The Friday Political Thread: No Hand Shows Edition

We survived two debates this week, an occurance which won't be repeated until... well, until three and a half weeks from now, when the Democrats and Republicans do back-to-back Jan. 5 debates in New Hampshire. Robert Novak's report is especially thorough this week and worth reading.

Unconvincing quote of the week...

"I always knew it would be hard." - Hillary Clinton, Dec. 14. Two weeks earlier she said she never considered the possibility of losing the nomination.

The week in brief...

- The much-loathed Des Moines Register debates hardly moved the needle in either campaign, although Fred Thompson showed signs of life, Hillary Clinton sounded flustered, and John Edwards announced plans to nationalize Hit & Run.

- New Hampshire Clinton backer Bill Shaheen (husband of the Democrats' Senate nominee against John Sununu) speculated—just being helpful!—that Republicans would pillory nominee Obama for his lifetime of hardcore drug use and dope dealing. Shaheen resigned.

- The energy bill, which needed 60 votes to break cloture, got 59.

The GOP rises again! This might be a half-baked theory based on a bunch of random results and fooferah, but consider:

- Last Friday, Kentucky Secretary of State Crit Luallen, a Democrat, decided not to challenge Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, whom polls show has been weakened over the last year.

- On Tuesday, Republicans held on to two open House seats in Virginia and Ohio by 21 points and 14 points respectively. The Virginia result wasn't much of a surprise, but Democrats actually made a play for Ohio, spending DCCC money, sending Gov. Ted Strickland and Sen. Sherrod Brown to campaign for Democrat Robin Weirauch after a nasty primary (the Club for Growth went in against him) apparently weakened Republican Bob Latta. Latta's win was at the high end of Republican hopes.

- On Thursday, former Mississippi Attorney General Mike Moore, a popular Democrat, decided not to run for Trent Lott's open Senate seat.

- The first poll pitting Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu against GOP Treasurer John Kennedy (who switched parties to run against her) has the second-term Democrat up only 46 to 42.

It feels very different from the winter of 2005, when Democrats were rushing into less-than-sure-thing races and Republicans were resisting Karl Rove's appeals to run for Senate. (Rove's the guy who flipped Kennedy in Louisiana.) Democrats are still cleaning up in fundraising and winning the general election, but the climate's a little worse than it was last year.

Final point: In the latest CNN poll (PDF), only 54 percent of undeclared voters want to vote in the Democratic primary. That's down from a high of 70 percent, and it's a factoid Democrats have been pushing all year as proof of their continued strength and the GOP meltdown.

Honest Barry. I try to get into the heads of Joe and Jane Iowa Voter, I really do... but it falls apart when the issue is drugs. Plenty of people think drug use is a character flaw, and I don't. So the way that Obama deals with his past drug use, as an awful youthful mistake that no boy should repeat, is probably the way to handle it even though it leaves me cold. Craig Crawford argues that it's not enough.

Throughout the 2000 presidential campaign, George W. Bush managed to dodge detailed questions about his partying past in the same way that Obama's team is now doing – by calling foul against anyone who brings it up.

I don't think that's quite fair. Karl Rove's strategy included denying that Bush had ever used drugs and hoping that reporters would get tired of asking. Rove et al knew that Bush had been arrested for a DUI and simply covered it up for the entire campaign. That's not what Obama is doing. He's wisely been admitting what drugs he did (and what crimes he committed) for years. Still, we're a long way away from the maturity of Australia, where Bob Hawke probably became prime minister because of his legendary boozing abilities.

Debates are stupid. Fred Thompson's going all in and stumping Iowa from next week to Jan.3. His tour is dubbed "The Clear Conservative Choice: Hands Down." That's a reference, of course, to his refusal to put his hand up or down to answer the DMR debate question on global warming. John Edwards put in a manful performance at the Democratic debate, but the second-day story was all about Obama smacking around Clinton when she laughed at a question about how many Bill Clinton advisers worked for him: "Hillary, I'm looking forward to you advising me as well." It's not like we're leaving behind a great era of American politics, but... seriously? Fred's angina counts for more than Romney's precision or Giuliani's daydreaming about endless meetings?

Below the fold...

- Jim Geraghty dreams about President Ron Paul: "I can’t deny that it appeals to some dark corner of my fiscal conservative psyche."

- The Iowa Independent (part of the Center for Independent Media's new web mag network) has an Iowa cattle call that puts Ron Paul in third place.

- Matt Taibbi swoons for Barack Obama. (Fair warning: His last political crush was Kucinich.)

- Mark Hemingway tries to understand the youth-Ron Paul axis.

- Phil Klein talks to Arkansans about Mike Huckabee's pardons.

- Rich Lowry denies him clemency.

In a week that ended with buzz about drugs and dealing, I award the Politics 'n' Prog slot to Can. You can guess why.

Comments

Rick Barton | December 14, 2007, 6:00pm | #

Ron Paul on the Mad Money show at 6 and 11 ET tonight on CNBC!!

Fluffy | December 14, 2007, 6:01pm | #

The Republicans can't rise again because of the mass retirements.

Warren | December 14, 2007, 6:03pm | #

We survived two debates this week, an occurance which won't be repeated until... well, until three and a half weeks from now, when the Democrats and Republicans do back-to-back Dec. 5 debates in New Hampshire.

So three and a half weeks from now, the Democrats and Republicans are going to travel back in time to Dec 5th? Cool, another month for Ron Paul.

NoStar | December 14, 2007, 6:05pm | #

Weigel,

How about a NSFW warning on the music video. I've got two more hours to go and falling asleep could cost me my job.

NoStar

Michael Scott | December 14, 2007, 6:16pm | #

"I always knew it would be hard."

That's what she said.

Oh wait, that really is what she said.

sixstring | December 14, 2007, 6:27pm | #

Ron Paul on the Mad Money show at 6 and 11 ET tonight on CNBC!!

Nice interview, Paul looked competent and confident. Cramer is a freaking lunatic, so this lovefest may not carry much weight. But, if someone is watching and this is his first impression of Ron Paul, I would suspect they would head to the website for more info.

Click 'n' Learn | December 14, 2007, 6:33pm | #

If you're tired of Sovietski debates, consider helping push this proposal.

In fact, Reason could even get a lot of press - and do a public service - by putting things like that on, and it wouldn't take that much money just as long as it was done in a straight-to-Youtube style (with a transcript).

Of course, Reason will have to choose experts from *across the spectrum* and they'll have to deal with issues like immigration, so that might partly explain why they haven't exactly rushed to adopt the idea.

In other news:

1. The WaPo has turned on Huck. Guessing why shouldn't be difficult.

2. Ruuudy, Mitttt, and Fred all have Bush family links: lonewacko.com/blog/archives/007317.html

3. One of Reason's favorite far-left sources shows their respect for the 1st (and the truth): lonewacko.com/blog/archives/007315.html

4. Here's the part of Huck's "tough" plan the MSM won't discuss.

5. Ron Paul gets smeared; Reason would probably agree with the smear.

6. Have you been exposed to prog at work, at home, or at school? The President's Select Committee Against the Use of Prog Use recommends this six-in-one antidote.

J sub D | December 14, 2007, 6:43pm | #

- The Iowa Independent (part of the Center for Independent Media's new web mag network) has an Iowa cattle call that puts Ron Paul in third place.

I went to the link and was impressed by the # of Paul supporters talking him up in the comments. The blimp got a mention. Will all of this enthusiasm translate into a good showing in the early states? I fervently hope so, but remain skeptical.

Ali (formerly iih) | December 14, 2007, 6:47pm | #

J sub D:

The goal is to make sure to be among the top 3. I am not sure where all Romney supporters go if he does not win Iowa. That could be great news for Ron Paul after Iowa and NH.

joe | December 14, 2007, 6:48pm | #

The Republicans would pretty much have to start trending upward at some point, wouldn't they?

Our system tends towards parity, and I've never seen a party as far down as the Republicans in from 2006-this fall.

But I wouldn't count on that translating into pickups in Congress. In terms of vulnerable incumbents, 2006 was actually set up to be a good year for the GOP Senate. In 2008 and 2010, the map is more favorable for the Democrats. We could be talking about a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate in 2009 or 2011.

As far as the war goes, "better than mid-2006" is still pretty awful, both in terms of Iraq and domestic politics.

Ali (formerly iih) | December 14, 2007, 6:49pm | #

Note: After 4 days away from H&R, I am going to disappear again. See y'all later.

Please, everyone, take care of Dondero and Guy for me.

Hello Guy Montag!

Charles | December 14, 2007, 6:49pm | #

Unrelated to anything that is in this post, but could Hit and Run get a karma/approval ratings system thingy? There have been some real dicks around lately, in addition to the usual ones. Balko has one on his site and it seems to work well enough.

Cesar | December 14, 2007, 6:52pm | #

Joe, the Democrats have a way of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Mike Huckabee | December 14, 2007, 7:00pm | #

Do Catholics pray to Mary as a God?

I don't know - Im just a humble monotheist Baptist minister. You should ask that Hell-bound, ring-kissing , mackeral-snapping Papist Rudy Giuliani.

crimethink | December 14, 2007, 7:01pm | #

Our system tends towards parity, and I've never seen a party as far down as the Republicans in from 2006-this fall.

The Dems in '94-95 were in pretty dire straits. Weren't they seriously talking about cooperating with the Repubs in shutting down a couple of federal departments at the time?

BakedPenguin | December 14, 2007, 7:01pm | #

I try to get into the heads of Joe and Jane Iowa Voter, I really do... but it falls apart when the issue is drugs. Plenty of people think drug use is a character flaw...

Myself, I think accepting subsidies for crops you aren't growing is a character flaw.

Papist Avenger | December 14, 2007, 7:04pm | #

Mike Huckabee,

If Rudy Giuliani is a Papist, I'm a ray of God's fluffy, nonjudgemental love shining into the world.

Cesar | December 14, 2007, 7:05pm | #

Myself, I think accepting subsidies for crops you aren't growing is a character flaw.

The truest statement I've seen all week.

joe | December 14, 2007, 7:07pm | #

Cesar,

I see that sentiment all the time. It seems to be based on 1) Al Gore having a small margin of victory in a campaign with a third party that only took votes from him, and 2) John Kerry coming closer to unseating a wartime president than any candidate in American history. I don't think that cliche holds up very well upon examination.

crimethink,

The Dems in '94-95 were in pretty dire straits. Yes, they were, but not this bad. It just kept coming for the Republicans in 2006. Mark Foley? What the hell was THAT?

Cesar | December 14, 2007, 7:10pm | #

I see that sentiment all the time. It seems to be based on 1) Al Gore having a small margin of victory in a campaign with a third party that only took votes from him, and 2) John Kerry coming closer to unseating a wartime president than any candidate in American history. I don't think that cliche holds up very well upon examination.

I don't know if an extremely reviled woman and a black guy whose middle name is "Hussein" will stand up very well after months of being attacked by right wing radio. Clinton could probably withstand it, but they'd destroy Obama. Remember Harold Ford? I can see it now, "Barack Hussein Osama".

J sub D | December 14, 2007, 7:16pm | #

Mark Foley? What the hell was THAT?

For reasons that I can't fathom, self loathing, sexually repressed but otherwise respectable, whackjobs are drawn to the Republican party. Expertise in political psychiatry is probably required to understand it.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 7:18pm | #

"Clinton could probably withstand it, but they'd destroy Obama. Remember Harold Ford? I can see it now, "Barack Hussein Osama"."

Actually I think you are wrong. I listen to talk radio quite a lot and Rush, Tod Schnitt and Glen Beck all seem to have more respect for Obama than Hillary Clinton. That doen't mean they like the guy but they don't think he is a sleezeball in the way Clinton is.

Cesar | December 14, 2007, 7:20pm | #

Actually I think you are wrong. I listen to talk radio quite a lot and Rush, Tod Schnitt and Glen Beck all seem to have more respect for Obama than Hillary Clinton. That doen't mean they like the guy but they don't think he is a sleezeball in the way Clinton is.

Is that why Rush calls Obama the "Magical Negro"?

And they are actually right about one thing. Obama is not a sleezeball like Sen. Clinton is.

Plant Immigration RIghts Supporter | December 14, 2007, 7:25pm | #

Cesar, I listen to Rush quite a lot (no I do not agree with him on everything) and I know his style. One thing he does is take comments from liberal (in the modern sense) collumnists and use those comments against liberals (in the modern sense). Ther "magic negro" comment came from an opinion piece in the LA Times describing Barak Obama as the Magic Negro because he was the first black politiction who actually (in the opinion of the writer) had a real shot at becoming POTUS. The words did not originate with Rush Limbaugh. Rush is merely using them.

SIV | December 14, 2007, 7:31pm | #

Cesar,

I take it you don't listen to Limbaugh.
Google "magic negro" and hit "I feel lucky".
Or just go here

The "magic negro" stuff is an attack on "the drive-by media" and their support for Hillary.

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 7:32pm | #

Cesar is right. Clinton and Obama are nightmare candidates. It's amazing to see the Dems intent on picking them. Joe has a good idea concerning the Mondalization of the war supporters, but I think there is plenty of Mondalization left among Dem primary voters. Their two front runners would start any race with huge disadvantages. Despite polls there are a great deal of potential Dem voters who will have a very, very hard time voting for a woman or a black guy (much less one whose name sounds so funny and even bad to many [admittedly ignorant] folks).

I think the GOP has a couple of strong candidates, meaning they could hurt any potential Dem. However, those two are McCain (because independents and Dems like the guy) and Guliani (because of his more moderate stances on social issues), and they will almost certainly pick either the poor man's GOP Jimmy Carter or Captian No-Convictions (need I point out I'm referring to the Huckster and Mitt(stake)?).

And yes the right wing press is playing softball with Obama right now It helps them look like they may have some iota of fairness (he's not only a "good black" but a "not-so-evil Democrat") and they (or better put their listnership) hates Hillary and he is her opponent...

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 7:35pm | #

"I listen to Rush quite a lot (no I do not agree with him on everything) and I know his style."

By which you mean insipid, right?

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 7:35pm | #

Mr. NIce Guy, may I ask what you mean by "good black"? I am just asking what you are implying.

Cesar | December 14, 2007, 7:37pm | #

I take it you don't listen to Limbaugh.

Only intermidantly. I did hear the "magical negro" thing secondhand FWIW.

I just don't think a black guy, particularly one who had a Muslim father and who has an odd middle name, will be elected President of the United States. If 2008 comes along and Obama is President-elect, everyone feel free to hit me over the head with this comment the day after election day though.

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 7:40pm | #

"I listen to Rush quite a lot (no I do not agree with him on everything) and I know his style."

Of fat hypocrite pussy?

"Limbaugh's opponents will likely call him a hypocrite after Friday's confession, since he has criticized crack addicts in the past and said drug offenders should be thrown in jail like any other criminals.

In the past, Limbaugh has decried drug use and abuse on his bluntly conservative show, mocking President Bill Clinton for not inhaling and often making the case that drug crimes deserve punishment.

"Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. ... And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up," Limbaugh said on his short-lived television show on Oct. 5, 1995.

During the same show, he commented that the statistics that show blacks go to prison more often than whites for the same drug offenses only illustrate that "too many whites are getting away with drug use."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,99731,00.html

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 7:42pm | #

PIRS-Racist people, like many right wing talk pundits, often will refer to "good blacks" (they actually use a much more offensive term) and talk them up in order to "demonstrate" that they are not unreasonably racist. Spike Lee had a little fun with this in one of his movies (the pizza one).

J sub D | December 14, 2007, 7:45pm | #

- Mark Hemingway tries to understand the youth-Ron Paul axis.

From the linked article
His conviction alone is unlikely to get the Texas congressmen elected president. But for now, if Ron Paul and young voters succeed in making the rest of the candidates adopt principles, assert their beliefs strongly, and ensure they hold fast to those beliefs and principles, who could argue against the importance of the role that Paul has played?

We can only hope that some of that priciple nonsense catches on. Lord knows GWB doesn't govern the way he talked in 2000, Romney has NO principles that I can discern.

Plant Immigration RIghts Supporter | December 14, 2007, 7:46pm | #

"By which you mean insipid, right?"

No. Not at all. I mean brilliant, inspired and quite talented. I disagree with him on a great many social issues but I must admit the man is a genius. I also do not think he is as much of a social conservative as he lets on. One of his best friends is Camille Paglia, an art critic and openly gay columnist for Salon.com. He is an enigma. For those who are not regular listeners of his program one of the things he is best at is “demonstrating absurdity by being absurd.” In 1992 he endorsed Bill Clinton in order to make a point. After his endorsement he was inundated with calls asking him why and he denied making the endorsement. He did so to point out one of the character flaws of Bill Clinton. His ability to switch positions and deny having taken the previous position. Sometimes these jokes are taken out of context by the mainstream press.

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 7:48pm | #

"I disagree with him on a great many social issues but I must admit the man is a genius."

Get out much?

SIV | December 14, 2007, 7:49pm | #

In the past, Limbaugh has decried drug use and abuse on his bluntly conservative show, mocking President Bill Clinton for not inhaling and often making the case that drug crimes deserve punishment.

If MNG's statement is true why does his only citation date back to 1995 and on Rush's short-lived TV show? Rush is on the radio 5 days a week. There is good reason to think that Rush is no great supporter of the WoDs for reasons quite seperate from his history of using them.

Plant Immigration RIghts Supporter | December 14, 2007, 7:50pm | #

"PIRS-Racist people, like many right wing talk pundits, often will refer to "good blacks" (they actually use a much more offensive term) and talk them up in order to "demonstrate" that they are not unreasonably racist. Spike Lee had a little fun with this in one of his movies (the pizza one)."

That is what I thought you meant. Are you implying that any of the three talk show hosts I name above are racist?

Plant Immigration RIghts Supporter | December 14, 2007, 7:51pm | #

For the record I have never heard any talk radio host use the term "good black".

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 7:52pm | #

If you're talking conservatives, then brilliant is a word I would use for Edmund Burke or James Fitzjames Stephen. Inspired someone like Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Allen Tate or Evelyn Waugh. Quite talented (in a funny way), P.J. O'Rourke.

Rush Limbaugh? HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

Oh, dear...

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 7:54pm | #

"If MNG's statement is true why does his only citation date back to 1995 and on Rush's short-lived TV show? Rush is on the radio 5 days a week. There is good reason to think that Rush is no great supporter of the WoDs for reasons quite seperate from his history of using them."

One of Rush's idols is William F. Buckley Jr. who devoted an entire issue of National Review to his opposition to the War on Drugs.

Click 'n' Learn | December 14, 2007, 7:55pm | #

Did I happen upon ThinkProgress by mistake? I say that, of course, because they and similar sites have a habit of jumping on random comments without putting them in their context.

My debate idea doesn't seem to have exactly lit the world on fire, or at least this corner of it. Can I suggest that as a good way to get Ron Paul's ideas out there?

P.S. Ron Paul!

SIVh | December 14, 2007, 7:56pm | #

Rush Limbaugh leaves quite a libertarian trail.

See Rush's blurb for REASON magazine, his friendship with Thomas W Hazlett and that he frequently turns the "Golden EIB Microphone"
over to Walter Williams (who argues for drug legalization to Rush's loyal listeners).

crimethink | December 14, 2007, 7:56pm | #

Meet the new boss..same as the old boss:

Attorney General Michael Mukasey refused Friday to give Congress details of the government's investigation into interrogations of terror suspects that were videotaped and destroyed by the CIA. He said doing so could raise questions about whether the inquiry is vulnerable to political pressure.

Apparently, DOJ also told the CIA not to cooperate with Congress either, so as not to raise the appearance of political pressure.

Plant Immigration RIghts Supporter | December 14, 2007, 7:57pm | #

Mr. Nice Guy, it seems you like one liners and snide comments. If you have actual criticisms of his show I am all ears (or eyes in this case.)

prolefeed | December 14, 2007, 7:57pm | #

LOL at Hemingway's description of Paul:

But that doesn’t change the fact Paul — a tragically unhip old man who comes off rather like an autistic version of Don Knotts — has animated the youth vote through the sheer force of his principled conviction.

Cesar | December 14, 2007, 7:58pm | #

Did I happen upon ThinkProgress by mistake? I say that, of course, because they and similar sites have a habit of jumping on random comments without putting them in their context.

Like you don't do that yourself, Lone Wack-off.

crimethink | December 14, 2007, 7:59pm | #

ClickNLearn,

I'll support your DebateIdea, but only on the condition that it's dubbed over in Spanish with EnglishSubtitles.

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 8:01pm | #

SIV
"If what I say is true?" Are you questioning the excellent fair and balanced reporting of Fox news my cockfighting friend? (Actually I guess what you obviously meant to say was that while it MAY be true there are only this handful of old quotes from Jabba the Pussy and therefore we can all imply the fat bastard really is not big on the WoD, since that is the only way your post makes any sense)...

PIRS
Yeah, I think most of those guys are racist and a lot of their audience is. Of course they don't "use the term 'good black'" on the air. But they engage in the "practice" of obliquely attacking minorities and then every now and then "parading" what they consider to be a "good black" in order to demonstrate that, hey, they are fair minded after all.

I guess you don't get the joke on Colbert about his "black friend."

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 8:04pm | #

SIV and PIRS "argument"
1. Rush likes some authors who are libertarians and are against the War on Drugs.
2. Therefore Rush is a libertarian and against the WOD.

Jesus, no wonder you think Rush is a "genius."

Juan | December 14, 2007, 8:04pm | #

Referring to Limbaugh by his first name alone confuses the hell out of me....

crimethink | December 14, 2007, 8:05pm | #

prolefeed,

I like how Hemingway takes a shot at Ron Paul for his "idealistic foreign policy"...aren't we supposed to be ending terrorism forever by spreading democracy still?

prolefeed | December 14, 2007, 8:05pm | #

Ali -- I think you can drop the "formerly iih" thing when filling in the name field for your posts. The people who visit here fairly regularly all know about the name change. The people who rarely visit here probably don't remember any iih.

But, hey, your call.

BakedPenguin | December 14, 2007, 8:07pm | #

Speaking of random comments, Can was psychedelic? I always thought they were proto-industrial. Or am I thinking of Chrome?

crimethink | December 14, 2007, 8:10pm | #

But that "autistic version of Don Knotts" comment really takes the cake. It's just an incoherent string of insults. Does this guy know what autism actually is? Has he ever seen Don Knotts? They don't look remotely alike.

prolefeed | December 14, 2007, 8:11pm | #

Our system tends towards parity, and I've never seen a party as far down as the Republicans in from 2006-this fall.

Our system does that because if either party falls much below 50%, they start drifting toward the other party's positions. Today's Republican party is far more statist than, say, the Democratic party in the early 1900s. Today's Democratic party has managed to implement nearly all the goals of the Socialist party in the early 1900s, with the reluctant assistance of GOPers afraid of hit pieces if they stood on what used to be their small-government principles.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 8:11pm | #

"Yeah, I think most of those guys are racist and a lot of their audience is. Of course they don't "use the term 'good black'" on the air. But they engage in the "practice" of obliquely attacking minorities and then every now and then "parading" what they consider to be a "good black" in order to demonstrate that, hey, they are fair minded after all."

On what basis do you make this claim? I have never heard any of them "attack minorities". I have heard them attack individuals, some of who happen to be minorities. But I have never heard them attack an entire group of people who only have ancestory or skin colour in common.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 8:14pm | #

"SIV and PIRS "argument"
1. Rush likes some authors who are libertarians and are against the War on Drugs.
2. Therefore Rush is a libertarian and against the WOD.

Jesus, no wonder you think Rush is a "genius.""

I never claimed Rush was a libertarian. By the way, William F. Buckley Jr. is not a libertarian either. I don't think SIV was making that claim either.

This is a change, SIV and I are on the same side in an argument?

Cesar | December 14, 2007, 8:15pm | #

MNG, I too hate people like Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton. Hate to break it to you, but that doesn't make one racist.

SIV | December 14, 2007, 8:16pm | #

MNG.


What you said is totally bullshit.
I didn't realize it was all quotes from a Fox News piece as you didn't put quotes around all of it.The archive of all his broadcasts shows Rush doesn't actively support the WoDs as a conservative issue.
Why waste the breath on a "progressive" cause like that?

BakedPenguin | December 14, 2007, 8:17pm | #

Yup, it was Chrome I was thinking of.

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 8:18pm | #

I remember several Rush episodes (his tv show, and no I can't site the actual dates it was YEARS ago) where this "genius" would simply play clips of Owen Major or some other member of the Black Caucus making some over the top speech and he would stand by the picture and make faces and literally POINT while they person spoke. It was always one of the members that had, shall we say, almost nearly stereotypically bad grasps on the King's English. It was obvious what connection he was counting on his audience to make...

I think liberals overdue the "coded racism" meme. But Rush and his ilk make it seem like they are on to something.

Cesar | December 14, 2007, 8:19pm | #

Was it true Limbaugh called for the execution of drug dealers once?

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 8:20pm | #

Hey Cesar, I hate Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, and yes, I am not a racist either. But I'm confused as to what in the world that has to do with what we are talking about.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 8:21pm | #

Cesar, I hate Jesse Jackson and Al Sharton also. They are the racists, they support government programs that discriminate against people on the basis of skin colour.

Cesar | December 14, 2007, 8:21pm | #

Hey Cesar, I hate Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, and yes, I am not a racist either. But I'm confused as to what in the world that has to do with what we are talking about.

Liberals often call people "racist" for not following the platform of the NAACP and Rainbow/Push, thats what I'm talking about.

prolefeed | December 14, 2007, 8:23pm | #

Clinton and Obama are nightmare candidates.

I agree about Clinton, MNG, except that this race is full of nightmarishly bad candidates. Edwards is worse than HRC, and Giuliani and Huckabee give me the shivers. I simply don't know what Obama stands for, and quite possibly he doesn't either.

OTOH, this is the first presidential primary in a long time when there was one person worth voting FOR in either of the major parties, versus the lesser of two evils.

J sub D | December 14, 2007, 8:24pm | #

PIRS many, too damned many, moons ago, '92-'94, I listend to Rush Limbaugh while on my daily commute. I got an hour of him a day, for 2+ years. He's funny. He sometimes make intelligent points. He's also a racist. He's exceptionaly good at code words. No, I have no transcripts available to buttress my point. But this isn't Annie, just off the pickle boat, talking here. 2+ years of an hour a day listening to his act convinced me. He was also evolving into a Repeblican party shill back then.

Cesar | December 14, 2007, 8:25pm | #

Obama is an old-school liberal. But hes a really nice guy, conciliatory, and non-confrontational. That and being the first probable black candidate is why he gets so much attention.

He'd also be destroyed in the general election for those very reasons.

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 8:26pm | #

I don't argue that Rush or anyone is racist because they hate and make fun of particular civil rights "leaders." I do maintain that Rush, and for example G. Gordon Liddy, engage in a great deal of rhetoric that is designed to appeal to racists without being overtly racist (he's not exactly Bill Bennet when he is mocking welfare queens and immigrants). And I maintain that a lot of their audience is in fact racist.

"The archive of all his broadcasts shows Rush doesn't actively support the WoDs as a conservative issue."
Well offer some up buddy. So far I've presented the evidence and your only argument has been "but that was a while back." So give us a quote where he argues against the War on Drugs. Man up or shut up.

PIRS-Well, then just change "is a libertarian" with "is not for the WOD." Or is that what you are arguing by pointing out that 1. WFB is against the WOD and 2. Rush likes him?

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 8:29pm | #

Mr. Nice Guy, if I had to guess it was probably Sheila Jackson Lee, an individual who, was certainly not the best that Black America in terms of intellectual fire-power. But then, she was a politician. The wisest among the human species do NOT run for public office. As Epicurus pointed out so long ago, it causes distress in the mind and the soul. She, it seems had more than her fair share of "distress".

I recorded that show most of the time (it was on late at night in my time zone) and watched most of the episodes. I do not think he was pointing fun at "black people" so much as he was pointing fun at "political people."

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 8:32pm | #

"He's also a racist. He's exceptionaly good at code words. No, I have no transcripts available to buttress my point."

Funny thing those transcripts, people who claim he is a racist can't seem to keep track of them.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 8:33pm | #

Insert "had to offer" between "America" and "in" above.

prolefeed | December 14, 2007, 8:34pm | #

crimethink -- It was a cheap shot, but imagine for a moment Jon Stewart or Steven Colbert delivering that line -- it's funny. The whole article had a funny closeted-and-in-deep-denial libertarian struggling with their dirty, dirty desires thing going, kinda like when Colbert denounces gays mode and then angrily demands the man-candy quit tempting him.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 8:39pm | #

"PIRS-Well, then just change "is a libertarian" with "is not for the WOD." Or is that what you are arguing by pointing out that 1. WFB is against the WOD and 2. Rush likes him?"

I never made any claim as to Rush's position on the War on Drugs.

SIV | December 14, 2007, 8:44pm | #

This is a change, SIV and I are on the same side in an argument?

I don't think it is the first time.
Does your name refer to opposition to the white-list on plant/seed imports?

Was it true Limbaugh called for the execution of drug dealers once?

As true as Hillary's charge that Barak Obama was a major coke dealer in kindergarten.

I recall hearing (the only "hypocrite" citation
that I am aware of) Rush respond to a liberal caller on the racial penalty disparity between rock and powder cocaine that "parity" could be achieved by raising the sentence for powder as well as lowering it for crack.He wasn't specifically advocating that policy but debating the caller.

Cesar | December 14, 2007, 8:49pm | #

I think we can all be happy SCOTUS finally said this week the discretion between crack and powder cocaine sentences is ridiculous. Now, the next step is to get rid of mandatory minimums for drug offenses altogether.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 8:51pm | #

SIV, yes, my name does refer to the white list. I think that all plant species have the right to "breathe free."

Mike Laursen | December 14, 2007, 8:51pm | #

Screw debates! It's about damned time we had a good old-fashioned, barn-burning candidate scandal.

SIV | December 14, 2007, 8:53pm | #

As I said above Rush leaves quite a libertarian trail.Hazlett and Williams aren't just "authors he admires" but friends who have influenced his thinking.I think (former REASON writer) Hazlet coined the term "Feminazi". Walter Williams is a regular scheduled substitute host.

SIV | December 14, 2007, 8:55pm | #

SIV, yes, my name does refer to the white list. I think that all plant species have the right to "breathe free."

We certainly agree on that.

SIV | December 14, 2007, 9:01pm | #

I think we can all be happy SCOTUS finally said this week the discretion between crack and powder cocaine sentences is ridiculous. Now, the next step is to get rid of mandatory minimums for drug offenses altogether.

I'd like to go well beyond that and restore our property rights re "drugs" to a pre-1914 status--The entire pharmacopoeia.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 9:03pm | #

SIV, I am glad to hear (read) that you are a suporter of plant liberty.

This is completely unrelated to this discussion, but I remember about 10 years ago, when Yahoo Chat was still good, I had lots of good political discussions in the politics forum there. It has since then descended into nothing but ad hominims and soundbites. These threads remind me (in a good way) of my best experiences with Yahoo Chat back when it was actually worth participating in.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 9:08pm | #

"I'd like to go well beyond that and restore our property rights re "drugs" to a pre-1914 status--The entire pharmacopoeia."

Yes, we should repeal the amendment that enabled the Federal Government to engage in the War on Drugs. Wait - what amednment was that again?

crimethink | December 14, 2007, 9:17pm | #

The 18th Ammendment gave the Feds the power to regulate drugs, didn't it...

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 9:25pm | #

Crimethink, is that the same amendment that enabled the Federal Government to regulate baseball?

The Police | December 14, 2007, 9:29pm | #

Are there people talking about drugs in here? If there are people talking about drugs that must mean there are people doing drugs.

joe | December 14, 2007, 10:19pm | #

I think this is a teachable moment.

SIV defends Rush Limbaugh from the charge that his "Magical Negro" bit was racist by linking to the source he got it from.

SIV, the fact that he cribbed the term from a David Ehrenstein column has nothing to do with whether his bit was racist. This isn't about magic words, and whether they're on the special Do Not Use: Racist list of words. If you use a term to make a racist point, or make fun of someone's race, it doesn't matter where you got the term or if somebody else used it in a non-racist manner.

I used to work at a warehouse where we played cards during break, Pitch, it's a local bid/trump game in New England. If someone vacillated during bidding, they'd always tell the same joke:

Hey, are you a re-neger?

I ain't no re-neger.

Har har har. Sometimes they'd do a "funny" negro accent.

Renege is a perfectly innocent word. That doesn't mean they weren't being racist assholes.

Some people just get positively gleeful when they think they've got an excuse to be a racist asshole. Like Rush Limbaugh.

YahooJerk! | December 14, 2007, 10:19pm | #

It has since then descended into nothing but ad hominims and soundbites.

No it hasn't!!1!1! You suck!!1!! ROFLMAO!!1!

Kolohe | December 14, 2007, 10:22pm | #

Speaking of talk radio, today I happened to hear parts of Hannity's interview with Alan Keyes. All I have to say is: wow, this guy was an ambassador?

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 10:22pm | #

"As I said above Rush leaves quite a libertarian trail.Hazlett and Williams aren't just "authors he admires" but friends who have influenced his thinking."

This is the best you can do SIV? That goes up in the SIV Hall of Fame with "Humans deserve rights because humans are humans" argument from the animal rights post way back (gotta give it to you, noone has been able to refute that humans are, indeed, humans).

Rush has two libertarian friends so he must "leave quite a libertarian trail." (I imagine you mean like a snail? That fits Jabber the Hut [Rush]).

Hell, I have more than two libertarian friends so I must be Ludwig von freaking Mises.

Maybe in your fantasy land where libertarians and conservatives gambol through the fields naked and drink from the same cup Rush in particular and conservatives in general are against the war on drugs. But in reality poll after poll shows folks who identify as "conservative" supporting a harsher line on drugs than those identifying themselves as "liberal." And the FACT is that Rush has made comments supporting the WOD* and none that you can produce opposing it.

PIRS-I'm sure it was Jackson Lee, but it was also Major Owens and a few other members of the CBC. He loved it, and as J sub D pointed out, he knew exactly what he was doing by choosing these public figures and making fun of them in the way he did.

* "“There’s nothing good about drug use. We know it. It destroys individuals. It destroys families. Drug use destroys societies. Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up. What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug use. Too many whites are getting away with drug sales. Too many whites are getting away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not to start letting people out of jail because we’re not putting others in jail who are breaking the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river, too.”
- Rush Limbaugh show, Oct. 5, 1995

joe | December 14, 2007, 10:26pm | #

They are the racists, they support government programs that discriminate against people on the basis of skin colour

I hate to break this to you, but disagreeing with David Duke about affirmative action does not make one racist.

And agreeing with him on the issue does not inoculate one against being a racist.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 10:39pm | #

"SIV, the fact that he cribbed the term from a David Ehrenstein column has nothing to do with whether his bit was racist. This isn't about magic words, and whether they're on the special Do Not Use: Racist list of words. If you use a term to make a racist point, or make fun of someone's race, it doesn't matter where you got the term or if somebody else used it in a non-racist manner."

In Rush's case he did NOT use the term in a racist manner.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 10:40pm | #

LOL @ YahooJerk!

joe | December 14, 2007, 10:41pm | #

No, having a good laugh because you get to use forbidden racial terms is just hunky-dory.

It's probably not "racist," in the same sense that the six-year-old saying"fuckity fuckity fuck fuck" on a playground isn't obscene.

SIV | December 14, 2007, 10:41pm | #

joe, are you going to denounce the Racist Hillary Clinton campaign? Black man = cocaine dealer.

I love how you liberals have the magic decoder ring that translates all the conservative "codewords" as RACIST!

joe | December 14, 2007, 10:43pm | #

Actually, the point was "guy who says he did coke = druggie."

I don't know if that guy Shaheen was deliberately trying to get racists to make that leap, but I see they have.

joe | December 14, 2007, 10:45pm | #

Oh, yes:

Denounce you, Bill Shaheen! If you bring up Barack Obama's drug use, people like PIRS are going to stop thinking of him as "one of the good ones."

You know how easy it is to get them to do that, and you shouldn't have gone there.

joe | December 14, 2007, 10:47pm | #

PIRS,

You are clearly quite adept at denying accusations of racism, on your own behalf and on the behalf of other people who are often accused of racism.

You have a great deal of experience at this, don't you? Most people sputter and swear but you...you handle it like a real pro.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 10:47pm | #

I wrote:
"They are the racists, they support government programs that discriminate against people on the basis of skin colour."

Joe wrote:
"I hate to break this to you, but disagreeing with David Duke about affirmative action does not make one racist. And agreeing with him on the issue does not inoculate one against being a racist."

Joe, replace "affirmative action" with "jim crow laws" and see if your statement still makes sense.

joe | December 14, 2007, 10:50pm | #

OK.

"Disagreeing with David Duke about jim crow laws does not make one a racist."

That makes perfect sense. Believing segregation is wrong - ie, disagreeing with David Duke - does not make one a racist.

I'm not sure what you were going for there.

SIV | December 14, 2007, 10:51pm | #

So the leftist PC authoritarianism says an educated professional journalist can use those "forbidden racial terms" in a sophisticated nuanced narrative but a conservative commenter satirizing said journalist can't?

Hillary really fucked up thinking the yahoo Democrat voters were going to choose her over that scary Black cocaine dealer.Your rank and file Dem proles are still dumb enough to fall for that "Party of the Working Man" BS but they can see a unprovoked vicious racial smear as clear as anyone.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 10:54pm | #

Actually, when I was in college I was a conservative (for the first 2/3 of my experience) and minored in poli-sci. Most of my professors were socialists and most of my classmates thought the absolute worst of conservatives. So, yes, I became adept at defending myself. I had to. Then, I gradually became libertarian. On vacation once I bought a book called the "Politically Correct Dictionary" it defined the word "racist" as "I disagree with you."

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 10:56pm | #

From YahooNews:
"Shaheen, an attorney and veteran organizer, had said much of Obama's background is unknown and could be a problem in November 2008 if he is the Democratic nominee. He said Republicans would work hard to discover new aspects of Obama's admittedly spotty youth.

"It'll be, 'When was the last time? Did you ever give drugs to anyone? Did you sell them to anyone?'" said Shaheen, whose wife, Jeanne, is a former New Hampshire governor and is running for the U.S. Senate next year.

"There are so many openings for Republican dirty tricks. It's hard to overcome," Shaheen said."

That certainly is not saying Obama is or was a drug dealer. Obama has admitted using drugs, and when Clinton did that the GOP machine went after him bigtime (see, the thing to do is what Bush did [Press: Did you do cocaine? Bush: I could pass the background check at the White House]), and this guy is pointing out, quite correctly, that his admissions will likely be used against him.

Conservatives are tools for jumping up and down screaming "Look at HRC calling Obama a drug dealer!" And, of course, Hillary is her usual tool self for getting this guy to step down (but then that's the kind of thing I expect from the Clintons).

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 10:58pm | #

joe
It's OK to be confused with where PIRS is going with such a thing. I wouldn't be suprised if he shares that confusion. This is a guy who upthread said, of Rush Limbaugh that he was "brilliant, inspired and quite talented. I disagree with him on a great many social issues but I must admit the man is a genius."

I kid you not. Scroll up and have a belly laugh. I know I did.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 10:59pm | #

"I'm not sure what you were going for there."

OK Joe, I will write it for you. "Agreeing with David Duke on Jim Crow laws does not make one a racist."

Does this make sense to you?

joe | December 14, 2007, 11:00pm | #

So the leftist PC authoritarianism says an educated professional journalist can use those "forbidden racial terms" in a sophisticated nuanced narrative but a conservative commenter satirizing said journalist can't?

That would depend on how it's done. Satirizing the journalist? Yeah, sure, that's it. That was a totally meaningful, incisive critique of Ehrenstein's ideas. And totally not a cheap excuse to call Barack Obama "negro" and laugh about it.

I'm sorry you think Barack Obama is a scary black cocaine dealer, but it's pretty much what we've come to expect from you.

PS, remember when you used to call yourself "Single Issue Voter" who only cared about cockfighting, and pretended to be horrified when I called you out as a transparent Republican shill after about two threads?

Good times. You really are easy to peg.

joe | December 14, 2007, 11:01pm | #

On vacation once I bought a book called the "Politically Correct Dictionary" it defined the word "racist" as "I disagree with you."

Whoops, you left off "...and never seriously thought about whether making fun of black people was wrong again," dittohead.

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 11:03pm | #

Shill is right joe. I'm a longtime reader of his stuff. SIV's posts are obviously meant to convince H&R posters that conservatives in general and the GOP specifically are great. They're almost childishly obvious...But he has come a long way these days, calling himself a "traditionalist" and "conservative." 12 steps...

joe | December 14, 2007, 11:03pm | #

No, that doesn't make any sense.

But don't worry. Most of what you're writing doesn't make any sense.

SIV | December 14, 2007, 11:08pm | #

Shaheen? C'mon joe all her surrogates are in on the action.She still thinks she can make it stick. Keep it up Hillary and you'll get less of a percentag of African-American Democrat Primary votes than a Republican gets in the General election

joe | December 14, 2007, 11:10pm | #

MNG,

PIRS's comments - check that, the comments PIRS cribbed from every perfectly-coordinated Republican media outlet in the country - are a classic example of the "You're a racist for noticing my racism" gambit.

Shaheen says Republicans are going to read about Obama's past drug use and talk about scary black drug dealers. And, well, just look at those cribbed talking points. Looks like Shaheen was right.

And yet, for observing that the Republicans are going to act like bunch of racist goobers, Shaheen gets called a racist by them.

What's funny is that exactly the same people actually are going to talk about Barack Obama, the urban politician with a history of drug use who goes to one of THOSE churches for the entire general election, without batting an eye.

But hey, only a racist would notice the Republicans are assholes about race.

Mr. Nice Guy | December 14, 2007, 11:10pm | #

joe
Actually the most fun with a shill I ever had was with anon. A thread on Israel conjures him up like a lamp does a genie, there to defend the Likudian view of the world. One time he was having a hard time convincing everyone here why we should keep giving gobs of taxpayer money to Israel no matter how they behave. So he started to post under, I kid you not, the handle "Lord Acton" (get it, Lord Acton is a libertarian figure, so hey, I'm not just a Likud shill I'm with you guys.") However the silly goose forgot which handle he was under in subsequent posts and everybody saw who he was. He disappeared for days, and, I can only assume, wet his pants...

joe | December 14, 2007, 11:15pm | #

Keep it up Hillary and you'll get less of a percentag of African-American Democrat Primary votes than a Republican gets in the General election

Mmm, I'm sure she's quaking in her boots.

Fluffy | December 14, 2007, 11:21pm | #

Joe, do I have to accuse you of having Hillary as your girlfriend again?

You are as sensitive to criticism of her - even intraDemocrat party criticism as the most unreasonable Paultard is sensitive about Ron Paul criticism.

But you keep claiming she's not your candidate and I just don't get it.

joe | December 14, 2007, 11:28pm | #

"Agreeing with David Duke on Jim Crow laws does not make one a racist."

You switched it around.

DISagreeing with David Duke on issues related to race does not make one a racist, was my first statement. Agreeing with him on issues related to race does not INOCULATE YOU FROM CHARGES OF RACISM, was my second statement.

I disagree with David Duke on race-related issues, just about across the board. That does not make me a racist - if anything, just the opposite.

You agree with David Duke on at least one race-related issue. That, at a minimum, does not prove your anti-racial bona fides.

Here's a hint - if you want to hold yourself out as being holier-than-thou because of your opinion about a race-related political issue, don't select your determination to see fewer black people admitted to college as the opinion you highlight. People who are actually opponents of anti-black racism can generally point to a position they hold that would actually benefit black people suffering from racism.

And before you get in a huff about how opposing affirmative action isn't, by itself, racist: I agree. It isn't.

It isn't proof that you were Martin Luther King in a past life, either.

joe | December 14, 2007, 11:34pm | #

Fluffy,

I don't object to legitimate criticism of Clinton.

I don't object to criticism of the Shaheen, or of the Clinton campaign, for their racial concern-trolling regarding Barack Obama's past drug use.

What I do object to are dishonest Republican talking points being waved around in bad faith. Claiming that Shaheen's comments were a smear about Obama's race, rather than an attack on his electability once the Republicans turn the Southern Strategy back on, is dishonest propaganda.

BakedPenguin | December 14, 2007, 11:39pm | #

And yet, for observing that the Republicans are going to act like bunch of racist goobers, Shaheen gets called a racist by them.

Sorry joe, have to call you on this. Try: for observing believing that the Republicans are going to act Democratic primary voters would be swayed like in fear of a hypothetical bunch of racist goobers, Shaheen gets called a racist by them.

Nothing happens in the Clinton campaign without being vetted, joe. Are you fucking kidding me? Those comments were meant to be a kneecapping like Nancy Kerrigan got. "Psst, librul pal... you vote for Obama, and teh racist Rethuglikans will take him out with his drug history".

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 14, 2007, 11:54pm | #

"Whoops, you left off "...and never seriously thought about whether making fun of black people was wrong again," dittohead."

Hmm, can you point me to the thread where I have "made fun of black people"? For that matter, where any of the talk show hosts I have named above have done so? You keep making accusations but you have yet to produce evidence. Or are we to the point in our society where a person is guilty until proven innocent?

prolefeed | December 15, 2007, 12:08am | #

Keep it up Hillary and you'll get less of a percentag of African-American Democrat Primary votes than a Republican gets in the General election

Mmm, I'm sure she's quaking in her boots.

joe, are you saying that HRC shouldn't be concerned about the backlash from this smear, in primaries where in some states blacks make up half the primary voters?

Or do you think blacks will disregard this whole bidness, and that the recent migration of black voters from HRC to Obama before this got out won't accelerate?

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 15, 2007, 12:11am | #

“You switched it around. DISagreeing with David Duke on issues related to race does not make one a racist, was my first statement. Agreeing with him on issues related to race does not INOCULATE YOU FROM CHARGES OF RACISM, was my second statement.”
Most people of at least average intelligence would have understood my point. You either did not or are claiming that you did not. Since you at least seem intelligent my guess is the latter.

“Here's a hint - if you want to hold yourself out as being holier-than-thou because of your opinion about a race-related political issue, don't select your determination to see fewer black people admitted to college as the opinion you highlight.”
It is not my determination to see fewer black people admitted to college. It is my determination to see them admitted on their own merit. I think they can do so and will have a greater self-worth for doing so.
“People who are actually opponents of anti-black racism can generally point to a position they hold that would actually benefit black people suffering from racism.”
I can. I support the elimination of the state. It is the state that enabled slavery to exist in the first place by subsidizing the return of slaves, prohibiting their ownership of firearms, prohibiting their education and emancipation. It is the state that continued to hold them down with Jim Crow Laws. It is the state that continues to provide them with inferior schools to their white counterparts. It is the state the holds families in a cycle of poverty by subsidizing that poverty . It is the state that is keeping neighborhoods where they live as warzones with the War on Drugs. Yes, I do hold such a position.

Cesar | December 15, 2007, 12:30am | #

My original point is Barack Obama would be destroyed in the general election because 1) hes a nice guy and 2) hes black. Does anyone doubt this?

prolefeed | December 15, 2007, 12:38am | #

Cesar -- I doubt this. The last two presidential elections both came down to a single state. The demographics haven't changed drastically since then. The states where being black is a huge handicap went red in the last two elections.

The nice guy thing isn't as big a handicap as you might think -- if Obama's niceness can survive all the nastiness HRC throws at him if the race tightens up, it can survive the nastiness the Republicans throw at him. If it can't survive HRC's attacks, it won't be an issue, because he won't be the general election candidate.

Look at the matchups on RealClearPolitics.com. Obama and HRC both do equally well against Republican opponents.

Plant Immigration Rights Supporter | December 15, 2007, 12:50am | #

"The states where being black is a huge handicap went red in the last two elections."

Other than Florida which has a huge population of old people what other state are you talking about?

Plant Im migration Rights Supporter | December 15, 2007, 12:52am | #

"My original point is Barack Obama would be destroyed in the general election because 1) hes a nice guy and 2) hes black. Does anyone doubt this?"

I do doubt it. He will be destroyed in the general election because of his positions.

Cesar | December 15, 2007, 1:12am | #

I'll eat my shirt and shave my head if Barack Obama is elected President next year. I say this with complete, total confidence because I know it will never happen.

Again, if this does happen, joe or anyone else can feel free to post this all over H&R in November 2008.

bigbigslacker | December 15, 2007, 1:21am | #

Obama is black? Oh, I get it - the other half is Irish.

Resisting temptation to hit "submit"....can't stop....help.....must resist.....

bigbigslacker | December 15, 2007, 1:23am | #

that was aweful, let me make it up to yall:

Q: Why do you put a baby in the blender feet first?

A: So you can see his expression.

bigbigslacker | December 15, 2007, 1:29am | #

er awful, not filled with awe

Now I owe another joke. Ok, there was a Mexican, an Englishman, and a "African-American" standing on a bridge. Blah, blah, blah...."dodging traffic"

Neu Mejican | December 15, 2007, 1:55am | #

BakedPenguin,

Chrome are the most important band of the 70's.
Half Machine Lip Moves is among the best rock albums of all time.

Can, however, is also quite kick-ass.
They get to be Both proto-industrial, psychedelic, protopunk, free-jazz, proto-ambient, and a host of other things. They predicted almost every musical style post- 1970.

imho...

Neu Mejican | December 15, 2007, 2:15am | #

FWIW,

It is far more interesting to debate the prog-rock roots of Can and the proto-industrial cred of Chrome than to try and figure out whether republicans or democrats are more racist.

Way too short clip of "Firebomb" by Chrome
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO5c3pzCg78

Neu Mejican | December 15, 2007, 2:17am | #

Fuckin' A,

Here's the whole thing.
The intertubes kick ass!!!!!

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=6173878

Neu Mejican | December 15, 2007, 2:23am | #

And there's even this Gallon Drunk video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwzqF2ZSl4M

At least Blue Daisies is still hard to find.

Neu Mejican | December 15, 2007, 2:24am | #

Yes,

gallon drunk has a guy who only plays the maracas... you got a problem with that!!!!

Neu Mejican | December 15, 2007, 2:27am | #

A better maraca display...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7tlRXiOcGE

Neu Mejican | December 15, 2007, 2:29am | #

This time with go go dancers...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQbqoQLCxQ0

Pig Mannix | December 15, 2007, 4:48am | #

@NoStar

How about a NSFW warning on the music video. I've got two more hours to go and falling asleep could cost me my job.

I'd have thought the word "prog" should have been all the warning you would have needed...

Ali | December 15, 2007, 6:02am | #

Ali -- I think you can drop the "formerly iih" thing when filling in the name field for your posts. The people who visit here fairly regularly all know about the name change. The people who rarely visit here probably don't remember any iih.

Done!

(P.S. New Orleans is cool!)

Eric Dondero | December 15, 2007, 9:04am | #

Wayne Root, Libertarian for President today on Fox News Weekend at 3:00 pm est.

BakedPenguin | December 15, 2007, 9:35am | #

Mejican - looks like they traded the maraca player for the go-go dancers. Good call.

| December 15, 2007, 9:53am | #

"Obama is black? Oh, I get it - the other half is Irish."

Does that mean he's an Irish jig?

edna | December 15, 2007, 10:07am | #

hes black. Does anyone doubt this?

i do. he's about my shade and the census takers (after i refused to state) put me down as white.

Ayn_Randian | December 15, 2007, 10:12am | #

OK, Dave, seriously, Ohio's District 5 (which just happens to be my home district, so I might know a little about this) has been Republican for like, ever.

Bob Latta is Del's son (I think?) and Del held that seat for thirty years. Actually, that seat was held by only 3 Republicans (Clevenger, Latta and Gillmor) for almost 70 total years.

Anyway, my point is that Rs winning OH-5 is as surprising as the New York Times endorsing the Democratic candidate for President, in that it signifies nothing.

sending Gov. Ted Strickland and Sen. Sherrod Brown to campaign for Democrat Robin Weirauch

Not that Republicans are any better in my book these days, but I will testify that all three of these Ds are grade-A douches. Although that's a given for either party in Ohio politics...seriously.

Ayn_Randian | December 15, 2007, 10:13am | #

oh yeah, and why is Dondero pimping the Libertarian candidate? Like you actually know what libertarian means, Mr. Support Giuliani and the War on Every Foreign Country Ever.

Cesar | December 15, 2007, 10:17am | #

Ayn_Randian, Dondero has now morphed into Mr. Im So Fucking Scared of Huckabee I'll Back Anyone Else.

J sub D | December 15, 2007, 11:02am | #

Open thread claim! Researchers Clone Fluorescent Cats

I read this and thought "Hmmm, 500 μgrams of acid, a dark apartment, black lights and two glow in the dark kittens." Where were the glow in the dark cats in the '70s when I would have done that? And enjoyed it no end. Just the thought of it brought a huge smile to my face.

Seriously, gene splicing and cloning techniques are going to change the world in ways that we will not forsee. Buckle up, boys and girls, it's going to be a wild, interesting, and sometimes scary ride.

J sub D | December 15, 2007, 11:05am | #

Dond