM|#
"Was there any Wilder effect for Ford in TN?"
No. In fact, he did better than his polls, because some
African Americans were afraid to tell (presumably white) pollster
that they were voting for the black guy. This happens in southern
states a lot (esp. VA and NC in the Democratic primaries).
"Did I read those polls right that Obama is now ahead in FL? If
that holds then that is it..."
Yes. And they polled Sarasota County--one of the most conservative
in the state. Bush won it by +20. McCain leads by +2.
BDB|10.3.08 @ 8:38PM|#
Also, remember small leads mean more in October than they do in July. Peoples minds are pretty much solidified by now barring a meltdown on the level of "macaca".
BDB|10.3.08 @ 8:40PM|#
Deval Patrick in Mass. He did as expected, winning.
Lynn Swan and Michael Steele (black Republicans in PA and OH,
respectively). They got shellacked but they got their asses kicked
by the same amount they were losing in the polls. Nobody was lying
to pollsters.
|10.3.08 @ 8:42PM|#
BDB
I'm not sure that is enough data points to make me think a Wilder
effectg won't be found this time. And, Presidential races may be
different.
BDB|10.3.08 @ 8:43PM|#
If there is such a Bradley Effect, why did McCain pull out of
MI?
If he (and his internal pollsters) don't think he will win in MI
with the Bradley Effect, where will it work? It doesn't exist. It
hasn't existed since the 80s. It's like in 1960 you're afraid
someone will lose because they are Catholic, citing Al Smith.
BDB|10.3.08 @ 8:45PM|#
What do you make of Obama *overpreforming* his polls in the primaries? Especially VA and NC?
|10.3.08 @ 8:51PM|#
I'd always thought Palin's smile was an irritating, arrogant
smirk, but apparently the Republican male interprets it as some
bizarre mating signal.
On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that when she falls back on that
folksy crap, we all cringe and think "Shut the f*** up." And I'm a
guy who drives an old crappy American car and drinks WAY more beer
than she ever has or will, so my downwardly mobile "Joe-six pack"
cred is rock solid.
Kolohe|10.3.08 @ 9:00PM|#
What other state-wide races featured African-Americans since
the 1980's.
Also, the Lt Gov of Maryland earlier this decade. (a republican;
not sure if md is like va and a split ticket state)
BDB|10.3.08 @ 9:01PM|#
Bobby Jindal in LA is a minority, and won.
Also, Richardson in New Mexico (minority).
|10.3.08 @ 9:03PM|#
What is the name of the character on Prairie Home Companion that
already has the Sara Palin accent down pat?
I know it's Sue Russell, but I can't think of her character up in
Lake Woebegone.
Elemenope|10.3.08 @ 9:22PM|#
Also, Richardson in New Mexico (minority).
Yeah, but in New Mexico, he's only just a minority by the grace of
whatever. And his name sounds non-Hispanic, so on the phone polls
that might wash out any Bradley Effect that might be present.
But I agree on the larger point. The Bradley Effect, the the point
where it ever might have existed, it doesn't seem to exist now, at
least on the national stage.
BDB|10.3.08 @ 9:29PM|#
Speaking of names, I think the name "Hussein" has been repeated so much now that it's mainstream. Obama should really be thanking Hillary Clinton right now.
|10.3.08 @ 9:39PM|#
I think change from all that would be progress. You
don't?
In any case, we won't get change. Politicians may talk about
"change", but you can't reach the pinnacle of power without
convincing everyone important that you won't change anything.
|10.3.08 @ 9:48PM|#
"you can't reach the pinnacle of power without convincing
everyone important that you won't change anything."
To put a finer point to it, Max, don't rock the boat?
It's the essence of conservatism.
|10.3.08 @ 9:55PM|#
Can't speak for anyone else, but this election campaign has ended any illusions I had about Reason being an independent pro-libertarian magazine. Bye Bye subscription. I guess the temptations of free liquor, possible book deals, yo que se, proved too much. Reason is the official voice of libertarian leaning Democrats, pure & simple. Review the articles, blog entries, etc. The snarkiness, the need for acceptance from libs...They just don't want to be left out of the parties. Sad. Guess Welch was the first sign (more precisely, Reason's not noticing that he was a dem cheerleader in disguise from the beginning). Pathetic sellouts.
|10.3.08 @ 10:08PM|#
and of course suddenly Michael Young is persona non grata...wouldn't want any ideological divergences to appear. Like I said, sad. I won't be voting for either main party candidate, but it's clear who Reason will be. And its staff has been well trained and/or recruited. Pathetic. Anyone know any Independent libertarian leaning magazines?
Eric Dondero|10.3.08 @ 10:16PM|#
Sarah Palin was just interviewed by Carl Cameron on Fox
News.
She just came out strongly against Kelo and Eminent Domain, and
spoke passionately for private property rights.
We've got the video at Libertarian Republican blog. (click above
link.)
|10.3.08 @ 10:21PM|#
rusty | October 3, 2008, 9:55pm | #
Can't speak for anyone else, but this election campaign has ended
any illusions I had about Reason being an independent
pro-libertarian magazine. Bye Bye subscription
*Drink*
|10.3.08 @ 10:25PM|#
SNL needs to bring back Will Farrell to do a Sarah Palin Celebrity Jeopardy sketch.
|10.3.08 @ 10:28PM|#
"Reason is the official voice of libertarian leaning Democrats,
pure & simple. Review the articles, blog entries, etc. The
snarkiness, the need for acceptance from libs...They just don't
want to be left out of the parties. Sad. Guess Welch was the first
sign (more precisely, Reason's not noticing that he was a dem
cheerleader in disguise from the beginning)."
I wish.
Welch wrote his book about McCain BEFORE McCain was the GOP
nominee. Rusty, can you not remember the passionate hate that the
right, not the "libertarian leading Democrats" had for John McCain
before he became the nominee? Welch is just being consistent, which
is something you can't say for all the right wing types that
crapped on McCain as the Devil for years and now proclaim him as
the Second Coming...Welch recently made the libertarian case for
McCain here on Reason if you didn't catch it...
Another factor is that libertarian or socialist it is just hard not
to face the fact that the Republicans did a terrible job governing
the past eight years. Terrible in the sense of starting
multi-billion dollar wars and swelling government, and terrible in
the sense of mismanaging every major thing they undertook to do.
There is such a thing as accountability. Keep the same party in
power too long and you get something quite yucky.
Elemenope|10.3.08 @ 10:28PM|#
She just came out strongly against Kelo and Eminent Domain,
and spoke passionately for private property rights.
Someone apparently told her about another Supreme Court case.
She's up to two, now!
|10.3.08 @ 10:32PM|#
"They just don't want to be left out of the parties."
Yeah, you know, liberals run all the great parties. Hard to have a
great time when Orin Hatch is supposed to bring the drinks.
SIV|10.3.08 @ 10:32PM|#
Cindy McCain's junkie confessions are on ABCs 20/20 right now. Wished I had caught it all.
The Orange Line Runs Silent an|10.3.08 @ 10:44PM|#
Rusty writes: And its staff has been well trained and/or
recruited. Pathetic. Anyone know any Independent libertarian
leaning magazines?
Don't know any. However, BHO's supporters seem to be under the
mistaken impression that everyone is going to forget their advocacy
for him, including repeating his lies. In case he wins, I urge
everyone to never let them forget: throw it back in their faces
every chance you get. If he wins, there will be plenty of
opportunities to do that.
MNG writes: which is something you can't say for all the right
wing types that crapped on McCain as the Devil for years and now
proclaim him as the Second Coming.
Very few people are acting about McCain the way they acted about
Bush. In fact, I was strongly against Bush when all the
right-leaning hacks were willing to lie for him.
Now, I'm strongly in favor of McCain, but only because I realize
just how bad BHO would be, especially with a Dem Congress.
I don't really understand why many others aren't the same, but I
suspect one possibility might be that they want things to be bad so
they can whine about it and increase their traffic. For instance,
I've never been impressed by Patterico's intelligence, but you'd
think that if he were as concerned about bias and BHO as he
pretends to be he would have helped push my open letter (link
above).
BDB|10.3.08 @ 10:51PM|#
The Republican blogs, specifically the local ones, are going
nuts now. They are ceasing to make sense.
By November they're going to be just babbling incoherently about
gulags and concentration camps for Republicans, as Barack HUSSEIN
Obama surrenders to the World Wide Caliphate.
|10.3.08 @ 11:20PM|#
She just came out strongly against Kelo and Eminent
Domain
Actually, she came out against imminent
domain.
She has no clue about the content of the talking points she's
parroting.
Brandybuck|10.3.08 @ 11:28PM|#
She just came out strongly against Kelo and Eminent Domain, and spoke passionately for private property rights.
Yet she supports her running-mate's vote on the trillion+ bailout
scheme. No one who voted for any of these bills this week will ever
get a vote of mine.
SIV|10.3.08 @ 11:58PM|#
Yet she supports her running-mate's vote on the trillion+
bailout scheme. No one who voted for any of these bills this week
will ever get a vote of mine.
I'm not going to fault Palin for that.She is stuck with whatever
position the McCain campaign takes. She didn't vote for it.
She could be completely opposed to the bailout but can't say it as
the GOP VP nominee.
Orange Line Special|10.4.08 @ 12:11AM|#
BDB writes: By November they're going to be just babbling
incoherently about gulags and concentration camps for Republicans,
as Barack HUSSEIN Obama surrenders to the World Wide
Caliphate.
It's not that bad; clearly, Obama has been
vetted by the East Coast establishment so don't look for him to
start talking about land reform.
However, he clearly has issues with the
First Amendment, and what's even worse are his followers. He
hasn't exactly shown an interest in tamping down their facistic
tendencies, among many other examples that could be provided.
Note that the last was featured even at Reason; apparently there
are some Potomac bridges even they aren't willing to cross.
BTW, here's what I wrote on November 1, 2004 where I suggested voting for
Kerry. In retrospect, a lot of things would be better now if
more people had taken my advice.
shecky|10.4.08 @ 12:31AM|#
Actually, she came out against
imminent domain.
To be fair, imminent demean can be quite cruel.
shecky|10.4.08 @ 12:31AM|#
Bingo|10.4.08 @ 12:32AM|#
This is the worst friday free-for-all ever.
Hey Weigel, Obama voted for FISA and now this. WTF? When are you
going to start ripping into this ideological charade? You're worse
than Steve Chapman if you don't.
|10.4.08 @ 12:35AM|#
"""No one who voted for any of these bills this week will ever
get a vote of mine."""
I thought it was worth saying twice.
gmatts|10.4.08 @ 12:45AM|#
"Actually, she came out against imminent domain.
She has no clue about the content of the talking points she's
parroting."
That was great! I guess she got Supreme COurt decisions mixed up w/
the concept of imminent threats. In fairness to her though, she was
chewing gum at the time so it's reasonable that she wasn't able to
do both.
I was also shocked that alot of the questions had to do with those
meanies in the media. Stupid jerks.
gmatts|10.4.08 @ 12:48AM|#
"SNL needs to bring back Will Farrell to do a Sarah Palin
Celebrity Jeopardy sketch."
She'll take The Penis Mightier for $200.
Elemenope|10.4.08 @ 1:14AM|#
I'm not going to fault Palin for that.She is stuck with
whatever position the McCain campaign takes. She didn't vote for
it.
She could be completely opposed to the bailout but can't say it as
the GOP VP nominee.
But SIV, during the debates she said that they disagree on many
things! And he respects her for it! And she doesn't have to give up
her beliefs just so she can be on the ticket with him!
Unless that was bullshit (NO WAY!!), she surely can speak out. She
claimed she could, at any rate, so if she doesn't she has only
herself to blame. And you no longer get to say "oh, well, what she
*doesn't say, that's her real opinion, because she's been muzzled
by the evil presidential candidate."
|10.4.08 @ 2:21AM|#
I'm not going to fault Palin for that.She is stuck with
whatever position the McCain campaign takes. She didn't vote for
it.
I'm gonna fault her for it. She could have come out guns blazing
for it, and won over fiscal conservatives all over the country. She
didn't -- and I quit watching the debate right there.
All of the Presidential or VP candidates from the major parties
supported the bailout, which is an epic fail for me.
Go Bob Barr! We're number 1 -- well, number 1 in the sense of
getting 1% of the vote.
Sigh.
|10.4.08 @ 7:26AM|#
"I'm not going to fault Palin for that.She is stuck with
whatever position the McCain campaign takes."
This creates kind of a Freudian non-falsifiable VP wish
fulfillment. Any position Palin takes vocally you don't like?
That's just her having to tow the McCain line, she doesn't REALLY
believe that. Any position she takes that you do like? That's the
REAL Sarah Palin shining through. That plus the fact that she
simply has not been in office long enough to have taken a solid
stance on any issue can give you a candidate that certain people
can read all of their preferences into, a gigantic wish fulfillment
President. I guess it doesn't hurt my idea that she is a hot
MILF...
"Go Bob Barr! We're number 1 -- well, number 1 in the sense of
getting 1% of the vote."
I think it's interesting how the major parties are so successful at
casting every election as CRUCIAL and CLOSE so that you simply MUST
NOT "waste" your vote on a candidate that you actually think
represents your values best. They do this by demonizing their
opponents, so its "McCain is not perfect but you can't waste your
vote on Barr because Obama will socialize the country" or "Gore is
not perfect but you can't waste your vote on Nader because Bush
will create a theocracy." In actuality Bush and Gore were just not
that different on many positions and McCain and his party are more
than willing to socialize things and grow the government if called
upon...
|10.4.08 @ 8:26AM|#
Well, at least both Biden and Palin, McCain and Obama are
against gay marriage.
She might be an idiot, but dems are tools.
Fluffy|10.4.08 @ 8:48AM|#
Have you seen the latest McCain ad attacking Obama for not
pushing hard enough for the bailout?
McCain didn't only want the bailout bill, he is determined to OWN
the bailout bill.
And the text of the ad mocks Harry Reid for saying that he didn't
know what the government could do to fix the problems on Wall
Street. So not only does John McCain want to OWN the bailout bill,
he specifically and deliberately mocks any statement that has even
the ring of Hayekian humility about it: If you don't think more
spending and more regulation by the state is always the answer to
economic problems, John McCain will MOCK you.
Fluffy|10.4.08 @ 8:52AM|#
And by the way: FREE OJ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OJ Simpson has been the victim of a horrible injustice.
The court and the jury in Nevada have just ruled that, if you are
going to a confrontation with people you think have robbed you, if
you bring a gun along you deserve to go to jail for the rest of
your life.
When I was in college, some friends of mine asked me to meet them
in NYC for New Year's Eve. While we were there, their car was
broken into and some luggage and personal items were stolen. They
ended up going to a street where junkies spread out stolen items to
sell them, and actually found the needle in the haystack and found
some of their stuff and got it back. According to the court in
Nevada, if they had had a gun with them when they did this, they
deserved to go to jail for the rest of their lives.
Fuck Nevada.
|10.4.08 @ 9:03AM|#
Go Bob Barr! We're number 1
I will never understand that. Obama doesn't have much of a
record.
Bob Barr does. And it's about as un-libertarian a record as one
could imagine.
And yet, Resonoids have the courage to believe.
ktc2|10.4.08 @ 9:19AM|#
The "folksy" bullshit really just seemed completely insincere
and contrived, but apparently the fundy/redneck hordes are eating
it up.
http://forums.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=184&pollShowResults=1
These people clearly live full retard.
BDB|10.4.08 @ 9:57AM|#
"He hasn't exactly shown an interest in tamping down their
facistic [sic] tendencies,"
I hate Jonah Goldberg.
P.S.--It's spelled "fascistic". Not only do you not know what the
word means, you can't spell it correctly.
|10.4.08 @ 10:54AM|#
No one who voted for any of these bills this week will ever
get a vote of mine.
Bob Barr '08. Or don't vote for POTUS.
Just Plain Brian|10.4.08 @ 11:29AM|#
I'm thinkin of writin in, "Carl Childers." I like the way he talks.
It's not just you:
"I reckon I could
run the country if I don't give out"
|10.4.08 @ 11:39AM|#
"Have you seen the latest McCain ad attacking Obama for not
pushing hard enough for the bailout?"
I saw one that attacked Obama for being FOR the bailout. Yes, the
one that McCain suspended his campaign to go get passed.
I like McCain but his campaign is a trip.
|10.4.08 @ 11:42AM|#
"Bob Barr does. And it's about as un-libertarian a record as one
could imagine."
That's not true, but even to the extent it is, Barr has made a
truly honest attempt over the past couple of years to explore the
libertarian perspective and has seemed to have made a genuine and
intellectually honest change on most issues that would be a
libertarian (disclaimer: I'm not a libertarian, not that there's
anything wrong with that). I mean, what do you think he's getting
from all that effort if he's not a genuine convert to the
ideas?
|10.4.08 @ 11:47AM|#
I have mixed feelings about Obama taking the lead. I prefer
Obama overall, and most of all I want accountability for the GOP
for their eight years of executive malfeasance.
Having said that, I think McCain has shown a lot of integrity in
the past and I hate to see him pay for his rival G.W.'s sins. Also,
I honestly think that many reforms I would like to see (global
warming, banking & securities regulation) have a better chance
of passing under a McCain presidency because the GOP senators will
not filibuster. I mean, easily the greatest liberal reform in the
past twenty years, the Americans With Disabilities Act, passed
under a GOP President. I don't think that was a coincidence...
BDB|10.4.08 @ 12:15PM|#
The most conservative reform (the '96 welfare act) was passed under a Democratic President. Ha!
|10.4.08 @ 12:27PM|#
The most conservative reform (the '96 welfare act) was
passed under a Democratic President. Ha!
To be fair, a GOP congress sent welfare reform up to Clinton two
previous times* for a veto. He was getting his ass kicked in
opinion polls over it so he did the politic thing and signed
it.
Also to be fair, with a GOP congress, GWB made no serious attempts
to reform any government giveaway program.
Reagan with a Dem congress - successful.
Clinton with a GOP congress - successful.
It is not always that way (Nixon, George H.W. Bush**) but it is
worth pondering.
* I'm working from memory here. Maybe one, maybe three.
** Who wasn't horrible. The Desert Shield/Desert Storm thing was
masterful international politics.
BDB|10.4.08 @ 12:47PM|#
Yeah, I appreciate Desert Shield/Storm now. Too bad he is associated with his son forever now in history.
BDB|10.4.08 @ 12:48PM|#
J sub-
He DID pledge to "End welfare as we know it" in 1992, though, and
he did live up to that promise, amazingly. Since, you know, he's a
Clinton, which means he's a self-serving liar.
BDB|10.4.08 @ 12:54PM|#
Actually, Nixon was very good, too, if you look at his
international politics.
Sometimes I think we should have a Prime Minister type position for
domestic policy and leave the President to conduct foreign and
military policy only.
|10.4.08 @ 12:54PM|#
BDB | October 4, 2008, 12:48pm | #
J sub-
He DID pledge to "End welfare as we know it" in 1992, though, and
he did live up to that promise, amazingly. Since, you know, he's a
Clinton politician, which means he's a self-serving
liar.
fixed
JMR|10.4.08 @ 1:51PM|#
Is anyone else bothered by the fact that supposedly Wachovia's situation was bad enough for a federally helped Citi bailout, but then Wells Fargo came in and ate it instead? It's almost as if insiders are getting some especially sweet deals or something, but I *know* that could never happen!!
|10.4.08 @ 1:55PM|#
I mean, seriously? Some people are a source of constant
amusement for me.
We, the peeps, allow our system of government to incrementally
morph from the "citizen legislator" model of the late 1700's into
an Imperial Congress. A system where our Congressmen more closely
resemble Don Vito Corleone:
"Bonasera, Bonasera. What have I ever done to make you treat me
so disrespectfully? If you'd come to me in friendship, then this
scum that ruined your daughter would be suffering this very day.
And if by chance an honest man like yourself should make enemies,
then they would become my enemies. And then they would fear you.
".
They have virtual tenure (absent the live boy-dead girl scenario)
through gerrymandering, and the one-hand-washes-the-other symbiosis
of crony corporatism and DC insider which creates not only
political AND business corruption, but also deep pocket
incumbency.
The only comparatively positive aspect of the Presidency is the
planned obsolescence of the 22nd Amendment.
We (the country in general) allow them to distract us with
bullshit:
Bush: Hey, you got Bread in my Circus!
Congress: You got Circus all over my Bread! (apologies to Reese's
PB cups)
Then, you pick sides between Cancer and AIDS, and scream over each
other about which group is the "crook".
Well. Fuck. Me.
Wow, two froth-at-the-mouth rants in two days...I think I might
need to up the dosage.
|10.4.08 @ 2:04PM|#
He DID pledge to "End welfare as we know it" in 1992,
though, and he did live up to that promise,
After the electorate spanked him by giving the Newt led
GOP control over congress. Think it would have happened
otherwise?
I honestly think Slick Willie was a more than competent president
when his worse instincts were brought under control by the
opposition. You have to admire his political skill in office.
|10.4.08 @ 2:09PM|#
Actually, Nixon was very good, too, if you look at his
international politics.
I'm certain it was an oversight taht you omitted to use the
qualifier "only".
War on Drugs Liberty.
Watergate and enemies list.
Wage and price controls.
But opening up to the PRC was a good geopolitical move.
|10.4.08 @ 2:14PM|#
BDB | October 4, 2008, 12:54pm | #
Sometimes I think we should have a Prime Minister type position for domestic policy and leave the President to conduct foreign and military policy only.
Are you really ready for the permanent end to grid-lock? After all,
in parliamentary systems the gang in power gets to appoint the PM.
(for reference, see the last 8 years)
Elemenope|10.4.08 @ 2:31PM|#
After all, in parliamentary systems the gang in power gets
to appoint the PM.
And yet, most parliaments and the countries that they serve do not
melt down into an amorphous puddle the way that
gridlock-aficionados would have you believe.
It's almost as if they are asserting a theorem and then ignoring
all data contrary to theory...
BDB|10.4.08 @ 2:48PM|#
Yeah, I meant to say "only".
His domestic policies blew. But talking to Mao took stones.
|10.4.08 @ 2:57PM|#
As I understand the customs at H&R, Friday Political Thread
means I can bring up anything I wish if it is remotely related to
politics.
Suspected
US Missile Strike Kills 20 in Pakistan
Three facts -
1) It looks like we got what we were aiming for.
2) Neither Congress nor NATO have authorized war in Pakistan, our
professed partner in the war on terror.
3) Barack Hussein Obama first publicly said we should, and
he would, do this.
Three questions -
a) Should the Bush administration be following a strategy first
publicly voiced by Obama?
b) Does it matter in the elction that he is?
c) Should we give a rat's ass about the forthcoming objections by
the Pakistan government.
No need to phrase your answers in the form of a question.
Bingo|10.4.08 @ 3:12PM|#
I just found out that, in 2000, Arizona passed legislation that
advocates secession if martial law is declared.
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/legtext/44leg/2r/bills/hcr2034p.htm
Elemenope|10.4.08 @ 3:21PM|#
I just found out that, in 2000, Arizona passed legislation
that advocates secession if martial law is declared.
That's pretty cool. I bet Texas has one lying around in a drawer
somewhere, too...
cunnivore|10.4.08 @ 4:17PM|#
The only downside to that would be that Sherriff Joe Arpaio would be freed from what little federal oversight he has to deal with now.
Borman|10.4.08 @ 7:21PM|#
"The only downside to that would be that Sherriff Joe Arpaio
would be freed from what little federal oversight he has to deal
with now."
That's a feature. Not a bug.
Elemenope|10.4.08 @ 7:46PM|#
That's a feature. Not a bug.
Indeed. In old Texas, didn't they run out on a rail the corrupt and
abusive lawmen?
Nowadays, you can get in trouble for that. If Texas had its
druthers, perhaps shooting a cop "who needed killing" would not be
an offense so much as a public service. Much like shooting the guy
you catch trying to diddle your kid.
Man, those were the days. (I'm only half-kidding).
Elemenope|10.4.08 @ 7:48PM|#
I just finished watching Jericho, and I can't get over
the deep and abiding hilarity of having the sovereign state of
Texas as the decisive swing state in an east/west American Civil
War (part II).
It just seems right, somehow.
Kolohe|10.4.08 @ 8:22PM|#
a) Should the Bush administration be following a strategy
first publicly voiced by Obama?
I don't know what it is, but their should be a catchy name for the
opposite of argument from authority. i.e. if some dude has an idea,
you can not make an a priori assertion that it's a bad idea based
on the dude. (That said, I think a lot a people mistake the caveat
of 'past performance does not *guarantee* future results' with
'past performance does not *predict* future results). All of which
is an excessively longwinded roundabout way a saying , 'sure, if
it's a good idea.' (this answer still begs the more important
question, is it a good idea? 8 ball is on the shelf and too lazy to
grab it)
b) Does it matter in the election that he is?
George Bush no longer matters in this election. That is to say,
opinions about W are fixed and are already accounted for in each
voter's decision. (or indecision)
c) Should we give a rat's ass about the forthcoming objections by
the Pakistan government.
Yes, but only from a smallish rat. Definitely not from one of those
south america capybara things. Nor from any of Mrs Frisby's
associates.
|10.4.08 @ 10:05PM|#
J sub D,
a) The Bush Administration has been following this strategy all
along. It's certainly not unique to Obama - that we would hit al
Qaeda leadership in Pakistan if the Pakistanis won't is utterly
uncontroversial.
b) It could matter a bit, in that McCain decided to make it an
issue, and it makes yet another of his "What you don't
understand..." arguments fall flat.
c) Tough one. From a strategic point of view, it might have made
sense to chill a little on this sh*t for the time being, see if Mr.
Ten Percent is both willing and able to get the military solidly
under control and lined up with against against the Talibs and al
Qaedists. Then again, initial signs haven't been good, and I'm not
inclined to second-guess them on this. It's a close call.
Just Plain Brian|10.4.08 @ 10:10PM|#
I don't know what it is, but their should be a catchy name for the opposite of argument from authority. i.e. if some dude has an idea, you can not make an a priori assertion that it's a bad idea based on the dude.
Sounds like the ad hominem fallacy to me, although there might be a
name that's more catchy and less latin.
Elemenope|10.4.08 @ 11:12PM|#
Sounds like the ad hominem fallacy to me, although there
might be a name that's more catchy and less latin.
He's asking about the "opposite of" the ad hominem fallacy.
"Argumentum ab homine" might be a start. It means (roughly)
"argument (separated) from the person".
Just Plain Brian|10.4.08 @ 11:33PM|#
He's asking about the "opposite of" the ad hominem fallacy.
The quote from above was, "the opposite of argument
from authority", and "Appeal to authority
is a type of inverse ad hominem argument"
|10.4.08 @ 11:44PM|#
Saturday Night Live once again (third week in a row) has opened with a Tina Fey Palin parody. Is Tina back in the cast? If not, how is this not an in-kind political ad?
Elemenope|10.5.08 @ 12:00AM|#
The quote from above was, "the opposite of argument from
authority", and "Appeal to authority is a type of inverse ad
hominem argument"
No, actually the full quote was:
"I don't know what it is, but their should be a catchy name for the
opposite of argument from authority. i.e. if some dude has an idea,
you can not make an a priori assertion that it's a bad idea based
on the dude."
Unpackaged, it says:
I don't know what it is, but their should be a catchy name for
the opposite of argument from authority --
If "Argument from authority is A, and A is a binary property, we
are searching for ~A"
and then
if some dude has an idea, you can not make an a priori
assertion that it's a bad idea based on the dude
Which is asking for the inverse of an "ad hominem" (defined as an
argument that proceeds to *attack* an argument based solely upon
its originator). So if "ad hominem" is B, and B is a binary
property, we are looking for ~B.
Personally I thought the second part was more obvious, but
whatever. The point is that something can be ~A [AND] ~B so long as
those states are not contradictory.
And it happens that they are not. On can make an inverse ad hominem
statement without appealing to authority.
Elemenope|10.5.08 @ 12:24AM|#
Saturday Night Live once again (third week in a row) has
opened with a Tina Fey Palin parody. Is Tina back in the cast? If
not, how is this not an in-kind political ad?
Seeing as how many conservatives see Sarah Palin being ridiculous
as some hideously perverse feature instead of a crippling
show-stopping killer poke sort of
bug, I can't see how they could complain. SNL is playing *up* their
favorite thing about her.
Just Plain Brian|10.5.08 @ 12:25AM|#
if some dude has an idea, you can not make an a priori assertion that it's a bad idea based on the dude
Which is asking for the inverse of an "ad hominem"
Not sure where you're getting inverse from there - he was simply
stating the fallacy that you can't conclude an idea is bad based on
the dude who has it, as in the original question which implied that
a strategy might not be advisable because it came from Obama.
Perhaps I'm misreading what Kolohe intended, but I read it
as:
Argument from authority - "This is a good strategy because it came
from Obama"
The Opposite - "This is a bad strategy because it came from
Obama"
In all likelihood, only Kolohe can clarify what he meant, but I
disagree with the way you're parsing his message.
Elemenope|10.5.08 @ 1:00AM|#
Argument from authority - "This is a good strategy because
it came from Obama"
The Opposite - "This is a bad strategy because it came from
Obama"
If I'm reading him right, "it came from Obama" is the part that
Kolohe wants to drop out of the discussion entirely. He wanted a
term for:
"This is a good [Argument] | [regardless of the fact:[it came from
X]]"
which takes the specific form in this case
"This is a good strategy regardless of the fact that it came from
Obama"
hence Kolohe's post:
i.e. if some dude has an idea, you can not make an a priori
assertion that it's a bad idea based on the dude
Which is pointedly different from if he had
said:
i.e. if some dude has an idea, you can not make an
a priori assertion that it's a bad
good idea based on the dude
which would be an argument from authority.
-----
It's cool to disagree and all, but I think it takes very little and
fairly uncontroversial parsing to get at what he was asking.
Kolohe|10.5.08 @ 1:56AM|#
Arggh. I knew I should have looked up inverse, reverse, and
observe and then used the right one.
to be clear, was i was trying to is that the wisdom of any
particular policy is of course (mostly) independent on who's saying
it. (but while you should not out either dismiss or accept a policy
out of hand based on who's saying it, you should take the 'who'
into account)
which was pretty pointless to say anyway. J sub D (whom no one can
accuse of being a partisan shill, he's pretty contemptuous of
everyone) was asking a question (I think) specifically about the
(US domestic) politics of the cross border raids (which joe
actually answered). But my statement implied that I thought J sub D
implied that the policy itself was unwise because Obama advocated
it and/or Bush was executing it (got it? me neither.) And most of
all it illustrated the problem that I use too many parenthetical
comments when I write.*
Fwiw, i'll repeat this part to clarify where I stand on the
strategy itself of cross border raids:
(this answer still begs the more important question, is
it[the cross border raid]a good idea? 8 ball is on the
shelf and too lazy to grab it)
*i should start using asterisks more to improve readability; they
don't break up sentences and mitigate the run-ons.
Elemenope|10.5.08 @ 4:21AM|#
Kolohe, it was pretty clear the first time.
Asterisks are the bomb, though. They improve any text.*
*Batteries not included, some restrictions may apply.
|10.5.08 @ 8:44AM|#
Has no one remarked on Biden's repeated referral to the U.S.
citizenry as an engine/machine, like we are there to power the
politicos' dreams,lifestyles,retirements?
While I have long recognized this attitude, I found it blatant, and
did not see any mention in any of the comments that I read
recently. WTF?
|10.5.08 @ 9:07AM|#
if some dude has an idea, you can not make an a priori
assertion that it's a bad idea based on the dude
My version of this is, "You can't be wrong all the
time, either."
|10.5.08 @ 9:19AM|#
"Barack Hussein Obama first publicly said we should, and he
would, do this."
At the debate Obama was criticized for criticizing these strikes,
remember? It was labeled "un-American" in the simplistic GOP sense
of that term (America never, ever does anything that might be
unwise).
I think antagonizing Pakistan is a bad idea for what its worth. We
want them to get Osama for us, but turning that whole state against
us is going to help that how?
"Saturday Night Live once again (third week in a row) has opened
with a Tina Fey Palin parody. Is Tina back in the cast? If not, how
is this not an in-kind political ad?"
CLARIFICATION FOR STUPID PARANOID CONSERVATIVES: SNL (AND OTHERS)
MAKE FUN OF SARAH PALIN BECAUSE SARAH PALIN COMES OFF AS A
MORON.
There, Jesus. I mean, they were'nt running parody after parody
aimed at McCain before Palin's pick. They "pick on" Sarah because
she's laughable and their business is getting laughs. If
conservatives don't want their nominees laughed at then they can
not pick laughable candidates...
|10.5.08 @ 9:23AM|#
As Obama takes the lead we should get ready to be reintroduced to Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright a lot. That'll be the McCain approach if he continues to slide. Obama will attack less and try to act all high minded (I call this the McDonalds Law, notice that McDonalds, which is above and beyond the most successful fast food joint, never mentions their competition in their ads while the competetion often takes a slug at them).
|10.5.08 @ 9:45AM|#
"CLARIFICATION FOR STUPID PARANOID CONSERVATIVES: SNL (AND
OTHERS) MAKE FUN OF SARAH PALIN BECAUSE SARAH PALIN COMES OFF AS A
MORON."
I'm not a Conservative, so there's no need to shout. But of course
if it makes you feel better…
But I wonder, if a black man who spoke Mississippi mush-mouth where
running for President, would a parody of that regional dialect be
considered acceptable?
My former in-laws were from North Dakota. They sounded like the
Sheriff in the film "Fargo". It didn't make them stupid, they just
kind of sounded that way.
I also remember that while working at a multi-national corporation
(controls, 96 countries),someone being passed over for a promotion
to senior management because his southern accent, coupled with his
regional grammar, made him sound rather ignorant, which they felt
would cast the company in a negative light. They regretted not
promoting him as he was great at his job, but they felt they had no
other choice.
The whole gist of Tina Fey's parody is Palin's regional dialect,
and really nothing more.
|10.5.08 @ 10:06AM|#
"As Obama takes the lead we should get ready to be reintroduced
to Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright a lot."
And that would be bad how? Do you really buy Obama's hollow
rationalizations with regard to these two men?
|10.5.08 @ 11:38AM|#
I thought J sub D implied that the policy itself was unwise
because Obama advocated it and/or Bush was executing it (got it? me
neither.)
Actually I wasn't meaning to imply anything about the practicality
or morality of ignoring Pakistan's sovreignity by killing enemies
that we've essentially declared war on. The "legality" is obviously
questionable. This is certainly somewhat different than
Nixon bombing Cambodia.
The Bush Administration has been following this strategy all
along. It's certainly not unique to Obama - that we would hit al
Qaeda leadership in Pakistan if the Pakistanis won't is utterly
uncontroversial.
August 1, 2007.
Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama said on Wednesday the United States must be willing to strike al Qaeda targets inside Pakistan, adopting a tough tone after a chief rival accused him of naivete in foreign policy.
Got any links to Bush (or McCain) talking specifically about
attacks in Pakistan publicly prior to that? Got any links to
actual deliberate attacks in Pakistani territory prior to that?
the innominate one|10.5.08 @ 12:31PM|#
Enough About Palin | October 5, 2008, 9:45am | #
...But I wonder, if a black man who spoke Mississippi mush-mouth
where running for President, would a parody of that regional
dialect be considered acceptable?...
Yes, if he were playing up his subcultural speech and behavioral
markers as a vote-garnering strategy.
...The whole gist of Tina Fey's parody is Palin's regional
dialect, and really nothing more.
It's not Tina Fey's fault that Bush, Cheney and McCain have acted
so absurdly that they have destroyed satire.
|10.5.08 @ 1:02PM|#
Enough about Palin
It's the goofy cluelessness of her answers and the perceived
contrivance of her "aw shucks, doggonit" stuff that is at the
center of Fey's parody. Have you seen it?
Kolohe|10.5.08 @ 1:38PM|#
Got any links to Bush (or McCain) talking specifically about
attacks in Pakistan publicly prior to that? Got any links to actual
deliberate attacks in Pakistani territory prior to that?
2nd quest first:
Here's something from Feb '08.
As to the first question: I would say that it is well within the
parameters of the 'bush doctrine' as most people would define it.
(which, by my definition, is the unilateral* use of military force
or other means to combat enemies** in the global war on terror***)
It is also pretty much within the parameters of the 'clinton
doctrine' as is evidenced by similar air strikes**** on afghanistan
and sudan.
*unilateral is normally in the context of 'US only' - it has been
flexed to mean 'executive decision only', but people like Gates
have scaled that back
**feel free to use scare quotes.
***maybe deserving of scare quotes, but it's an actual term
d'art.
****these air strikes were unilateral both in the sense of 'US
only' and 'Executive Decision only'
|10.5.08 @ 1:56PM|#
"Yes, if he were playing up his subcultural speech and
behavioral markers as a vote-garnering strategy."
You cannot say definitively that is what she is doing. You can only
speculate. Having been in a road band in my youth that traveled the
nation, I learned that some people just speak differently from me
in sentence structure, colloquialisms and pronunciation. If you can
produce old footage of Palin speaking differently, I will
reconsider my assessment.
"It's the goofy cluelessness of her answers and the perceived
contrivance of her "aw shucks, doggonit" stuff that is at the
center of Fey's parody. Have you seen it?"
Yes, I have (see directly above).
What I find startling is how an Ivy League, Harvard Law Review
Editor (great periodical BTW) has recently adopted a subtle
afro-preacher way of speaking and yet no one asks why that
is.
Look, I do not have a dog in this hunt. Obama/Biden sucks. Big
time. I would not vote for that ticket. McCain Palin sucks. Big
time. I would not vote for that ticket. All I ask is that when
people compare and contrast, they do so objectively.
I spoke with my Lesbian feminist sister yesterday. She told me she
could not stand Palin. Just hated her. I asked her why that is and
she told me because she is offended that just by shaking her cute
little ass, Palin can get rise to the level of VP candidate. She
said it was the exact opposite of what true feminism was all about.
I did not call her on it, but I could not help thinking, I have
never seen Palin shake her ass. Moreover, I am certain that were
there footage of this alleged ass shaking, it would be all over the
net.
And just to avoid further confusion, my handle was not chosen
because I am a Palin apologist, it's because after her speech at
the RNC, for days all that Reason posted on Hit & Run were
Palin items. Scores of them at a time when there was so much else
going on in the world (e.g. Russian bombers and nuclear armed
warships in the Caribbean at the behest of Chaves). This knee-jerk
hatred fascinates me.
|10.5.08 @ 2:01PM|#
"This knee-jerk hatred fascinates me."
I should add that it is no really no different than the outlandish
Obama love fest captured in the Obama as Dear Leaderesque children
singing YouTube clip.
Just Plain Brian|10.5.08 @ 2:04PM|#
I have never seen Palin shake her ass. Moreover, I am certain that were there footage of this alleged ass shaking, it would be all over the net.
It is all over
the net, unless you want to get into a semantic discussion of
what precisely constitutes "ass shaking"
|10.5.08 @ 2:09PM|#
2nd quest first: Here's something from Feb '08.
My Obama link was from August '07. So that doesn't quite cover it.
I concede that the Bush administration made general statements
about attacking terrorists anywhere prior to that. Hell, Clinton
probably said something similar. The Bush administration
may have warned the Musharaff regime "you do it or we
will.* Assuming honorable diplomats on both sides, we'll never
know.
* I've also heard grumbles that Pakistani intelligence can't be
trusted with information about the Taliban and fellow
travellers.
Kolohe|10.5.08 @ 2:12PM|#
I spoke with my Lesbian feminist sister yesterday
I was at my 'stay-at-home mom' sister's house in exurbs of
Jacksonville during the Republican convention. She is the exact
demographic that Palin was picked to connect. My sister, however,
doesn't care for her because she doesn't think that a woman with a
baby - esp a 'special needs' baby - should be going back to work so
quickly, and particularly at a job that requires as much time
commitment as running for nationwide office.
|10.5.08 @ 2:27PM|#
"It is all over the net"
It's nearly a quarter century old. Is it your position that being
in a beauty pageant disqualifies a woman from holding public
office? What about dance line or cheerleading? Some women's
gymnastics floor exercise routines contain dance moves that
actually do a bit of ass shaking. Are former female gymnasts
disqualified in your little world too? Or are you saying that Palin
entered a beauty pageant twenty-four years ago in order to
eventually secure a spot on the Republican ticket? If so, that is
very forward looking on her part.
But the greater point is that you seem to be unable to address
Obama's recent adaptation of an Afro-preacha speaking style. Care
to give it a shot or is your obsession with Palin just too much for
you to over-come-ah.
BTW "Chavez"
|10.5.08 @ 2:28PM|#
"My sister, however, doesn't care for her because she doesn't
think that a woman with a baby - esp a 'special needs' baby -
should be going back to work so quickly, and particularly at a job
that requires as much time commitment as running for nationwide
office."
I can understand her position / concern. It has merit because it is
reasoned as opposed to Pavlovian.
Just Plain Brian|10.5.08 @ 2:32PM|#
"It is all over the net"
It's nearly a quarter century old. Is it your position that being in a beauty pageant disqualifies a woman from holding public office...
I didn't say any of those things you're alleging, so I'm not sure
which "you" you are talking to, I merely pointed you in the right
direction to see Palin shaking her ass, since that video seems to
have completely passed you by.
But feel free to keep beating all those strawmen, and maybe someone
will come along to actually argue those positions.
Kolohe|10.5.08 @ 2:36PM|#
My Obama link was from August '07
ah, didn't catch the 7, thought we were talking this year.
Here is a Feb '07 article with Cheney 'warning' Musharraf to
act against terrorists(presumably with the subtext 'or else we'll
do it for you.' To which Pakistan said 'sod off'.)
There are probably very few non-laudatory public statements
regarding Pakistan. For most of this decade, the US was very
circumspect in consideration of Musarraff's tenuous position.
(whether this was a good idea or not is another begged
question)
Looking at some google news archives, it looks like the following
happened around the time Obama made his statement. Bhutto came back
from exile shortly thereafter, was engaged in a competitive
parliamentary contest, but was then assassinated. Which was
followed by the subsequent series of events that has now lead to
Musharaff's resignation.
Now, I'm not trying to be too conspiratorial here; most of the
events in Pakistan have been the result of various people and
factions in Pakistan. But, what it looks like to me is that the
Bush Administration cut bait with Musharaff sometime in summer '07
(which was either the cause of Bhutto's return or the result of her
imminent return). And the larger 'foreign policy establishment' as
well. Some of which were advising Obama. So Obama was able to come
out in Aug '07 with his 'bold statement' which was held quietly by
Bush administration and other people. But couldn't be held publicly
by Bush because it would an irresponsible and counterproductive
kick in the nuts to Musarraff. And the 'foreign policy
establishment' was split among a half dozen candidates on both
sides of the aisle. So they had to either say 'we disagree w/
senator obama' or keep quiet.
|10.5.08 @ 2:36PM|#
"I didn't say any of those things you're alleging, so I'm not
sure which "you" you are talking to"
My mistake. My humble and sincere apology.
the innominate one|10.5.08 @ 2:42PM|#
What I find startling is how an Ivy League, Harvard Law
Review Editor (great periodical BTW) has recently adopted a subtle
afro-preacher way of speaking and yet no one asks why that
is.
Camille Paglia (a liberal) on salon.com (a liberal website):
" A major gaffe this summer has been that, in trying to act more
casual and folksy to appeal to working-class white voters, Obama
has resorted to a cringe-making use of inner-city black intonations
and jokey phrasings -- exactly the wrong tactic. "
Kolohe|10.5.08 @ 2:44PM|#
But the greater point is that you seem to be unable to
address Obama's recent adaptation of an Afro-preacha speaking
style.
To be fair, to my ear he doesn't sound all that different now than
when he did his audio books, which is before he got famous.
And I have a habit of slipping into a slight southern dialect just
from living a brief time in sw va, middle ga and north fl, even
though I was raised in northern virginia by new yorkers and have
spent the majority of my adult life in hawaii.
Kolohe|10.5.08 @ 2:48PM|#
Obama has resorted to a cringe-making use of inner-city
black intonations and jokey phrasings -- exactly the wrong tactic.
"
You gotta admit, *nothing* was more cringe inducing this election
cycle than when Hillary Clinton tried to do something like this at
an MLK day thing (I think that's when it was)
Kolohe|10.5.08 @ 2:52PM|#
Correction, it wasn't 'street,' it was just a straight out southern drawl in a speech in march at an predominately african american church. Link.
|10.5.08 @ 2:59PM|#
"Camille Paglia (a liberal) on salon.com (a liberal
website):
" A major gaffe this summer has been that, in trying to act more
casual and folksy to appeal to working-class white voters, Obama
has resorted to a cringe-making use of inner-city black intonations
and jokey phrasings -- exactly the wrong tactic.""
Smart and well-reasoned woman. My sister had me read "Sexual
Personae" and "Vamps & Tramps" in the mid-nineties. Enjoyed
both. But what transgendered person wouldn't? One of the things
about Paglia that really struck me as honest was her writing that
as a bisexual woman, her sexual attraction to males and/or females
closely correlated to her menstrual cycle. I also recall reading
the Salon article you reference and she also said the level Palin
has advanced feminism is on par with Madonna in the 1980's. But I
could be melding her last two columns into one.
Kolohe|10.5.08 @ 3:16PM|#
It's not Tina Fey's fault that Bush, Cheney and McCain have
acted so absurdly that they have destroyed satire.
Just saw a commercial on TV related to this. SNL used to have that
cartoon 'the Ex-Presidents'. What's funny is that now it seems that
everytime there's a disaster, Clinton and Bush 1 do team up to
'save the world'; I just saw an ad of them together for Ike
hurricane relief.
the innominate one|10.5.08 @ 3:20PM|#
I believe Paglia describes herself as a liberal with libertarian leanings. She is a registered Democrat.
|10.5.08 @ 3:27PM|#
"I believe Paglia describes herself as a liberal with
libertarian leanings. She is a registered Democrat."
"I myself am a libertarian and registered Democrat who voted for
Bill Clinton (once gladly, once not) and for Ralph Nader in
2000."
- Camille Paglia
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=6E3E7427-0F4A-4BF3-B903-DCBA502D8D73
|10.5.08 @ 4:28PM|#
McCain fucking deserves to lose this election. If he had come
out strongly against the bailout, that would have endeared him with
the majority of the populace, on both the left and right, and I
think would have closed the gap with Obama considerably.
Taking the "I'm almost exactly like my opponent, except possibly
even more socialist" is SO not a winning strategy when you're a
Republican and trailing in the polls.
I was talking with a hardcore right wing Republican from Florida a
few days ago -- you know, one of those voters in a state that
matters -- and he is incredibly pissed off at the McCain bailout
thing, ready to not vote because of that for the first time ever.
He can't be the only one thinking this right now.
|10.5.08 @ 4:43PM|#
Seeing as how many conservatives see Sarah Palin being
ridiculous as some hideously perverse feature instead of a
crippling show-stopping killer poke sort of bug, I can't see how
they could complain.
I think most guys, when thinking about Palin and "killer pokes",
don't think about software bugs, LMNOP. The non-gay response is to
think about penetrating a hottie MILF during fucking.
NTTAWWT :o)
|10.5.08 @ 4:59PM|#
Re: J sub D |
October 4, 2008, 2:57pm
From today's newspaper, Turkey
slams Iraqi Kurds after rebel attack kills 15
soldiers
ANKARA (AFP) - The Turkish military Sunday accused Iraqi Kurds of aiding Turkish Kurdish rebels holed up in their autonomous enclave in northern Iraq after the militants killed at least 15 soldiers in a daytime attack near the border.
If what the US did in Pakistan last week is justifiable (and I
believe it was), it follows that Turkey striking Kurdish terrorists
based in the Kurd controlled areas of northern Iraq (which
they have done in the recent past) is equally
justifiable.
After all, if the Iraqis/Iraqi Kurds are "unable or unwilling" to
take control of the region ...
'Tis a fucked up world in which we live.
Muhammad|10.5.08 @ 6:49PM|#
"'Tis a fucked up world in which we live."
Thanks you. Wouldn't want it any other way. For now.
It Took Two Months???|10.5.08 @ 7:02PM|#
Man freed after powder found not to be cocaine
Associated Press:
A Shakopee man who spent two months in jail after being found with
white powder was cleared this week after tests showed the powder
was deodorant, not cocaine.
Thirty-one-year-old Cornelius F. Salonis was arrested Aug. 3 for
allegedly driving drunk. He was jailed after police said they found
cocaine in his car.
Salonis' attorney blames a faulty field test for the false result.
Richard Hillesheim says a state crime lab concluded the powder was
deodorant.
Prosecutors dismissed the felony drug charges Wednesday and allowed
Salonis to plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge of drunken
driving.
He was sentenced to a year in jail. But the judge stayed nine
months of the sentence and removed another month for good behavior.
So with the two months he already served, Salonis was freed.
http://www.twincities.com/news/ci_10640322?source=rss
|10.5.08 @ 10:19PM|#
It's interesting that "Enough About Palin" manages to imagine
both that Tina Fey's spot-on impersonation of Palin is supposed to
be a derogatory reference to her accent AND find Obama's use of his
own accept - instead of generic unaccented American English - is
somehow disconcerting as well.
The discomfort with the - what was it again, Negro preacher? -
accent suggests to me that maybe EAP is reading hostility and
insult into Fey's adoption of the accent where none is intended.
Sometime an accent just characterizes someone, and shouldn't be
read as derogatory. You might has well say that Fey' wearing of
rimless glasses is meant to be derogate Palin's eyesight.
|10.5.08 @ 10:26PM|#
To answer your first question, if someone did a spot-on
impersonation of your theoretical Mississippi candidate which
included a pitch-perfect accent, it would be hilarious. This is
what Fey does with her Palin impersonation.
If he did an exaggerated accent to mock the guy's speech patterns,
that would be offensive.
|10.5.08 @ 10:57PM|#
"If not, how is this not an in-kind political ad?"
This was Enough About Palin's initial complaint, that SNL was
somehow providing an Obama ad by focusing so much satire on Palin.
I noted that they focus so much satire on Palin because she strikes
many folks as moronic. As evidence I once again submit the
following: there was not skit after skit parodying McCain. If there
were some attempt to support Obama or hurt McCain we should have
seen that.
But it does make sense if you accept that many people find Palin to
be especially limited as a thinker but don't think that about
McCain, whatever else they may feel about him.
Now we can talk about why people think Palin is stupid, a different
question. Enough About Palin argues that it is some irrational
thing aimed at her regional style of speech. Maybe that is some
part of it, and to that extent that's not fair.
However I would bet it has far more to do with Palin giving the
impression from WHAT she says and does (rather than how) that she
is clueless, like the goofy "Putin rearing his head, you can see
Russia from Alaska", the "I know more about energy than anyone in
the world", the non-answers to questions (i.e., asked about carbon
caps, talks about off shore drilling), not seeming to know what the
Bush doctrine or an Achilles heel is, etc. (by the way, the above
quotes are paraphrases so let's spare everyone any nitpicking about
this or that word).
And if you watch Tina Fey's parodies that kind of stuff is all in
there.
BTW-Tina Fey is not a regular cast member of SNL, but she still
works for Lorne Micheals and as her gimmick includes wearing
glasses like Palin it's natural she keeps being called on to do
her.
|10.5.08 @ 11:09PM|#
I've been watching people do characters with exaggerated
Massachusetts accents my whole life.
It never occurred to me I should be offended. And some of them were
ridiculously exaggerated, plainly intended to make fun of the
accent itself, and not done as an impersonation of any particular
individual, which means they were meant to impersonate New
Englanders as a whole.
Sambo|10.6.08 @ 12:22AM|#
"I noted that they focus so much satire on Palin because she
strikes many folks as moronic. As evidence I once again submit the
following: there was not skit after skit parodying McCain."
Are you certain? Because it was Palin that energized the slumping
McCain campaign, so it would make sense strategically to diminish
Palin as quickly and effectively as possible.
McCain parodies would likely be less effective.
Sambo|10.6.08 @ 12:28AM|#
For someone who "strikes many folks as moronic" she's playing
very well in Silicon Valley.
Joe Malchow writes:
"The original notion for northern California was to have an
intimate event in the Woodside, Calif., backyard of a certain
technology titan. But in the event, far, far too many Silicon
Valley Republicans wanted to pay $1,000 a plate to hear from Sarah
Palin. I received a call last week letting me know that the
high-priced event would now be held in a ballroom. And it was going
to remain high-priced.
http://www.dartblog.com/data/2008/10/008230.php
the innominate one|10.6.08 @ 4:04AM|#
Enough About Palin:
Like Paglia, Bill Maher has also described himself as a
libertarian. That doesn't make it so.
My point in bringing up Paglia was to give an example of someone
who had criticized Obama's speech patterns, since you seemed to
think that that had not happened. Congratulations to you on not
acknowledging that while throwing out a lot of red herrings.
|10.6.08 @ 10:24AM|#
"Change is not the same thing as progress"
Iraq.
Katrina.
Budget Deficets.
Prescription Drug Benefit.
Harriet Meyers.
Bailouts.
I think change from all that would be progress. You
don't?
I would, but Obama ain't bringing that change. He backed the
bailout, has promised to expand government health care, and will
grow the deficit. He seems to have a tin ear for who he hangs out
with, so I think we'll see more Harriet Meyers/Alberta Gonzales in
his administration. Whatever he says, I don't believe he can heal
the planet and prevent more hurricanes.
That pretty much leaves Iraq, and at this point I don't see him
doing anything different there than Bush would.
|10.6.08 @ 1:41PM|#
"My point in bringing up Paglia was to give an example of
someone who had criticized Obama's speech patterns, since you
seemed to think that that had not happened. Congratulations to you
on not acknowledging that while throwing out a lot of red
herrings."
Not to split hairs, but when I said "What I find startling is how
an Ivy League, Harvard Law Review Editor (great periodical BTW) has
recently adopted a subtle afro-preacher way of speaking and yet no
one asks why that is." by no one, I meant no one on this blog. No
one can know what everyone everywhere is saying or writing.
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