It's a slab of hackery, dusted with inarticulateness, marinated for 8 hours in dumb, stewed in sad attempts at humor.

He really is a dreadful writer. I'm embarrassed for him.

Don't worry, Obama's still got this

Now that Vice-President Joe Biden's strong debate performance has stopped the hyperventilating in Democratland that followed Obama's horrible, no good, very bad faceoff with Mitt Romney in Denver, we can all take a deep breath and face the fact that this race will still, probably, be won by the President....

It has been so long since Democrats felt even a scintilla of electoral despair that the slightest taste of it was frightening enough to make them look like they were in Edvard Munch's "The Scream."

Before Denver, Dems had grown complacent. Now, just as Palin can see Russia from her house, Dems can supposedly see the abyss of defeat from where they sit.

...

With all that at stake, to see Obama be so weak and passive as Romney danced behind his lectern like a kid who'd just had sugar for the first time - while he wildly misstated his own policies, pretending to be moderate as if that kid was also being on his intellectual best behavior in front of company - well, all that was a shock to the system.

So the media narrative shifted from "Romney's losing" to "Obama choked," and even Jon Stewart stopped dissing Romney and spent whole segments making fun of Obama.

Given all that, Obama had never needed Biden as much as he did this week. And Delaware Joe arrived, like your favorite uncle to your July 4 barbecue: bearing tons of red meat....

Like Robin looking out for Batman when he's in trouble, Biden rushed in to save Obama, and the reasons why he needed to aren't hard to understand. Incumbent Presidents almost always lose the first debate: Ford, Carter, Reagan and both Bushes did; only Clinton did not.

There are several reasons for this. First, after four years inside the presidential bubble, incumbents aren't used to being challenged. Second, because of their job they have less time to prepare. Third, they're out of practice, unlike challengers who rise up through a primary season filled with debates.

Note that last paragraph is just a recapitulation of things he read -- and everyone else read -- and everyone else wrote -- two weeks ago.

You're a horrible, horrible writer, and that seems largely because you're a horrible, horrible thinker.

Meghan McCain called. She wants her genius with the written word back.

Thanks to @headshakers.

Posted by: Ace at 08:34 AM | Comments (214)
Post contains 455 words, total size 3 kb.

From left to right: Sleepy, Choomy, Bashful, Gropey, and Dumbass

Good morning morons and moronettes and welcome to the presidential, imperial, and magisterial Sunday Morning Book Thread.

Books by Presidents

I have argued that the last serious, intellectually substantial man to occupy the White House was Richard Milhous Nixon. More on this later.

Presidents write books. It seems the natural thing to do after they've left office and people think they've got something worthwhile to say, and publishing companies believe they can make money from the segment of the population who wants to listen to them. Presidential books are mostly memoirs and speeches, but of course not exclusively. The following is an incomplete list:

Rules of Civility and Decent Behaviour in Company and Conversation by George Washington, who wrote it when be was 15 years old. Actually, what happened was that he read a similar work and copied down the best parts of each passage, a condensed version, if you will.

Of course, Thomas Jefferson wrote a number of books, among them his, Notes on the State of Virginia. And also the infamous Jefferson Bible which probably could more honestly be titled "The Bible With All The Parts Thomas Jefferson Didn't Like Taken Out."

Letters on Freemasonry by John Quincy Adams. At one time in this country, the Freemasons were such an influential group that some felt compelled to organize to oppose them, and this resulted in the formation of the single-issue Anti-Masonic Party, of which Adams was a member.

Congressional Government A Study in American Politics by Woodrow Wilson. Wilson was an intellectual who thought quite a bit about what constitutes good government. Whether you agree with him or not, his ideas should be taken seriously. Also, On Being Human and When a Man Comes to Himself, in which Wilson "sets out his vision for the good life [which] draws on both Aristotle's notion of 'the golden mean' and Augustine's view of the ordo amorum (the order of the loves)-specifically, that the good life consists largely in a well-balanced, harmonious ordering of one's passions and priorities."

Whether you agree with it or not, it's a serious book which demands the reader takes the presented ideas seriously.

Teddy Roosevelt wrote over 30 books, many about his outdoor life of hunting and exploring. But he also wrote History As Literature, in which he stated, “In these addresses and essays I have discussed not merely literary but also historical and scientific subjects, for my thesis is that the domain of literature must be ever more widely extended over the domains of history and science.” The essays covered such topics as modern art, the pursuit of scholarship, science and history, and the poetry of Dante.

Again, this is a serious, substantial work. I am proud that Americans have elected men to office who are capable of writing such books.

Herbert Hoover had a lot to say, particularly in his book about the origins of WWII, Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoover's Secret History of the Second World War and Its Aftermath, which has been mentioned in previous book threads.

JFK's famous book Profiles in Courage was perhaps not written completely by him although he did win the Pulitzer for it. The "research assistant", longtime Kennedy family crony and speechwriter Ted Sorenson, admits he was very well paid for the work that he did. In other words, he pretty much confirmed the rumors that had been floating around for years that PiC was mostly written by someone other than Jack Kennedy.

After he was driven from office in disgrace, Richard Nixon wrote several books displaying his serious foreign policy chops, such as:
Six Crises
Seize the Moment: America's Challenge in a One-Superpower World
Real war
Real Peace

It is because of these books that I have argued that Richard Nixon was the last serious, intellectually substantial man to occupy the White House. All of the presidents since then, with one exception, have only written memoirs and autobiographies. I would like to see a good, solid book on foreign policy written for an adult audience by George W. Bush. However, I don't think Bush is not the kind of man who would write such a book. This is not to say I think Bush is dumb. That statement is itself dumb. But Bush is not an intellectual in the same way that Nixon was. There are two kinds of men in this world, poker players and chess players. Bush, according to those who knew him during his college years, was an excellent poker player and he won like crazy. Now, on the other hand, I can't imagine RN sitting down at the table with the boys for an evening of Texas Hold 'Em. But I think he'd have been a frightfully good chess player.

[Update]: Sigh. Looks like I really screwed the pooch on this one. Many commenters have pointed out that Nixon won quite a lot of money playing poker while in the Navy.

Jimmy Carter has written a number of books, and in fact, his post-presidential output is quite prolific. Fun fact: Carter is the only president who has written a novel, The Hornet's Nest: A Novel of the Revolutionary War. He also wrote a children's book with his daughter, Amy. Also, a volume of his poetry. These are in addition to his policy books, We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land: A Plan That Will Work, and Our Endangered Values: America's Moral Crisis. Along these lines, I suppose I am going to have to mention the execrable Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid that allegedly some Saudi fat cats paid him to write.

I have to give the devil his due. Yeah, Carter was and is a complete dumbass, but I actually came to be somewhat impressed with the variety of his output since he left office. I can't say I agree with any of his policy suggestions, but if someone wants to argue that it was Carter, not Nixon, who was the last serious intellectual in the White House, he might have a point. Dude's written fiction and poetry and books on policy, and you have to respect that. At least I do.

On the other hand, someone should dig up that hilarious P.J. O'Rourke review of one of Carter's earlier autobiographical books, I forget which one, which demonstrated that the book is completely full of stupid. [Update]: Here it is, and it's a masterpiece of snark.

And now that brings us in our day to the Resident of the United States, who has written (some say co-written) two books on his favorite subject: himself. And this before he ever did anything to warrant such attention. I mean, in 1995, who would care would this lazy choomer had to say? Of course the good news is that after he's out of office, there's going to be nothing to motivate his slacker ass to write a book, so perhaps we'll be spared his nonsense and drivel. Oh wait, I forgot, he can always hire Billy Ayers to write him a book, again. Dang.

We've come down quite bit lower than Wilson, Hoover, and Nixon. And even Carter.

So the last American president to author a serious book on policy was -- Jimmy Carter? Sad, but true.

more...

Posted by: Open Blogger at 07:05 AM | Comments (202)
Post contains 1293 words, total size 10 kb.

It ain't a book, and it ain't a pointy-elbowed cheerleader.

Just roll with it.

Posted by: andy at 05:57 AM | Comments (230)
Post contains 22 words, total size 1 kb.

Knowing PPP would have something wacky, I decided to cut right down to the most absurd point highlighted by the firm: 19% of respondents have already voted and they are breaking 3-1 Obama. That seems to spell certain doom for Romney.

Is it actually true? Have just under a fifth of Ohio voters actually voted?
Facts tend to get in the way of such fantasies.
CUYAHOGA COUNTY (Largest County in the State, overwhelmingly Democrat).
TOTAL REGISTERED VOTERS: 928,798 (which, FTR, is down over 180,000 from 2008, and with the registration deadline past in the state, it won't climb from here).

Of this total, 229,794 have requested absentee ballots.
Of this total, 31,233 have returned them, 13.59% of the total requested. Red flag #1.

That total requested accounts for a third of the total number of votes counted in 2008. So fractions of fractions now. Red flag #2.
Assuming lower turnout of 670,000 (closer to 2008 which ironically had fewer votes than 2004), that 31,233 drops to less than 5% of the total vote from the largest county in Ohio. A base county for President Obama and the Democrats. A core part of his Early Vote strategy.
Sure, its just one county, but it is also one of the most Democratic (and as the press meme is going, they have the advantage here), one of the more enthusiastic on voting, and will account for 1 in every 9 ballots cast in Ohio. If we were seeing the levels claimed, we would see it here, and we aren't. Flag #3.

But what about In-Person voting?
Statewide, about 60,000 Ohioans (out of around 8million registered) have voted in-person.

If we are to believe the hype that 18 to 19% of Ohians have already voted as per the surveys from Marist and PPP are claiming, where are the voters? If the Democrats are turning their ballots back in droves, where the hell are they?

Per the SOS' own press release, 1.1 million voters have requested (not submitted, as we see above, that is not the case at all) absentee ballots, and 59,000 have voted in-person. That totals to just around 20% of the 2004/2008 total vote, so on it's face the 18/19% statistic being bounced around and "found" by polling firms like Public Policy Polling could be true, except for two things: counties are still mailing out these requested ballots so it is impossible for those voters to have sent them back; and on the county level the return rate yields a number in the mid-single digits, if that. A third of what PPP and Marist's respondents are claiming.

The smaller the # of respondents for a given question/sub-question, the higher the margin of error. It is how you can wind up with polls giving a Republican 45% of the black vote: if that sample size out of the larger polled group is small, wackiness can ensue. It is why ultimately these subsamples need to be taken with a grain of salt, and not paraded about as significant when the actual numbers on the ground don't match up.

Anyone saying the race is over based on "19% said they already did and PPP said they are breaking 76-24 Obama ELEVENTY OMGZ!" is trolling, and on a very pedestrian level. Want to know how many people have voted? Check the counties themselves, or better yet, for a more concentrated spot of information, check out ningrim's spreadsheet here (requests only).

Beyond the usual smattering of poll junkies and politicos who will gobble and ooze with delight over garbage, any pollster hyping the statistic is either ignorant of the actual statistical numbers reported or they are deliberately pushing a very, very steamy pile.

But nobody would push something that obviously isn't true. That would be the work of a hack, not a reputable pollster.

Posted by: CAC at 12:07 AM | Comments (234)
Post contains 655 words, total size 4 kb.

Happy Birthday to the United States Navy. It was on this day in 1775 that the Continental Congress authorized the first American naval force. It's pretty interesting to note that it was General George Washington that actually got the ball rolling to spur Congress into action on establishing the Continental Navy.

Still, the establishment of a navy seemed too bold a move for some of the timid men in Congress. Some southerners agreed that a fleet would protect and secure the trade of New England but denied that it would that of the southern colonies. Most of the delegates did not consider the break with England as final and feared that a navy implied sovereignty and independence. Others thought a navy a hasty and foolish challenge to the mightiest fleet the world had seen. The most the pro-navy men could do was to get Congress to urge each colony to fit out armed vessels for the protection of their coasts and harbors.

Then, on 3 October, Rhode Island's delegates laid before Congress a bold resolution for the building and equipping of an American fleet, as soon as possible. When the motion came to the floor for debate, Samuel Chase, of Maryland, attacked it, saying it was "the maddest Idea in the World to think of building an American Fleet." Even pro-navy members found the proposal too vague. It lacked specifics and no one could tell how much it would cost.

If Congress was yet unwilling to embrace the idea of establishing a navy as a permanent measure, it could be tempted by short-term opportunities. Fortuitously, on 5 October, Congress received intelligence of two English brigs, unarmed and without convoy, laden with munitions, leaving England bound for Quebec. Congress immediately appointed a committee to consider how to take advantage of this opportunity. Its members were all New Englanders and all ardent supporters of a navy. They recommended first that the governments of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Connecticut be asked to dispatch armed vessels to lay in wait to intercept the munitions ships; next they outlined a plan for the equipping by Congress of two armed vessels to cruise to the eastward to intercept any ships bearing supplies to the British army. Congress let this plan lie on the table until 13 October, when another fortuitous event occurred in favor of the naval movement. A letter from General Washington was read in Congress in which he reported that he had taken under his command, at Continental expense, three schooners to cruise off Massachusetts to intercept enemy supply ships. The commander in chief had preempted members of Congress reluctant to take the first step of fitting out warships under Continental authority. Since they already had armed vessels cruising in their name, it was not such a big step to approve two more. The committee's proposal, now appearing eminently reasonable to the reluctant members, was adopted.

Posted by: CDR M at 05:45 PM | Comments (780)
Post contains 788 words, total size 7 kb.

Video below the fold, via Weasel Zippers.

What an asshole. more...

Posted by: andy at 04:01 PM | Comments (469)
Post contains 72 words, total size 1 kb.

Real? Or is she going for a goof?

more...

Posted by: Ace at 01:52 PM | Comments (486)
Post contains 51 words, total size 1 kb.

Paul Rudd did something funny.

For whatever reason, he's long had a dream of recreating, shot-for-shot, the opening titles of semi-funny eighties detective show Simon & Simon. Correction: It looks like this was more Adam Scott's idea than Paul Rudd's.

He did so. And then began promoting this as The Greatest Event In Television History.

They also did a "Behind the Scenes/Making of" tribute to their 2 minute clip, pumping it up, again, as the most amazing thing history. So of course it's hosted by Jeff Probst.

You know what's funny? I was just listening to the Simon & Simon theme earlier this week.

Anyway, the Making of this landmark event in the history of television is below. The recreation begins at 8:39. Well, that's where the countdown starts.

Plus, a side-by-side comparison of the recreation. The recreation stars Adam Scott from Parks & Recreation, and John Hamm from Mad Men.

Thanks to Just the Tip. more...

Posted by: Ace at 11:07 AM | Comments (382)
Post contains 168 words, total size 1 kb.

An average 4.6% shift in swing state polling.

This is probably RomneyÂ’s best polling day of this election. Not only did he hold leads in the battleground state polls but Romney made relatively large gains compared to pre-DNC surveys. And the North Carolina poll where Obama led was partially conducted prior to the debate and Romney led by 6 points in the post-debate sample. Romney even led a poll in Nevada, the first heÂ’s led since the onset of the general election campaign. The national tracking polls didnÂ’t point toward any additional gains for Romney, but thatÂ’s hardly good news for the president, who largely trails in the national polls.

Three crucial states-- Iowa, Wisconsin, and Ohio -- were not polled in this batch.

Gallup: Biden was such a winner in the debate that Obama's lost 2 from job approval and Romney's two point lead holds, unchanged.

Posted by: Ace at 10:23 AM | Comments (217)
Post contains 159 words, total size 1 kb.

What do you do when your firewall is on fire?

Um, Old: I saw this on Twitter and thought it was new. It's not. It's from October 8.

Plus, it's numbers we've already seen. I thought it was confirmation of those numbers.

Guess I should have read it.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 10:01 AM | Comments (109)
Post contains 66 words, total size 1 kb.