Online Media

Reason Writers Around the Internet: Peter Suderman Talks Obama's 2012 Chances, the GOP Field, Super Committee, and More on Bloggingheads

|

Will the economy kill Obama's reelection chances? Does Texas Gov. Rick Perry's rhetoric match up to his record? What's the best we can hope for from the super committee? Reason Associate Editor Peter Suderman and Jamelle Bouie of The American Prospect discuss these questions and more on Bloggingheads. Approximately one hour.

Advertisement

NEXT: Reason.tv: Why is the Government Driving Folks Off Their Land?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. A pointing device is an input interface (specifically a human interface device) that allows a user to input spatial (i.e., continuous and multi-dimensional) data to a computer. CAD systems and graphical user interfaces (GUI) allow the user to control and provide data to the computer using physical gestures ? point, click, and drag ? for example, by moving a hand-held mouse across the surface of the physical desktop and activating switches on the mouse. Movements of the pointing device are echoed on the screen by movements of the pointer (or cursor) and other visual changes.
    While the most common pointing device by far is the mouse, many more devices have been developed. A “rodent” is a technical term referring to a device which generates mouse-like input. However, the term “mouse” is commonly used as a metaphor for devices that move the cursor.
    For most pointing devices, Paul Fitts’s law can be used to predict the speed with which users can point at a given target position.

    Thesis Mice the animals are different from Mice the pointing devices.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointing_device

  2. Thats pretty scary when you really think about it. WOw.

    http://www.web-anon.at.tc

    1. Baby Got Back

      “Baby Got Back”

      Sir Mix-a-Lot’s “Baby Got Back” from Mack Daddy
      Problems listening to this file? See media help.
      “Baby Got Back” is a 1992 Number One single by hip hop artist Sir Mix-a-Lot, from his album Mack Daddy, and samples Channel One’s “Technicolor”. The song’s title originates from an urban slang term used to express a favorable opinion about the bust of a woman’s (baby) buttocks (back). “Baby got back” can be rephrased as “She has a nice butt”.
      At the time of its original release, the song caused controversy with its outspoken and blatantly sexual lyrics about women, as well as specific and objectionable references to the female anatomy. The video was briefly banned by MTV.[1] Baby Got Back has remained popular and even anthemic for almost 20 years since it was originally featured on the album Mack Daddy in 1992.
      In 2008, it was ranked number 17 on VH1’s 100 Greatest Songs of Hip Hop.[2]

      The first verse begins, “I like big butts and I cannot lie…”, and most of the song is about being attracted to big butts. The second and third verse challenge mainstream norms of beauty: “I ain’t talkin’ bout Playboy” and “So Cosmo says you’re fat / Well I ain’t down with that!”. Sir Mix-a-Lot comments in a 1992 interview: “The song doesn’t just say I like large butts, you know? The song is talking about women who damn near kill themselves to try to look like these beanpole models that you see in Vogue magazine.” He explains that most women respond positively to the song’s message, especially black women: “They all say, ‘About time.'”[3]
      Also brought to the forefront of pop culture by this song is what was considered to be a generally accepted white standard of beauty ? a skinny body lacking in voluptuous curves. The song starts with a conversation between two (presumably) thin, white valley girls. In the prelude that opens the song, one girl remarks to her friend, “Oh, my God, Becky, look at her butt! It is so big […] She’s just so … black!” following by Sir Mix-a-Lot representing the African-American subculture’s view: “You other brothers can’t deny” and “Take the average black man and ask him…”[4]

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_Got_Back

      1. It occurs to me that Sir Mix-a-Lot was not representing black subculture; he stood in opposition to it; at least, from my perspective, black guys vastly prefer skinny white girls, no matter how horse-faced, over any number of attractive-but-curvier black women.

  3. Perhaps Hurricane Irene will devestate the entire East Coast and open the way for a massive stimulus spending that will save us all.

    At least that’s how they’ll try to sell it.

    1. I like the way you think.

  4. Honestly, who has an hour to listen to stuff like this?

    1. I have the same question about most cable news shows.

      1. Yes, that is what I was thinking originally. I go online to read the text when something major happens on cable news shows, or I will view the 1-minute clip if necessary. I’ll be damned if I am going to listen to two guys talk on the phone for an hour.

    2. An hour?!? Holy shit. Ihave things to do.

  5. I have to say… I am disappoint in Suderman’s accent. I was really looking forward to a Billy Bregg crossed with Bjork sort-of vibe.

    1. And I have my answer. Government employees, I swear…

  6. ac?qui?esce /?akw??es/
    Verb: Accept something reluctantly but without protest.

  7. There is a good chance that things are going to get so bad for Obama in the coming year that any Republican, even a Ron Paul or a Rick Santorum could beat him. And there is little question in my mind Palin could win the Republican nomination if she put her mind to it. She is a lot like Hillary Clinton in one key way. Back in the 00s when Hillary was thinking about running for President all of my conservative friends used to say that she could never win because she was so unpopular. I never believed that. Hillary has and still has a rock solid base of people who love her.

    And sure enough, had the world not gone nuts with Obama syndrome and Axelrod and company hadn’t as much as stole the nomination through crooked caucusing (Obama won very few if any primaries 08 but he killed in the caucuses) or if the media had actually covered the Rael Hunter scandal knocking Edwards out of the race early, Hillary would be President right now. Palin is the same way. No matter how much her enemies hate her, she has a huge base of very loyal supporters. And that counts.

    What I wonder is what Democrats will do come next spring if it looks like Palin is going to get the Republican nomination and Obama’s approval numbers are in the low 30s. Will they ask him to step aside to avoid the horror of Palin winning?

    1. The parties virtually never, ever, ask an incumbent to step aside. They will not ask Obama to do so, partly from tradition, and partly because they’ll think that he’ll just do what he did last time: be Hope and Change guy and inspire people.

      And frankly, they’re right to do so. People are fucking stupid, and if you thought he was Hope and Change once, you’ll probably do it again, no matter how awful he actually has been.

      I’m not saying he’s going to win, but I think you’ll be stunned by the number of morons who vote for him again.

      1. In this environment any sitting President could get 45%. The problem is that a really wounded Obama depresses the vote down ticket. A sitting President only getting say 45% of the vote would probably mean a really big chunk of Senators and reps go down with him. If I am not mistaken there are 20 Democratic Senators up for re-election in 2012. IF Obama is looking like a dead loser come summer 2012, they are going to start to panic. Never under estimate what an endangered incumbent will do to stay in power.

        I would love to see a Palin Hillary general election. That would be the bitch fight from hell. And it would pretty much be a civil war amongst white women. Hillary’s support is from upscale secular or near secular white women. Palin’s support is from middle and down scale and religious white women. I don’t think either one of them would be excessively mean as candidates. But the clashes between their supporters would be like sticking two wolverines in a box. Nothing could beat it for pure entertainment value.

        1. Nothing could beat it for pure entertainment value.

          I heartily agree.

    2. Despite all the rending of clothing and gnashing of teeth, the leftist/progressive/blue core is going to vote for Obama no matter what. Nominating either Ron Paul or Sarah Palin splits the GOP enough to make a lot of them stay home. The GOP apparatus will grab the joystick to keep either of those crash scenarios to happen.

      About the only thing that might work is something like Perry, who–despite the scare pieces–is more the sort of saber-rattlin’, Jesus-talkin’,fence-sittin’, debt-chickenhawk, middle-of-the-road conservative-lite that appeals to the core and swing portion of the non-Obama vote.

      1. I don’t necessarily agree with that. But for the sake of argument consider it to be true. That means that the conservative Tea Party types will suck it up and vote for a fake conservative. But the establishment types will take their marbles and go home if they don’t get what they want.

        But remember, it is all of the conservatives who are the unreasonable ones holding the Party hostage.

        1. Perry isn’t a fake conservative, he is what a conservative is defined as in the current GOP.

          In the Venn diagram of Party-line GOP, TEA party/nominally libertarian-friendly GOP, and politically-active SoCons, Paul, Palin and Romney land squarely in one of those circles; Perry squats in the middle. Unless he has some spectacular flame-out (dead girl/live boy type situation) my money is on him being palatable enough to get the nomination.

          Whether he can beat Obama from that GOP nexus is another question.

      2. “grab the joystick”

        Thanks, SF. I’ll be using that, without attribution.

        Unless he has some spectacular flame-out (dead girl/live boy type situation)

        The trial lawyers have been trying to dig dirt on Perry in Texas for years. I doubt there will be any surprises.

        And Perry is known as a very disciplined campaigner, so I doubt we’ll have any unscripted “Yeeeaaargh” moments.

        I think Perry beats Romney for the nom. The GOP establishment loves them some ROMNIAC, and Perry is not one of their faves, but the Tea Party hates the Father of MassCare, and can probably live with Perry.

        The general? Absent a real uptick in the economy (which nobody is really calling for right now, but a year is a long time) and/or a spectacular national security rally-around-the-Prez crisis, I think Perry can take Obama.

        1. Great, so we get Bush III?

        2. Thanks, SF. I’ll be using that, without attribution.

          Grr.

          Great, so we get Bush III?

          Yes, but this time it’s personal.

          1. On the plus side, the progs will go absolutely batshit over Perry. The creamy, frothy hate, splooging all over everything . . . .

    3. I know a number of conservative women who liked Palin in 2008 who would not support her today because of her resignation as Alaska governor. Palin should have served her term or taken the Murkowski senate seat but being a “quitter” has to have rankled a fair number of her supporters especially after her tough hockey mom talk and such.

    4. Interesting thought…

      People do mistake passion for votes. Say 45% of voters REALLY, REALLY hate Sarah Palin, 10% of voters REALLY, REALLY like Sarah Palin, and 45% of voters don’t give a crap, but will vote for anyone who is not Obama.

      In that scenario, Palin wins by a landslide. You don’t get more votes by hating someone more.

  8. An hour of Mr. McTardle simpering? No thanks.

    I can see why the wife doesn’t let him out of the house.

  9. what footwear styles are creating fashion trends in 2011?The outsoles are durable and special technology is used to add cushioning to the insoles.Most of the extreme heels are referred to as fetish shoes and are meant for admiration and titillation, not wearing to the office or a professional function that calls for walking.The wide width dress sandals from Softspots are extremely popular because of the high level of comfort they offer while retaining the style element.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.