January 25, 2013
— Ace I usually won't link Politico but it's a good piece.
There should have been something for everyone in President Barack Obama’s second inaugural address. For liberals, a full-throated call to arms. For conservatives, vindication.Obama settled once and for all the debate over his place on the political spectrum and his political designs. He’s an unabashed liberal determined to shift our politics and our country irrevocably to the left. In other words, Obama’s foes — if you put aside the birthers and sundry other lunatics — always had him pegged correctly.
Continue ReadingIf you listened to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham, you got a better appreciation of ObamaÂ’s core than by reading the presidentÂ’s friends and sophisticated interpreters, for whom he was either a moderate or a puzzle yet to be fully worked out.
Rush, et al., doubted that Obama could have emerged from the left-wing milieu of Hyde Park, become in short order the most liberal U.S. senator, run to Hillary Clinton’s left in the 2008 primaries and yet have been a misunderstood centrist all along. They heeded his record and his boast in 2008 about “fundamentally transforming the United States of America,” and discounted the unifying tone of his rhetoric as transparent salesmanship.
They got him right, even as he duped the Obamacons, played the press and fooled his sympathizers. David Brooks, the brilliant and winsome New York Times columnist, has been promising the arrival of the true, pragmatic Obama for years now. In his column praising the second inaugural address, he appeared finally to give up. “Now he is liberated,” Brooks wrote. “Now he has picked a team and put his liberalism on full display.”
The whole column is good, and notes, of course, that those who got Obama wrong (or got him right, but publicly lied about, a much larger caucus) will continue to congratulate themselves for having gotten it wrong, and will continue attacking those who got it right.
The situation seems to me to fall under the rules of etiquette and tact. Now, if you're thinking I'm going to say Limbaugh is "tactless," and yell at me for that -- hold on. That's not what I'm saying at all. Let me get there.
In any Polite Dinner Conversation we will have the rules of Tact imposed upon us. The rules of Tact state that certain Truths must not be uttered. Furthermore, we should note that the rules of Tact are not innocent and are not organic -- they are created by people for their own purposes. Some of those purposes may be benign (we want to have light dinner chatter) and some exist to enforce an existing social order (we pretend we don't care about matters of money, and react with hostility to anyone who brings the matter up, because pretending to not care about money is an aristocratic conceit by which aristocrats differentiate themselves from the ruder lower classes and rich-but-unmannered parvenu class).
"Tact" is the enemy of truth. Sometimes it's useful to have the truth contained, a little, to the proper time and place-- we don't want an unhappily married couple openly demonstrating their hatred of each other at a light dinner party. Tact requires they put on pretenses about this.
But very often tact is simply used to suppress the truth because those who create the rules of tact dislike the truth.
And the important thing is that, by the usual operation of tact, the more true something is, the more upsetting it is for those who enforce tact, and the more aggressively they attempt to shut up the person they've deemed tactless.
Example: Your son walks up to your obese uncle and says, "You're fat like a moose!" Your son's transgression is speaking too much truth. (And try to explain this to him later, that there's such a thing as "too much truth.") The entire table hisses at him, "Reginald!" (Yes, you named your son Reginald.) Reginald feels the heat of social scorn upon him, or he would if he was sensitive to the power of social scorn. Luckily, he's too young to be conditioned to be hurt by that, and so instead just giggles.
But my point is that the remark is Socially Unwelcome not because it's false but rather precisely because it's true.
Truth is the most painful insult and truth is the most awkward embarrassment.
Statements which are untrue rarely elicit powerful responses. They get an emotion-free dismissal -- the eyeroll, the arched brow -- or, more commonly, are simply ignored.
Now, we may abide the rules of tact (and approve of them) in the correct situation -- sure, at a party, at a dinner, and at other such functions in which Truth is not a particularly important matter, we can accept that Tact restrains us from speaking truth.
But this rule should never be applied to important matters of politics, should it?
Well, no, of course not; a society that insists of repressing the most important truths about politics rapidly becomes a dysfunctional system in which people only speak in euphemism and lies, a system in which nothing can actually change because people aren't free to express their actual preferences.
What Limbaugh said about Obama -- and what Levin said, and Hannity, and so on -- was completely true.
It was completely true, but the enforcers of Tact at the Great National Conversation decided that the truth that Obama was a left-liberal stewed his entire life in fashionably radical politics (and keep in mind the radical years in which he came of age) Should Not Ever Be Spoken.
And then Sarah Palin, for example, committed the faux pas of stating the truth -- Obama did in fact "pal around with terrorists."
Sarah Palin was attacked on this point, with emotion and vehemence, not because she'd said something untrue but because she said something very true indeed, but that truth was categorized by the Masters of Tact as declasse. And they categorized it as such precisely because it was true, and it embarrassed them, and it compromised their ability to get what they wanted.
Now even liberals are saying Obama gave a liberal speech, and has outed himself as a liberal. But where, then, are the apologies for attacking Limbaugh?
They won't be forthcoming, of course, because in their minds, the liberals behaved properly throughout the miserably long five year dinner party -- they suppressed the truth when it was socially favored to suppress it (that is to say, when they themselves decided it was socially favored to suppress it) and then the giddily expressed the long-suppressed truth when it was socially acceptable to do so (that is to say, when they themselves agreed mutually that it was now socially acceptable to express it).
On the other hand, Palin, Limbaugh, Levin and the rest just behaved abomidably, what with their rude statements of obvious truths which all good-mannered people were furiously attempting to ignore or hide.
No class, no class. Classy people know when it's okay to lie -- because "classy people" are privileged with the power of making up the rules as to when it's okay to lie.
As they set the rules -- to benefit themselves and to protect and extend their own socially-privileged positions -- they can never be disadvantaged by their rules. If they sense a personal disadvantage flowing from the rules they've made up, they just change the rules to grant themselves an advantage again.
And who are you to complain? They're your betters, you know.
Posted by: Ace at
10:28 AM
| Comments (555)
Post contains 1273 words, total size 8 kb.
Posted by: eman at January 25, 2013 10:32 AM (jp2Ur)
Posted by: occam's styptic pencil at January 25, 2013 10:33 AM (evdj2)
Posted by: Golan Globus at January 25, 2013 10:34 AM (/1U3u)
Heh. "Winsome." A well-known synonym for "fat and stupid."
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at January 25, 2013 10:34 AM (QKKT0)
They aren't saying it as if they are surprized. They are saying it laughingly.
Laughing at those who knew the truth but were shouted down by the DNC sponsored media, and laughing at those they fooled into voting for their own destruction.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 25, 2013 10:35 AM (xtvQl)
Posted by: jwest at January 25, 2013 10:35 AM (ZDsRL)
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 10:35 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 10:36 AM (LCRYB)
Bitch slap for the Big Bad Bitch.
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Wily Wrepublican Wench at January 25, 2013 10:36 AM (kXoT0)
I think no truer example of the above can be found than Ed Koch. Sure, I know he's a jew hater but I am going to vote for him anyway and hope his true hatred doesn't show too quickly. When is the last time Christopher Buckley has been heard from on the topic? How about the douche, Kmiec, who backed Obama despite supposedly being pro-life?
Posted by: ejo at January 25, 2013 10:36 AM (GXvSO)
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at January 25, 2013 10:36 AM (Mj6r9)
You do know that all of Lowry's pieces are available at National Review, where he happens to be the editor and all? All the NR writers have their external pieces duplicated at NRO, you never need link elsewhere. http://tinyurl.com/a6wwzzn
Posted by: Rex at January 25, 2013 10:37 AM (JpC1K)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 25, 2013 10:37 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 10:37 AM (LCRYB)
He didn't play the press. They were willing servants to promote him and lie for him
Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 25, 2013 10:37 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 25, 2013 10:37 AM (8y9MW)
The media has either by being dupes or sycophants help Obama escape what would otherwise be factual and realistic scrutiny. Personally, I think they are mostly propagandist sycophants...
David Brooks, is well, David Brooks- Captain creased pants. I don't believe for a second he felt Obama was going to become some great pragmatist-centrist. Otherwise he is dumber than I thought. I actually believe people like Brooks are Vichy Journalists; imbued with natural liberal tendencies which they cloak behind and alleged conservative moniker.
In the end, we are, and will continue to be worse off, poorer, less productive and less free. The forces are merely lining up to express their astonishment at Mr. Obama hard left proclivities- but will do nothing to expose or stop him. That's still up to us honest folks.
Posted by: Marcus at January 25, 2013 10:38 AM (xPfg3)
Oh, wait....
Posted by: Golan Globus at January 25, 2013 02:34 PM (/1U3u)
I kinda seriously doubt that anyone here thought it was wrong of her to say that Obama palled around with terrorists.
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 25, 2013 10:39 AM (xAtAj)
Posted by: pep, Secretary of Transparent Lies at January 25, 2013 10:39 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 10:39 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: L, elle at January 25, 2013 10:39 AM (0PiQ4)
Posted by: Tactless 4yo Clarice spoils Thanksgiving at January 25, 2013 10:39 AM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: Caustic at January 25, 2013 10:39 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 10:39 AM (LCRYB)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Take us away. at January 25, 2013 10:40 AM (Gk3SS)
Posted by: eman at January 25, 2013 10:40 AM (jp2Ur)
Posted by: Caustic at January 25, 2013 10:40 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 10:41 AM (l86i3)
People, though they won't say this, know that people get more upset when you tell the truth about them than when you lie. "Methinks he doth protest too much" and all that.
So instead of bristling and saying, "That's not true" and being defensive, Republicans need to stop, glare at their opponent, and say, "Oh yeah? Name 3."
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 25, 2013 10:41 AM (8y9MW)
People, though they won't say this, know that people get more upset when you tell the truth about them than when you lie. "Methinks he doth protest too much" and all that.
So instead of bristling and saying, "That's not true" and being defensive, Republicans need to stop, glare at their opponent, and say, "Oh yeah? Name 3."
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 25, 2013 10:41 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 25, 2013 10:41 AM (GFM2b)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 25, 2013 10:41 AM (GFM2b)
^ This times 10. ^ In reality, she was too damn physically attractive to be allowed to flourish in the political arean. Try to imagine Hillary's psyche and politics wrapped up in a Palin exterior, such a woman would be unstoppable. The Liberals elevate ugly, angry, graceless, stupid, and ineffectual women because that is the kind of women their ideology produces.
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Wily Wrepublican Wench at January 25, 2013 10:41 AM (kXoT0)
^ This times 10. ^ In reality, she was too damn physically attractive to be allowed to flourish in the political arean. Try to imagine Hillary's psyche and politics wrapped up in a Palin exterior, such a woman would be unstoppable. The Liberals elevate ugly, angry, graceless, stupid, and ineffectual women because that is the kind of women their ideology produces.
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Wily Wrepublican Wench at January 25, 2013 10:41 AM (kXoT0)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 10:42 AM (LCRYB)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 10:42 AM (LCRYB)
The first thing the Lefties do is demonize the person speaking out of turn. They don't ever attempt to confront the argument. Do you remember any substantive rebuttal to "death panels"?
We don't help ourselves by personalizing these issues--that's what they want. Limbaugh's a racist, thank you. No discussion of affirmative action in the media for black QB's. Palin's an idiot regardless of being dead on again and again.
I hate politicians on some pedastel--they will always disappoint us--but fixating on the person rather than the idea is what they do and what they are happy to watch us do to each other.
Posted by: spongeworthy at January 25, 2013 10:42 AM (r5w1L)
The first thing the Lefties do is demonize the person speaking out of turn. They don't ever attempt to confront the argument. Do you remember any substantive rebuttal to "death panels"?
We don't help ourselves by personalizing these issues--that's what they want. Limbaugh's a racist, thank you. No discussion of affirmative action in the media for black QB's. Palin's an idiot regardless of being dead on again and again.
I hate politicians on some pedastel--they will always disappoint us--but fixating on the person rather than the idea is what they do and what they are happy to watch us do to each other.
Posted by: spongeworthy at January 25, 2013 10:42 AM (r5w1L)
that anyone should be told he can't say things he believes are true for "other reasons," like politeness or tactical advantage ("we must all present a unified front with no disagreement on this point, or else the LIBERALS WIN!!").
Well there is a certain way you can be polite or tactical without alienating the very people whose side you on supposedly on. Its not tactical or polite to call people who have a different opinion than you as lunatics.
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 10:42 AM (m2CN7)
that anyone should be told he can't say things he believes are true for "other reasons," like politeness or tactical advantage ("we must all present a unified front with no disagreement on this point, or else the LIBERALS WIN!!").
Well there is a certain way you can be polite or tactical without alienating the very people whose side you on supposedly on. Its not tactical or polite to call people who have a different opinion than you as lunatics.
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 10:42 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: soothsayer at January 25, 2013 10:42 AM (KeJAW)
Posted by: soothsayer at January 25, 2013 10:42 AM (KeJAW)
Posted by: jwest at January 25, 2013 02:35 PM (ZDsRL)
I think Tavis Smiley is the last person with that dunce cap on.
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 25, 2013 10:42 AM (R4Bz0)
Posted by: jwest at January 25, 2013 02:35 PM (ZDsRL)
I think Tavis Smiley is the last person with that dunce cap on.
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 25, 2013 10:42 AM (R4Bz0)
People pointed out that TFG was a socialist in thought and deed. The Mandarins of Protocol hissed and screeched feigning indignation about how could anyone dare impugn TFG. So the messengers who pointed out TFG's red diapers were marginalized.
And yet here we go into circular firing squad mode again.
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at January 25, 2013 10:43 AM (Mj6r9)
People pointed out that TFG was a socialist in thought and deed. The Mandarins of Protocol hissed and screeched feigning indignation about how could anyone dare impugn TFG. So the messengers who pointed out TFG's red diapers were marginalized.
And yet here we go into circular firing squad mode again.
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at January 25, 2013 10:43 AM (Mj6r9)
When everything about our country and our children's future is at stake, everything, then to hell with tact.
Posted by: Uncle Jefe at January 25, 2013 10:43 AM (25KoS)
When everything about our country and our children's future is at stake, everything, then to hell with tact.
Posted by: Uncle Jefe at January 25, 2013 10:43 AM (25KoS)
Posted by: CSMBigBird at January 25, 2013 10:43 AM (dgqjL)
Posted by: CSMBigBird at January 25, 2013 10:43 AM (dgqjL)
I am so fucking disappointed.
Heller II, which upheld the "assault weapons ban" and "magazine restriction" of Washington D.C., was decided by three fucking Republican judges.
There was a great dissent, but how in the FUCK could two pub judges be so fucking stupid. It's mind boggling.
Posted by: Prescient11 at January 25, 2013 10:43 AM (tVTLU)
Posted by: soothsayer at January 25, 2013 10:44 AM (vanqS)
Posted by: phoenixgirl waiting for spring training at January 25, 2013 10:44 AM (GVxQo)
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 10:44 AM (m2CN7)
We can only hope that a group of courageous, non-elitests will continue to help point out the flaws of conservative candidates at critical moments to those of us prone to idol worship.
Posted by: jwest at January 25, 2013 10:45 AM (ZDsRL)
And then goes home and tells all the relatives who weren't present, and next Christmas, Uncle Moose gets all moose-themed gifts. By the time the funeral rolls around, all the cousins of Reginald's generation are shocked to learn Uncle Moose was originally christened Ervin.
My family's weird.
Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs an intervention at January 25, 2013 10:45 AM (ZKzrr)
Posted by: ejo at January 25, 2013 10:45 AM (GXvSO)
Posted by: CSMBigBird
See, now that's classy!
Posted by: Jim Halpert at January 25, 2013 10:45 AM (BrQrN)
Posted by: L, elle at January 25, 2013 10:45 AM (0PiQ4)
Posted by: Mr Pink at January 25, 2013 10:46 AM (JMYH3)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 25, 2013 10:46 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: Golan Globus at January 25, 2013 10:46 AM (/1U3u)
Posted by: rrpjr at January 25, 2013 10:46 AM (pnjFD)
Ace: ...""Tact" is the enemy of truth. Sometimes it's useful to have the truth contained, a little, to the proper time and place-- we don't want an unhappily married couple openly demonstrating their hatred of each other at a light dinner party. Tact requires they put on pretenses about this."
----
True, Ace.
But 'Tact' also disarms you....in today's political arena.
Conservative politicians and pundits seem to be stuck in 'polite dinner party mode'...while the Left does not hinder themselves with such niceties.
Posted by: wheatie at January 25, 2013 10:46 AM (fH4X9)
Posted by: soothsayer at January 25, 2013 10:46 AM (xIzGn)
Posted by: eman at January 25, 2013 10:47 AM (jp2Ur)
Posted by: Parker at January 25, 2013 10:47 AM (YkW3i)
At the risk of stating something which will be in fact an uncomfortable truth which upsets the dinner party:
It's acknowledged elitism. At least in my own head. I don't acknowledge it out of politeness, and because i know the anger it will provoke.
But if you want the truth, here it is: It is due to elitism. I do not think Sarah Palin is smart enough to be president. I don't know if she's smart enough to be vice president, either.
I do not think people who are not very smart should be president.
Now, politeness compels me to dance around this but if you want to talk about elitism -- yes, I have the "elitist" notion that a president should be of above-average intelligence, and should be willing to study to overcome her deficiencies.
And I also think she's emotionally unsuited for the position, too.
Does that mean I favored Obama? Good Lord, no. I was willing to gamble on Palin.
But, if I have my choice, then no, I do not want someone who I think is too dumb to be president to be our candidate.
Okay? So there's your elitism, now with all the politeness stripped off it.
And no, I don't think she's dumb because she's country; I think she's dumb because she's dumb.
Or, if not "dumb" -- at least not of above-average intelligence. Not at the level to give you a degree of comfort in this area.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 10:47 AM (LCRYB)
Posted by: SurferDoc at January 25, 2013 10:48 AM (6H6FZ)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 10:48 AM (l86i3)
Ace - unfortunately, any mention of Palin invites love or scorn. She's like the Yankees or the Cowboys, either lover her or hate her. Its no doubt why she will for the time being have a voice.
I still think Breitbart was right. She should become the conservative Oprah or conservative Katie Couric.
Posted by: SH at January 25, 2013 10:49 AM (gmeXX)
That's only his first name, he has 3 middle names and two hyphens.
Posted by: Clarence Carlisle Salsbury Quentin-Sykes Cavendish III at January 25, 2013 10:49 AM (Qxdfp)
Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at January 25, 2013 10:49 AM (wR+pz)
Posted by: Golan Globus at January 25, 2013 02:46 PM (/1U3u)
Total bullshit.
Ace criticized Palin for being a quitter, and never committing to anything. These are valid criticisms.
He also praised her for her perception of Obama and her honesty and her ability to cut through the fluff of the political process.
The fact that he was never a blind, babbling cheerleader for her still chaps the Palinistas' collective ass.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 25, 2013 10:49 AM (GsoHv)
Which is why the GOp needs to start building a new coalition and tell our "betters" in the Brooks/Frum wing to go fuck themselves.
Make the case for small government to the illegal in spanish and go around these bilious bastards.
Our way leads to a person having the ability to make their own real gain, liberalism wants the client population right where they are.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 10:49 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: Regular Moron [/i] at January 25, 2013 10:49 AM (feFL6)
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at January 25, 2013 10:50 AM (FKQng)
It's taken Rich Lowry four goddamn years to come to this conclusion?
Cripes, Republican pundits are stupid.
Posted by: Jaws at January 25, 2013 10:50 AM (4I3Uo)
13 You do know that all of Lowry's pieces are available at National Review, where he happens to be the editor and all?
---------
Yeah, but these days NRO is all pop-up ads, CPU-sucking scripts, and click through thingies that interrupt you just as you're getting into the first paragraph to demand that you sign up for their e-mail stuff.
Used to frequent the corner. Got tired of that crap, so I don't go there anymore.
Posted by: Citizen Anachronda at January 25, 2013 10:50 AM (NmR1a)
Bullshit, just yesterday some asshat continued the lie that she was a quitter.
yeah, what a lie. She merely quit her governorship before the end of her term, but that doesn't make her a quitter, that makes her a fighter by other means.
She flipped the script, you know. It was so brilliant of her to do that.
Idiotic. Someone quits their office but we have to argue years after the fact about whether quitting an office makes one a quitter.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 10:50 AM (LCRYB)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 10:50 AM (l86i3)
I'd rather listen to TFG for 4 hours than refight the Palin wars.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 25, 2013 10:50 AM (8y9MW)
So you're recommending that we not order the Tact?
Posted by: weft cut-loop
No need. That was a fully automatic assault post with tactical sights.
....
I should feel some shame for that comment but I'm really not that classy.
Posted by: Lurking Canuck at January 25, 2013 10:50 AM (BrQrN)
I find it hilarious because Palin has absolutely no chance of being nominated, much less elected. It's like arguing that Zombie Reagan should be the nominee. Why does it even matter(TM)?
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 25, 2013 10:50 AM (xAtAj)
Posted by: eman at January 25, 2013 10:50 AM (jp2Ur)
Posted by: Dick Nixon at January 25, 2013 10:50 AM (VrVBw)
Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at January 25, 2013 10:51 AM (BuSM8)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 25, 2013 10:51 AM (GFM2b)
I did NOT know that -- I thought it was an exclusive at Politico, or else I wouldn't have linked them.
Thank you for telling me that. I've ignored several Lowry pieces I liked because I thought they were only on Politco.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 10:51 AM (LCRYB)
Posted by: toby928© for TB at January 25, 2013 10:51 AM (evdj2)
To quote Hitlery, "What difference does it make?"
This changes nothing. The left will never see this or admit to this if they did.
The cult brainwashing is too overpowering for the weak-willed on the left to allow them any objective thought.
Posted by: Marmo at January 25, 2013 10:51 AM (QW+AD)
Posted by: sTevo at January 25, 2013 10:51 AM (VMcEw)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 02:47 PM (LCRYB)
I feel the same way about Palin but have to agree once the pick was made, if you are partisan, the only strategy is to make her look as good as possible. Otherwise it justs assists the otherside. After the election was over, I say its fair game just like every other Republican politician who receives no quarter on this site.
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 10:52 AM (m2CN7)
Posted by: joncelli at January 25, 2013 10:52 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 25, 2013 10:52 AM (R4Bz0)
"Or, if not "dumb" -- at least not of above-average intelligence. Not at the level to give you a degree of comfort in this area."
I assume this is based on the fact that Wasila is far from Manhatten, the center of all knowledge. Other than that, you've never presented any reason why you held that position.
Posted by: jwest at January 25, 2013 10:52 AM (ZDsRL)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 10:52 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: Fans of Richard M. Nixon at January 25, 2013 10:53 AM (LCRYB)
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Wily Wrepublican Wench at January 25, 2013 10:53 AM (kXoT0)
Posted by: jeremiah God Damn Barack Obama the Mother Fucking SCoaMF wright at January 25, 2013 10:53 AM (+OTLF)
Posted by: Adam Smith's Invisible Pimp Hand at January 25, 2013 10:53 AM (NzBQO)
Sarah Palin did not have the right political or education credentials or pedigree.
She had the failing of not being tactful, or deferential to certain OTHER PEOPLE in politics.
Sarah is far from infallible, and she has, in my opinion, made some kinda dumb moves if she really wanted a career in politics. But her directness and honesty are refreshing. She does speak her mind, and does speak to a certain faction as a populist, which makes her likable. I wish she would work to become a more serious politician, but I don't think that is going to happen now.
Let her stand as an example of what happens when a normal citizen tries to get engaged in politics above the local level and how the Massive Bullshit Media can eviscerate you if you are.......tactless. She is not a martyr to me, but a warning of how a decent citizen can be attacked ruthelessly by those who think they are the gatekeepers of all that is Good and True.
And Obama, he's and educated shit storm. Who knew? I wish Mike Royko was still alive, because he would have endless fun with Obama from Chicago. Who sent him?
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes.... at January 25, 2013 10:53 AM (RFeQD)
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 25, 2013 10:53 AM (xtvQl)
i agree about overly smart, I think, but I would like smart.
Underly smart isn't good either.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 10:54 AM (LCRYB)
I don't think Joe Biden's dumb. He's a blowhard and probably dotty as well. Would I bet some serious $ Palin's smarter? Yes. Yes I would.
I would prefer to have the presidency reserved for near-geniuses only, but would settle for a bright person with common sense. (And one who balances their own checkbook. Some acquaintance with numbers would be a plus.)
Posted by: spongeworthy at January 25, 2013 10:54 AM (r5w1L)
Posted by: Opus An Arcus at January 25, 2013 10:54 AM (LZ7Cv)
Posted by: SH at January 25, 2013 10:54 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: cardinal fang at January 25, 2013 10:54 AM (Jsiw/)
Posted by: soothsayer at January 25, 2013 10:55 AM (QVBzT)
Why the Hell are people talking about Palin in this comments thread? I'd think it was some sort of liberal troll trick to get people to ignore the very serious article posted above, but it's far too subtle for the brand of troll that we get around here.
Posted by: junior at January 25, 2013 10:55 AM (UWFpX)
"I did NOT know that -- I thought it was an exclusive at Politico, or else I wouldn't have linked them."
Happy to help, Ace! Same goes true for Jonah Goldberg's pieces at USA Today, Ramesh Ponnnurrrrururnruru stuff at Bloomberg, etc.
Posted by: Rex at January 25, 2013 10:55 AM (JpC1K)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 10:55 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Jeff B. at January 25, 2013 10:55 AM (OQZWo)
Posted by: Al at January 25, 2013 10:55 AM (V70Uh)
Posted by: Caustic at January 25, 2013 10:55 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at January 25, 2013 10:55 AM (FKQng)
75
It's taken Rich Lowry four goddamn years to come to this conclusion?
Cripes, Republican pundits are stupid.
Heh.
It's 'safe' now, to come to this conclusion.
He didn't have to go out on a limb, just agree with what had already been said.
Posted by: wheatie at January 25, 2013 10:55 AM (fH4X9)
Posted by: Dick Nixon at January 25, 2013 10:55 AM (VrVBw)
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes.... at January 25, 2013 02:53 PM (RFeQD)
A precondition for the existence of the JEF had to be Royko's death.
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 25, 2013 10:55 AM (R4Bz0)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 25, 2013 10:56 AM (GFM2b)
Posted by: Barry Soetoro at January 25, 2013 10:56 AM (Cm5S0)
Or maybe based on the fact that he's watched her shallow babbling for more than a few minutes.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 25, 2013 10:56 AM (SY2Kh)
A lot of grief over a Facebook poster.
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 25, 2013 10:56 AM (xAtAj)
Posted by: SurferDoc at January 25, 2013 10:56 AM (6H6FZ)
>>>Obama settled once and for all the debate over his place on the political spectrum and his political designs.
I work with some fairly out and out commie people. I thought it was interesting to see their faces turn from elation over the re-election to grim determination and silence. They have plans, you see, and they know now is the time.
Posted by: Bigby's Spanking Hand at January 25, 2013 10:56 AM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: Al at January 25, 2013 10:57 AM (V70Uh)
Posted by: eureka! at January 25, 2013 10:57 AM (HPRku)
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 25, 2013 10:58 AM (xAtAj)
Underly smart isn't good either.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 02:54 PM (LCRYB)
Biden: So you're saying I'd be a good president
Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 25, 2013 10:58 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: SH at January 25, 2013 10:58 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at January 25, 2013 10:58 AM (FKQng)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 10:58 AM (l86i3)
I don't think it's anything objective; I think they have three different emotional pitches and whose schtick you like just depends on where you are.
Levin is, yes, "negative" and frequently angry. If you're angry, you love Levin. (And if you're occasionally angry, you love Levin when you're angry.)
Hannity seems to specialize in a sort of good-guy earnestness, which some like. Others don't like it on the theory that it's cloying.
Limbaugh does more of the cynical/jaded sarcastic thing, usually not angry per se. Levin is obviously angry, whereas Limbaugh's anger is sublimated through and hidden in jocular sarcasm.
That's a method of providing distance from your actual emotion (anger) which many people like, as they don't like the undisguised anger.
That last is more my thing, I guess.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 10:58 AM (LCRYB)
I'd rather listen to TFG for 4 hours than refight the Palin wars.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 25, 2013 02:50 PM (8y9MW)
I'm currently home from work because The Boss, bless him, closed the office at 12:30 due to an ice storm. My server just went down on WoW. I've got a open bottle of wine and nothing else to do.
Yeah. Tact compels me to stay the fuck out of this thread before I make some comments I will deeply regret.
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Take us away. at January 25, 2013 10:58 AM (Gk3SS)
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at January 25, 2013 02:55 PM (FKQng)
THIS!!!!
Posted by: Adam Smith's Invisible Pimp Hand at January 25, 2013 10:58 AM (NzBQO)
>>>She is not a martyr to me, but a warning of how a decent citizen can be attacked ruthelessly by those who think they are the gatekeepers of all that is Good and True.
Bingo.
Posted by: spongeworthy at January 25, 2013 10:58 AM (r5w1L)
In my politicians I'll trade intelligence for modesty any day of the week. Brash politicians are fun to cheer and quote, but God, do I want more politicians without hubris. The GOP can skip finding the next Reagan and head straight to the next Coolidge. Hell, I'll take the next Chester Arthur at this point, please.
Posted by: Dave at Garfield Ridge at January 25, 2013 10:59 AM (JpC1K)
Posted by: soothsayer at January 25, 2013 10:59 AM (wAng0)
Posted by: Chas C-Q at January 25, 2013 11:00 AM (6U+/4)
Conservative politicians and pundits seem to be stuck in 'polite dinner party mode'...while the Left does not hinder themselves with such niceties.
Posted by: wheatie at January 25, 2013 02:46 PM (fH4X9)
------------------------------------------------
And this is the repubs' problem. They're stuck in northeastern, hahvad- educated dinner mode.
I wish many of them would come to OK and learn a little southern plains wisdom. When someone here fucks up, we tell them, "you fucked up".
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2013 11:00 AM (/ZV9/)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Take us away. at January 25, 2013 02:58 PM (Gk3SS)
It's ok to hijack the thread.
We still haven't had a post on Feinstein's ridiculous bill. We can talk about that.
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 25, 2013 11:00 AM (xAtAj)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 02:39 PM
Judging be a couple photos of the last few years, I think she keeps a couple in her bra
Posted by: kbdabear at January 25, 2013 11:00 AM (wwsoB)
But that's not a lie. She WAS a quitter. She quit her job using the flimsiest of pretexts to become a political/reality-TV celebrity and bank a crapton of money while her "brand" was still hot.
In that respect, actually, I think she was pretty smart. She understood the ephemerality of such things and realized that she better get while the gettin' was good. It's just a shame that so many of her slavish supporters didn't recognize it for the con that it was.
Hey: have you heard anything from Sarah Palin in the last few months, as there have been multiple, major policy battles between Obama and the Republicans? Why has this Important Voice been silent?
Posted by: Jeff B. at January 25, 2013 11:01 AM (OQZWo)
Posted by: cardinal fang at January 25, 2013 11:01 AM (Jsiw/)
AH NO, RITE???
Posted by: St. Hillary the Forgetful and her Goggles of Deception at January 25, 2013 11:01 AM (EZl54)
She's an ordinary person doing fairly extraordinary work. She is someone many Americans can relate to. She went from school board to the governors office. In that regard she's an everyday role model and hero to some.
But I also believe that President or VP is out of her league. Very much for the same reasons.
But she is a fighter and I like that. Few people who allege to be "with us" today really fight. They mostly patronize and bumble.
Is there a place for her? Sure and there always will be.
Posted by: Marcus at January 25, 2013 11:01 AM (xPfg3)
Posted by: L, elle at January 25, 2013 11:01 AM (0PiQ4)
So....
That's a "no" on the calming manatee, then.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 25, 2013 11:01 AM (8y9MW)
Still don't get the animosity toward Palin here. If you who dislike her would spend a quarter of the time you use nitpicking Obama for an examination of the lady, it might just cause you to change your opinion.
If that were done.
Or is it just too easy to be lazy?
Posted by: irongrampa at January 25, 2013 11:02 AM (SAMxH)
Posted by: joncelli at January 25, 2013 11:02 AM (RD7QR)
i like Rush though.
Posted by: JDP at January 25, 2013 03:00 PM (60GaT)
YOU GOTTA GET MAD!!!111!WON!!!
Posted by: MAD AS HELL BLAH BLAH at January 25, 2013 11:02 AM (xAtAj)
Ace,
Here you are, making some nice statements about Palin in your original post...and you still get pummelled for it.
I'm not sure we can ever have a non-emotional discusion about Palin...when just the mention of her seems to push people's buttons.
Posted by: wheatie at January 25, 2013 11:02 AM (fH4X9)
If Steyn and Walter Williams took over I don't think I'd miss Limbaugh. Levin is like rocket fuel when anger is bubbling though. His takedown of Pelosi at the passage of Ogabecare was epic.
http://youtu.be/5sz9Vjz9554
Mark Levin on Pelosi
"You know the original Constitution was about 4500 words..."
EPIC
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:02 AM (LRFds)
Limbaugh does more of the cynical/jaded sarcastic thing, usually not angry per se. Levin is obviously angry, whereas Limbaugh's anger is sublimated through and hidden in jocular sarcasm.
---
There is truth in that. My humor and demeanor is much more like Limbaugh's. I do enjoy Levin's writing because I think he is extremely well versed on Constitutional issues.
Posted by: SH at January 25, 2013 11:02 AM (gmeXX)
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at January 25, 2013 11:02 AM (FKQng)
Levin is obviously smart, but the negativity turns me off.
I don't think it's anything objective; I think they have three different emotional pitches and whose schtick you like just depends on where you are
You forgot Medved. He's different from all of the preceding three, being both very smart, willing to listen, and generally conservative without being Statler and Waldorf negative and unremittingly unpleasant (*cough*Levin*cough*). In short, he's the only one I can listen to for an extended period.
Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 11:02 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 25, 2013 02:58 PM (p/cQy)
A typical commie whore white person
Posted by: TheQuietMan at January 25, 2013 11:03 AM (1Jaio)
I would say, "you should spend the time you waste bashing Palin on fighting Obama."
But I've never been to a cocktail party.
Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs an intervention at January 25, 2013 11:03 AM (ZKzrr)
i want a post about hawks. we were promised a post about hawks & i wanna see it.
Posted by: redc1c4 at January 25, 2013 11:03 AM (8MasJ)
Slo Joe is a genius, BUT Palin is a fool....
that was our "me too" legion...
I don't have an answer.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:03 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: SH at January 25, 2013 11:03 AM (gmeXX)
Ronald Reagan was called an "amiable dunce" and not just by Democrats
Posted by: kbdabear at January 25, 2013 11:04 AM (wwsoB)
actually I asked commenters to provide me with facts about hawks sufficient to sustain a long review of hawks. You failed. You provided, at best, scattered trivia.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 11:04 AM (LCRYB)
Ace, your reaction when anybody down here in the trench says anything favorable about Palin is crazed. You get all...Jezebel-on-Twitter. It's a serious problem. And it's not "misogyny," because misogyny is usually awesome, and this never is. It's just fucked up. Search your feelings, enjoy some fake lesbo porn, LSMFT, etc.
Moving on...
I suppose I haven't said this in a while:
There's a guy who's the president of a nominally free country here, and the people of it are not allowed to say his middle name.
The president of the U.S.M.F.A. is, by the rules of tact, the God of Exodus.
We are done.
Posted by: oblig. at January 25, 2013 11:05 AM (cePv8)
Posted by: awkward davies at January 25, 2013 11:05 AM (USjX1)
What the lefties have done with Obama for the last 5 years is straight up lying to protect him. That's called aiding and abetting, not tact.
Posted by: angienc at January 25, 2013 11:05 AM (w3JGl)
Posted by: Wilt the Stilt at January 25, 2013 11:06 AM (UU0OF)
Posted by: Caustic at January 25, 2013 11:06 AM (/b8+5)
Even in pieces in which *nice things* are said about her, they are *compelled* to once again renew their long list of Grievances, as if the only important political matter is How Nice People Are to Palin.
Jesus Christ Almighty, the planets do not revolve around her.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 02:39 PM (LCRYB)
Your still pissed that your man crush from texas (i forget his name) forgot the three departments he was going abolish and had to be reminded during a debate and then tanked in the polls...and your replacement man crush got his ass beat by the obama machine.
Look (and i ask this as a general question cause you republicans are fucking retards when it comes to circular firing squad behavior), do you really think Palin is any less qualified or competant than obama was in 2008 or even is now to run this country?
Why is it acceptable for the Liberals to protect their won even when their own is the incompetent spawn of satan, yet you pussy ass (not you ace but republicans in general) republicans dont even have the balls to circle the wagons in unity and defend your own women.
Do you hear any liberal anywhere point out Obama's mistakes gaffes or misstatements?
HELL NO! They present a unified front and dont let any of the truth get out.
Yet you bitches, will eat your own and blame game and backstab every damn time.
The Liberals didnt destroy Palin, the republicans let it happen.
YOu think if Liberals supported that dipshit obama the way republicans conservatives, rhinos and assholes included, supported palin (cough laugh irony) that he woudl have ever made it out of the primaries against clinton?
What a fucking fairy tale.
Meanwhile you got dickshits like Jindal and Crispy creme FatFuckface telling us how the republican party sucks. Send these idiots a mirror.
Cause they are the party along with all the other idiots who dont stand up for our rights.
But yeah...bang on palin cause you know...palin fans are nuts or something..
I dont even know the woman but for fuck sake i never heard her say or do anything that would warrant the level of disrespect from within her own party.
You bitches rhinos and selfserving belly button gazing emo assholes need to get a grip and start defending your generals if you want any chance of surviving this war. And it is a FUCKING WAR!
jindal noonan frum christy...these assholes are just going to manage your decline. Times are a changing my ass.
And you wonder why you lose.
Grow some fucking backbone and stand with your convictions and dance with the ones that brung ya.
Spineless ratfink turds in this party are going to be the death of it.
Posted by: jeremiah God Damn Barack Obama the Mother Fucking SCoaMF wright at January 25, 2013 11:06 AM (+OTLF)
Incorrect. Asian cultures are actually very big on what we call "Tact." "Saving face" is an Asian notion.
You are right that they don't coddle their children, but that isn't tact. Telling little Johnny (or Reginald, as the case may be) that, no, he's not the fastest runner on the team and maybe he should focus on being a goalie, or on learning chess, is not a lack of tact.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 25, 2013 11:06 AM (8y9MW)
How's that for a hawk story?
Or what about up river where thee cadet let a mouse go and the hawk ate it?
http://tinyurl.com/alaawtr
Posted by: Marcus at January 25, 2013 11:07 AM (xPfg3)
Bingo.
Posted by: spongeworthy at January 25, 2013 02:58 PM (r5w1L)
Absolutely THIS. And she wasn't the only one in that election. Anyone remember Joe the Plumber? How 'bout macaca? I'm sure if we really try we could remember others whose names were drug through the sewer for calling things as they are.
We remember Palin only because she was villlified the most. Even by the so-called conservatives.
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2013 11:07 AM (/ZV9/)
I knew who she was, briefed in the horde on her work in AK and have pretty much let her go.
We as a party failed her, we should have attacked the left for using outsider donations to exert specious ethics charges that she was personally liable economically to defend.
Yeah she could have kept her job by risking total bankruptcy of Todd's business.
The left declared her kill on sight because without the full court press she was about to flip Soccer Mom probably.
Doesn't matter, I appreciate Sarah Palin being in our ranks, but she will not be our standard bearer the media and our own won't let her and that's okay.
I am a lot more worried about the document than who our clown in the clown car is.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:07 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: Guy Who Didnt Read The Post at January 25, 2013 11:07 AM (xAtAj)
No. Look up Honne and Tatamae.
Kids in Asian cultures are not considered independent people to whom you have to show deference or respect.
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at January 25, 2013 11:07 AM (xz0nG)
check your facts. I never have any reaction when someone says somethng nice about palin -- I ignore it. It's an internal eyeroll.
I have a reaction when someone tells me, for the bazillionth time, that *I* am insufficiently supportive of the great work the ex-governor is doing on FaceBook.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 11:07 AM (LCRYB)
4 Good thing nobody here criticized Palin.
did someone call me?
yeah, yeah, i'm slow...i'm painting a guitar
(and screwing up the white damnit)
Posted by: navycopjoe at January 25, 2013 11:07 AM (8nyQY)
Good grief, hasn't Palin been disappeared long enough to be ignored yet?
I mean, I like her fine, but she's the definition of a nothingburger these days.
Posted by: Meremortal, Watching It Burn at January 25, 2013 11:07 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: thunderb at January 25, 2013 11:07 AM (Dnbau)
Rush has enough "oomph" and money and exposure, and frankly experience dealing with being a target, that he doesn't care too much about being "tactful".
He has a large, loyal audience, and a raft of sponsors and affiliates that make money, so he can go out and say these things, and people will still come and listen. Is Rush always right? I've been listening to him, off and on, for about 20 years (really, that long?) and sometimes he is dead on, and sometimes he does miss the mark. But when he misses, he will sometimes come back and discuss his own mistakes.
A lot of public people are very uncomfortable with being a target, and don't know how to handle it, which then makes them "tactful". I find myself being "tactful" at some company meetings, because to come flat out and say that a major executive in the company (like sometimes the CEO) really screwed something up is a sure way to get on the shit list and maybe lose your job. There is a way to being truthful, getting the truth out, without being so personal as to absolutely paint yourself into a corner.
But what has happened to Obama is just plain lying. There were people who wrote about him "truthfully" in 2008 and were ignored. Just as in 1992 there was a writer for the Arkansas Democrat Gazette that wrote quite truthfully about Bill and Hillary (he is dead now) and was artfully ignored until after the election, and then was brought on a talking head show to discuss and ridicule him (politely, of course).
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes.... at January 25, 2013 11:07 AM (RFeQD)
What infuriates me about lightbulbs is that it was signed by GWB. The lightbulb regulations just encapsulate everything that is wrong with Washington. And just the other day, thinking I finally need a 100watt bulb, because normally I don't use them, I remembered that I can't buy one.
Posted by: SH at January 25, 2013 11:07 AM (gmeXX)
"And I'm not wasting 5 minutes for a guy who can't even win florida"
Florida was in play long after the polls closed. Perhaps if principled folks like you so called conservatives had quit your longing for St Sarah the Spineless and gotten behing the actual GOP nominee, you know, the person that actually ran for POTUS against Obama, maybe he would have won. Since you didn't vote, your opinion really doesn't matter. No skin in the game as it were. Palin didn't have the guts for running for POTUS. She'd rather set on the sidelines and cheered on Michelle Bachmann the night she went after Perry on Liquid Whore.
Thanks for playing.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at January 25, 2013 11:08 AM (VrVBw)
Yeah I'd do her, but if she opened up that whinny mouth, I would have to stick something in it to shut her up.
Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at January 25, 2013 11:08 AM (wR+pz)
Posted by: Ricky 'Sweatervest' Santorum at January 25, 2013 11:08 AM (F6KtL)
Constitution? You know who's got a helluva constitution? Big Mooch.
Tamales, lobster, dessert, and the occasional stray fly or two.
Nothing seems to upset her tummy.
Posted by: wth at January 25, 2013 11:08 AM (wAQA5)
Posted by: Hillary Rodmuncher Clinton at January 25, 2013 11:08 AM (jucos)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 11:08 AM (T0NGe)
David Brooks is brilliant? Really, Lowry? It would have been sufficient to simply call him a NYT columnist; the "brilliant" is just so much bootlicking.
What were those Japanese term from last week, about what you pretend to believe and what you really believe? Tatemae and honne ? I'd present this as the perfect example of those two terms in practice.
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit [/i][/u][/b] at January 25, 2013 11:09 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: Bosk at January 25, 2013 11:09 AM (QkFee)
184 We remember Palin only because she was villlified the most
I thought it was because of her sweater puppies and nice legs
Posted by: navycopjoe at January 25, 2013 11:09 AM (8nyQY)
After a few months he got sloppy, slipped up, got caught, and shipped off to Leavenworth for a while. Also, he could forge travel orders but not payroll, so he ran outa funds
Reminds me of the MFM ( only they get paid )--flying around, pretending to be something they're not, not really doing anything except burdening the system. They're tourists, doing no actual work and faking it non-stop
Posted by: sierra five at January 25, 2013 11:09 AM (Dll6b)
Posted by: joncelli at January 25, 2013 11:09 AM (RD7QR)
CPS Email To Parents Directs Them To Adult Web Site
http://tinyurl.com/bj6xtmk
CHICAGO (CBS) — The Chicago Public Schools system has apologized for sending an email to parents that included a typo in a web link that sent them to an erotic website as a result.
Posted by: kbdabear at January 25, 2013 11:10 AM (wwsoB)
Like all newspapers, they lie about just about everything.
They can't help themselves.
Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at January 25, 2013 11:10 AM (wR+pz)
"Grow some fucking backbone and stand with your convictions and dance with the ones that brung ya.Spineless ratfink turds in this party are going to be the death of it."
Many GOPers refused to vote for their own Party's nominee and stayed home rather than vote for Mitt. Mitt won the nomination and THREE FUCKING MILLION Gopers stayed home compared to 08. If they showed up Romney is POTUS now.
Palin didn't run. Perry did and didn't win. Mitt ran and won the nomination. And the so called fiscal conservatives and purists stayed the fuck home.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at January 25, 2013 11:11 AM (VrVBw)
i believe his intention was to contrast the "dumb, uneducated" Rush who got it right and the supposedly "brilliant, ivy-educated" brooks who got it wrong. I think he's trying to illustrate what I'm talking about, which is that truth, apparently, is irrelevant in these determinations -- the media loves Brooks' falsehoods and despises Limbaugh's truths.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 11:11 AM (LCRYB)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 11:11 AM (l86i3)
Now I see .
It wasn't that Derbyshire was wrong , Rich Lowry just thought him tactless .
Posted by: awkward davies
That right there is some pretty smart stuff.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes.... at January 25, 2013 11:11 AM (RFeQD)
Posted by: SH at January 25, 2013 11:12 AM (gmeXX)
That third govt. department was so useless I couldn't even remember what it was! And people called that a problem!
Oops, excuse me, I'm standing on a drill site. Have at it, boys!
-Gov Perry
I love this guy, I'm collecting gas royalties due to him.
Posted by: Meremortal, Watching It Burn at January 25, 2013 11:12 AM (1Y+hH)
Palin pick got us somewhat excited for the ticket, much like the Ryan pick.
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 25, 2013 11:12 AM (xAtAj)
I don't know how Palin got into this thread, but I would like to confirm that I would still ride that like Slim Pickens Kinging his Kong on a nuclear bomb.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 25, 2013 11:12 AM (p/cQy)
Scotus seems certain to hear NLRB recess appts. case as there is a conflict btw D.C. Circuit ruling today & an earlier one by 11th Circuit.
Posted by: Jones in CO at January 25, 2013 11:12 AM (8sCoq)
Posted by: Real Joe at January 25, 2013 11:12 AM (u1hOQ)
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at January 25, 2013 11:12 AM (FKQng)
So much for their vaunted sophistication and speaking truth to power.
And yeah, it was obvious when people on the right ganged up on Palin for stating the obvious that the battle was lost. A lot of us tried to make that point but no one was listening. Now that an object lesson has been made of what happens when you forthrightly state conservative principles we are left with the McCain's and Romney's, who are neither cat nor dog in the political menagerie.
That is why there is so much despair and hopelessness.
Posted by: Voluble at January 25, 2013 11:12 AM (qYvEa)
>>But my point is that the remark is Socially Unwelcome not because it's false but rather precisely because it's true.
Truth is the most painful insult and truth is the most awkward embarrassment.
Yeah, and if you're a leftist that depends on the subversion of truth across the board to support your false assertions, truth is far more than an awkward embarrassment, it is the death penalty to your dark agenda.
There should be a price to pay for those phonies like Brooks and Noonan and Parker and Frum that pretend to be right leaning opinion analysts and took the easier road while the more accurate view desperately needed support.
And a sharp rebuke for untimely tactfulness ain't nearly enough.
Posted by: ontherocks at January 25, 2013 11:13 AM (aZ6ew)
Oh my GOD! A winter storm! slick roads! No bread! Death and destruction sure to follow!
http://tinyurl.com/bga7tw2
Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at January 25, 2013 11:13 AM (wR+pz)
exactly I read it and didn't even think about any of the mentioned but probably all of us....
How many of us warned, showed, discussed, trued to convince and failed with someone who should be sensible but decided SNL hahaha Hope Race...post-racial?
When I figured out they were not in the least bit ashamed in the numbers they should have been and the media went full court press I fresked out as you all recall.
The he picked Ryan and I hoped for just long enough that my age and lower would GET the MATH!
I screwed up.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:13 AM (LRFds)
Like Limbaugh just a few weeks ago, I can't for the life of me, understand why people who are on our side had to voice their opinions about Palin after the decision had been made.
Everyone expected the liberals to attack her. There was no surprise when the press did everything they could to destroy her, but some of us wonder why it was necessary for respected figures on the right to jump on the pile.
Rush found it disgusting. I find it inexplicible.
Posted by: jwest at January 25, 2013 11:13 AM (ZDsRL)
Posted by: LGoPs at January 25, 2013 11:13 AM (BJVEF)
Posted by: Andy at January 25, 2013 11:13 AM (hjRtO)
Posted by: eman at January 25, 2013 11:13 AM (jp2Ur)
i believe his intention was to contrast the "dumb, uneducated" Rush who got it right and the supposedly "brilliant, ivy-educated" brooks who got it wrong. I think he's trying to illustrate what I'm talking about, which is that truth, apparently, is irrelevant in these determinations -- the media loves Brooks' falsehoods and despises Limbaugh's truths.
Hmm... Could be. It still doesn't read like it to me, but I'll cede the point.
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit [/i][/u][/b] at January 25, 2013 11:14 AM (4df7R)
"You mad."
yep. I worked my ass off for Romney only to watch you purists stay home on election day. And you are one of Sarah's cheerleaders.
Thanks for playing.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at January 25, 2013 11:14 AM (VrVBw)
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 03:13 PM (LRFds)
You effed up! You trusted us!
Posted by: Generation FSA at January 25, 2013 11:14 AM (xAtAj)
They're just prominent examples of people- including virtually everyone on the right wing blogosphere- who noted that Obama wasn't the pragmatic centrist he pretended to be. A cursory look at his record demonstrated that.
For this they (we) were labelled by the left and their MSM allies as racist, extremely extreme extremists engaged in name-calling extremism. And racism. Mostly racism.
Now that he's safely won his second term and outed himself as a partisan liberal, where the fuck is our apology? Where's the acknolwedgement that yes, right wingers (be they Rush, Levin, Hannity, The Quitter, or bloggers) were right about Obama being a doctrinaire liberal, and they were wrong?
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 25, 2013 11:15 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: soothsayer at January 25, 2013 11:15 AM (C0ttM)
Posted by: eman at January 25, 2013 11:15 AM (jp2Ur)
Posted by: CSMBigBird at January 25, 2013 11:15 AM (dgqjL)
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at January 25, 2013 11:16 AM (FKQng)
Posted by: toby928© for TB at January 25, 2013 11:16 AM (evdj2)
"And the so called fiscal conservatives and purists stayed the fuck home."
Medved (someone's favorite, not mine) says this claim is false.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at January 25, 2013 11:16 AM (Kgufq)
Posted by: St. Hillary the Forgetful and her Goggles of Deception at January 25, 2013 11:17 AM (EZl54)
Jesus Christ Almighty, the planets do not revolve around her.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 02:39 PM (LCRYB)
-------------------------------------------------
I see you've made up your mind and sticking with it.
My theory of why people had/have an infatuation with Palin is because all during that election the conservative voters had no politician's voice. She was the only one in either party that stood in front of the nation and talked about conservative principles. She was really the only one willing to turn on the light in the progressive darkness.
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2013 11:17 AM (/ZV9/)
Even Camille Paglia respects Rush Limbaugh's big voice and willingness to pick something up by the ankles and shake out the loose change.
Rush, who has 600 affiliates, millions of listeners and makes millions of dollars a year. A vulgar populist.
David Brooks is a courtier. He gets to go on PBS Newshour and debate with that retarded Irish dwarf Mark Shields. And that makes him "respected", plus his gig with that big newspaper in New York City that is going bankrupt.
Winning!
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes.... at January 25, 2013 11:17 AM (RFeQD)
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 25, 2013 03:15 PM (SY2Kh)
You're forgetting the Leftist Amnesia Effect. They will never admit that they were ever wrong, despite documented evidence to the contrary. And even if they WERE wrong, it was nothing worthy of apology. Just the cut and thrust of debate, don't you know?
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit [/i][/u][/b] at January 25, 2013 11:17 AM (4df7R)
Bingo, I had a guy I've made acquaintence and done business with here basically lecture me that "yeah you're right and you know what it is scary how right you guess where he's going sometimes but WHY CAN'T YOU WANT HIM TO BE RIGHT SOMETIMES?"
Uh....hello?
I was not here during Bush but what the high fuck and what do you say in response to that?
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:18 AM (LRFds)
http://tinyurl.com/ate9bjf
Raptors in North America
http://tinyurl.com/bfsujbp
North American Birds of Prey
http://tinyurl.com/bhc78tn
Now get to work on hawks Ace.
Posted by: Marcus at January 25, 2013 11:18 AM (xPfg3)
what did they name the winter storm, this time?
Kelvon?
Posted by: soothsayer at January 25, 2013 03:15 PM (C0ttM)
I think Trayvon, lot's of Black ice.
I denounce myself.
Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at January 25, 2013 11:18 AM (wR+pz)
There should be a price to pay for those phonies like Brooks and Noonan and Parker and Frum that pretend to be right leaning opinion analysts and took the easier road while the more accurate view desperately needed support.
And a sharp rebuke for untimely tactfulness ain't nearly enough.
My dear sir, of what do you speak?
Posted by: T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII at January 25, 2013 11:18 AM (BrQrN)
Posted by: Larsen E. Whipsnade at January 25, 2013 11:18 AM (6BgmB)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at January 25, 2013 11:18 AM (deaac)
Oh, and try not to shed on the furniture or into the soup tureen.
Posted by: miss manners at January 25, 2013 11:18 AM (01R+Z)
"Grow some fucking backbone and stand with your convictions and dance with the ones that brung ya.Spineless ratfink turds in this party are going to be the death of it."
Many GOPers refused to vote for their own Party's nominee and stayed home rather than vote for Mitt. Mitt won the nomination and THREE FUCKING MILLION Gopers stayed home compared to 08. If they showed up Romney is POTUS now.
Palin didn't run. Perry did and didn't win. Mitt ran and won the nomination. And the so called fiscal conservatives and purists stayed the fuck home.
Posted by: Dick Nixon at January 25, 2013 03:11 PM (VrVBw)
Like a said, a bunch of emo cunts in this party who would rather wine moan complain and backstab eachother and "sit out the vote" to prove a point like anyone gives a shit once you lose what your point it you retarded dumb fucks...you dont see liberal who dont like obama and would have preferred clinton sitting at home...liberals are like stupid lemmings, they follow and show up to vote apparently.
Republicans are like fucking pissed off retarded ass raped lemmings that dont understand there stretched out tender ass raped asshole is not safe if they dont get off their ass and act as one fucking party.
Mother fuckers like Santa Claus Paul, who wouldnt even endorse ROmney, have no place in this party. That fucking tard leads by example and i am sure there were plenty of Paultarded mother fuckers who followed that example.
Same goes for Palin, if the talking shitheads of our party had not led by example and started trashing palin, i am pretty damn sure things would be different...but hell now someone them actively decided to suck obamas cock too...yes Noonan you old scrunt i am talking about you you fucking idiot.
Posted by: jeremiah God Damn Barack Obama the Mother Fucking SCoaMF wright at January 25, 2013 11:19 AM (+OTLF)
Posted by: soothsayer at January 25, 2013 11:19 AM (vanqS)
My theory of why people had/have an infatuation with Palin is because all during that election the conservative voters had no politician's voice. She was the only one in either party that stood in front of the nation and talked about conservative principles. She was really the only one willing to turn on thelight in the progressive darkness.
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2013 03:17 PM (/ZV9/)
Pretty good point
Posted by: The Jackhole at January 25, 2013 11:19 AM (nTgAI)
My dear sir, of what do you speak?
Posted by: T. Coddington Van Voorhees VII at January 25, 2013 03:18 PM (BrQrN)
They remained acceptable at Georgetown dinner parties and that's what mattered to them. Actual intellectual consistency didn't enter into that consideration.
Posted by: joncelli at January 25, 2013 11:19 AM (RD7QR)
I would have said court jester, but they were actually expected to say unpleasant realities to the king from time to time.
Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 11:19 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 11:19 AM (l86i3)
and I wound up just donating because you could see that our side had too many in PURITY WARS! why can't we have a closeted Reagan like they got Closet Lenin?
I was so wound up I knew beyond a handful of phonecalls I made I'd be a disaster on the door to door circuit because I wanted it too bad.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:20 AM (LRFds)
She's good for 300 comments.
Posted by: toby928© for TB at January 25, 2013 03:16 PM (evdj2)
--- - --- ---- - ---- --
Thanks for making my point. she used to be good for a thousand.
Posted by: Meremortal, Watching It Burn at January 25, 2013 11:20 AM (1Y+hH)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 11:20 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 11:20 AM (l86i3)
Did anyone watch "Iron Lady", the Margaret Thatcher movie?
Apparently, liberals have one template for conservative women and you simply switch names when needed.
Posted by: jwest at January 25, 2013 11:20 AM (ZDsRL)
Posted by: jeremiah God Damn Barack Obama the Mother Fucking SCoaMF wright at January 25, 2013 03:19 PM (+OTLF)
I am liking your tone
Posted by: The Jackhole at January 25, 2013 11:20 AM (nTgAI)
Kelvon?
Posted by: soothsayer at January 25, 2013 03:15 PM (C0ttM)
Kaaaaaahhhhhhnnnnn!
No, really....Kahn.
Posted by: Tami[/i] at January 25, 2013 11:21 AM (X6akg)
Wasn't a joke about it being a movie review.
4 Pinocchios
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 25, 2013 11:21 AM (xAtAj)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at January 25, 2013 11:21 AM (deaac)
Posted by: Caustic at January 25, 2013 11:22 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 11:22 AM (l86i3)
I agree with that. Well, not with the "only" characterization. Certainly she was the most prominent and usually the most unabashed.
I think Palin has some virtues. I've said so. I continue to say so.
Do you think she has any flaws?
Incidentally sometimes I wonder about this: I think a lot of the Palinistas want something to make her whole, that is, to make up for the bad treatment she got.
I'm not against that idea but what I find to be a dealbreaker is the idea "the only thing we as a nation (or as a party) can do to compensate her for her poor treatment (including by the party) is to nominate her as our party's selection for President."
It's at that point I say: No. It will have to be something short of that.
People like me -- who actually don't *hate* Palin, but we're not supporting her for Presdient, either -- have all sorts of ideas of where Palin could serve. Senator? We're all on board.
But she doesn't want the job. And yet this seems to be held against *us*, as if we're the ones who are refusing.
If it's president or nothing than for me it will be nothing.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 11:22 AM (LCRYB)
*notes the name Palin*
*walks out of thread to avoid the circular firing squad*
Posted by: Kinley Ardal, Palin fan at January 25, 2013 11:22 AM (6Btru)
They remained acceptable at Georgetown dinner parties and that's what mattered to them. Actual intellectual consistency didn't enter into that consideration.
I know. T. Coddington was an ongoing Iowahawk bit making fun of them.
Posted by: Lurking Canuck at January 25, 2013 11:22 AM (BrQrN)
Posted by: toby928© for TB at January 25, 2013 11:23 AM (evdj2)
Can't I like Palin because she is good looking and has a great backside?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 25, 2013 11:23 AM (GsoHv)
Posted by: Jones in CO at January 25, 2013 11:23 AM (8sCoq)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at January 25, 2013 11:23 AM (deaac)
Posted by: cardinal fang at January 25, 2013 11:24 AM (Jsiw/)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 25, 2013 11:24 AM (GFM2b)
But I'd guess that the most recent Abel laureate (my advisor, BTW) might fail the "smart" test even in his native language because he doesn't wear the affectations of the intelligentsia.
Or as I call them, the pretensia.
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 03:20 PM (T0NGe)
Math ? Really ? GTFO
Posted by: The Jackhole at January 25, 2013 11:24 AM (nTgAI)
Posted by: Jones in CO at January 25, 2013 03:23 PM (8sCoq)
Hillary 2016
UGNNNGHHGNNNNN
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 25, 2013 11:24 AM (xAtAj)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 03:22 PM (LCRYB)
You've got nothing to worry about, ace.
Posted by: Meremortal, Watching It Burn at January 25, 2013 11:24 AM (1Y+hH)
I was alive and semi-coherant in 1980 and I can tell you conservatism and Reagan were not cool, even in North Dakota. People were sick of Carter, and Reagan was not afraid to speak the truth, even if it hurt. He went for the throat, but with a smile. He didn't take a poll to figure out what people liked and then pandered. He lead, and people followed.
We don't do that anymore. We blame Bush, make fun of Palin, distance ourselves from Rush, and try and trick people into thinking we are just like the progs, but with better fiscal policy some how. This idea we can't win unless we hide who we are or make nice is stupid.
The JEF knew that his health plan was unpopular but he did it any way. He led. He is gonna do the same with gun control and immigration. Because our leadership is afraid of being seen as mean, so they will not lead. We will never get out point across if our leadership refuses to lead. Leadesrhip trumps cool
Posted by: thunderb at January 25, 2013 11:25 AM (Dnbau)
269 -
I have a brother who is probably close to a certifiable genius in the aerospace industry, but he's fairly clueless about lots of things. When I dared to say I thought Bill Clinton was a near genius he went ballistic (not literally, he wasn't on the job).
It's a different kind of genius, and some people cannot recognize more than one kind.
Palin is a bright lady. I'm sure. She's not a bright politician though, and I'd think even her most loyal supporters would have a hard time coming up with examples to show otherwise.
Posted by: BurtTC at January 25, 2013 11:25 AM (TOk1P)
As someone nicely pointed out above, there is a difference between tact (sins of omission at worst) and lying (sins of commission). Dems lie. The media does both in service of their Dem masters.
Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 11:25 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 11:25 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: eleven at January 25, 2013 11:25 AM (VhqUZ)
Posted by: Jones in CO at January 25, 2013 11:25 AM (8sCoq)
Movie length post on classiness?
Not classy.
Posted by: Jim Halpert
I suppose I forgot the word 'review' but 4 Pinnochios is a pretty hard ass WP judgement on conservative statements.
Not classy.
Posted by: Lurking Canuck at January 25, 2013 11:25 AM (BrQrN)
===============
No, but I still think she'd have made a fine President.
-----
"I never have any reaction when someone says somethng nice about palin -- I ignore it. It's an internal eyeroll."
===============
That's how I feel nowadays when someone says she's dumb.
Posted by: Kensington at January 25, 2013 11:26 AM (H84UO)
258
Just because the First Lady scarfs down food, puts her elbows on the table and rolls her eyes at table guests doesn't mean that you're allowed to, Mr Wicket. Dinner-table tact is for us all.
Oh, and try not to shed on the furniture or into the soup tureen.
Posted by: miss manners at January 25, 2013 03:18 PM (01R+Z)
And chew with your mouth closed if you're sitting next to Barry. Unless you like flies.
Posted by: wth at January 25, 2013 11:26 AM (wAQA5)
I think a lot of palin's fans want other people to fight her battles -- thus, the unending complaint that we didn't "support" her enough or "defend" her enough or "rally for Sarah" enough.
But apply this thinking to any male candidate: The minute someone says a male candidate just needs people to fight for him more, we understand the self-defeating nature of that statement. THat means the male candidate can't fight for himself, and has to be helped over every hurdle.
And yet people dont' seem to sense this when we're talking about a female cnadidate. I think they categorize this "helping" as a kind of chivalry or something.
But I dont' care what the gender is -- if someone needs this much help and this much support and this much rallying, they've got a problem, and are not fit to be president.
and chivarly is, in this context, certainly a double-standard as far as gender.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 11:26 AM (LCRYB)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at January 25, 2013 11:26 AM (deaac)
283 Can't I like Palin because she is good looking and has a great backside?
the front is pretty damn nice too
Posted by: navycopjoe at January 25, 2013 11:26 AM (8nyQY)
Using your own hankie.
Hankies are for pussies. You wipe the blood off using your own tongue.
Separates the serious from the non-serious.
Posted by: EC at January 25, 2013 11:27 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: Caustic at January 25, 2013 11:27 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: soothsayer at January 25, 2013 03:19 PM (vanqS)
Rubio/Portman would be great. Rubio has the charisma to lie right to people's faces which is what is needed
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at January 25, 2013 11:27 AM (FKQng)
This was transparently obvious by the mocking adjectives he used to describe Brooks. "Winsome?" C'mon, using that to describe a 60 year old man is practically like calling him "Skippy" from Family Ties. I thought it was a delightfully subtle insult myself.
Posted by: Jeff B. at January 25, 2013 11:27 AM (OQZWo)
Cripes, Republican pundits are stupid.
>>>Heh.
It's 'safe' now, to come to this conclusion.
He didn't have to go out on a limb, just agree with what had already been said.
What else did you expect from the head "chestless wonder" over at NR?
Posted by: Ron Penfound at January 25, 2013 11:27 AM (Q1DS+)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 11:28 AM (l86i3)
BY GOD you nailed it Ace!
Obama is really a woman and we are jealous his er her "champions" fight for her.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:28 AM (LRFds)
Watch this permission evaporate the second any of the attempts to repeal the amendment or otherwise game things so TFG can get a third term get any traction.
Posted by: Ian S. at January 25, 2013 11:28 AM (OevbG)
Posted by: Chairman, Kate Upton for President in '16 at January 25, 2013 03:27 PM (6TB1Z)
she won't be old enough
Posted by: Jones in CO at January 25, 2013 11:28 AM (8sCoq)
*walks out of thread to avoid the circular firing squad*
I shot myself with my own assault petard if that makes you feel any better.
Posted by: eleven at January 25, 2013 11:28 AM (VhqUZ)
Posted by: eman at January 25, 2013 11:28 AM (jp2Ur)
In that regard, Palin is way too much of a distraction.
Posted by: Marcus at January 25, 2013 11:29 AM (xPfg3)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 03:11 PM
It's tribal at its core. Brooks himself exposed this tribalism when he wrote approvingly of TFG's Ivy League pedigree; "I divide people into two kinds; people who talk like us and those who don't"
Truth, laws, and etiquette is determined by "those who talk like David Brooks" and changed constantly to insure the perpetuation of their power and privilege
Posted by: kbdabear at January 25, 2013 11:29 AM (wwsoB)
I'd sau the exact opposite. She's not especially impressive as a general intellect, but she's as close to a natural political genius as I've seen. And I'm not a Palin for president supporter.
Posted by: Chairman, Kate Upton for President in '16 at January 25, 2013 11:29 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: awkward davies at January 25, 2013 11:29 AM (USjX1)
301 THat means the male candidate can't fight for himself, and has to be helped over every hurdle
like McCain and Romney? can you name another republican where all you heard was "i'll hold my nose and vote for him"?
Posted by: navycopjoe at January 25, 2013 11:29 AM (8nyQY)
Posted by: Rich Lowry, circa 1946 at January 25, 2013 11:29 AM (xAtAj)
Palin wasn't the 'only' conservative voice out there...
Rick Perry is just as much a 'true conservative' as Palin is, and has been doing it, instead of just talking about, a lot longer than Palin.
"I would like to see the Federal Government be as inconsequential in people's lives as possible." ~ Rick Perry
Who else said this?
I still don't understand why Palin didn't endorse Perry when he got in the race.
They were supposedly good friends.
I was a big fan of Palin, until the Primaries.
I don't think her long period of indecision did herself...or us...any favors.
Posted by: wheatie at January 25, 2013 11:29 AM (fH4X9)
I thought they esploded her up?
Posted by: Jones in CO at January 25, 2013 11:29 AM (8sCoq)
AmishDude @ 269
You make the mistake (heh) of judging reality by some objective measure, like "truth". This is where "tact" comes in, or the ability to polish shit to make it look good.
George Will had this comment or saying he frequently used in the Clinton years to describe the Administration mindset, calling it our "holiday from history", in that it seemed everything was going to turn to gold and the future was so bright, we had to wear shades.
George can be right sometimes, but it often takes years for the objective truth of a matter to become so abundantly and painfully clear that even the professional shit polishers have to acknowledge it.
Someday, the flaws and screw-ups of Obama may become so painfully clear that even the neo-Marxist shit shiners in the Media might acknowledge it (really? no.) but that is almost irrelevant to those of us who have to live in the here and now, and live with the consequences of electing this POS Leftist neo-Marxist from Chicago.
And yes, in the real world (which may just show up in America very soon) being "right" counts for a whole lot more than being clever, tactful or just plain good at polishing shit.
Posted by: Reader C.J. Burch writes.... at January 25, 2013 11:30 AM (RFeQD)
The problem is that the MFM employ him and other phonies that I mentioned upthread as slow moving, almost sympathetic targets of opportunity for their panel charades, to convince the low infos that they are at once balanced and and superior in their leftist dogma, while they are in fact, neither.
Posted by: ontherocks at January 25, 2013 11:30 AM (aZ6ew)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at January 25, 2013 11:30 AM (deaac)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 25, 2013 11:30 AM (GFM2b)
Posted by: cardinal fang at January 25, 2013 11:30 AM (Jsiw/)
"Palin is a bright lady. I'm sure. She's not a bright politician..."
She goes from housewife to Governor in a reasonably short period, without the backing of the powers in her own party.
Must have been luck.
Posted by: jwest at January 25, 2013 11:31 AM (ZDsRL)
like McCain and Romney? can you name another republican where all you heard was "i'll hold my nose and vote for him"?
Posted by: navycopjoe at January 25, 2013 03:29 PM (8nyQY)
Hate on Romney all you want, it was about 10x easier to pull the arm for him.
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 25, 2013 11:31 AM (xAtAj)
That was such a great speech. It's too bad about the follow through. Anyone care to assess his chances of rehabbing himself?
Posted by: Ian S. at January 25, 2013 11:31 AM (OevbG)
Posted by: Math is Hard [/i] at January 25, 2013 11:31 AM (feFL6)
Like Reagan
and Palin.
Paul Ryan has balls...but they havent fully dropped yet.
Mitt had balls (during the first debate...then during the second debate when he was about to show us balls again, candy crawley bit them off...proving that fat ball eater > Mitts balls. If Mitt had performed full on in debate 2 and three to beat obamas ass....oh well i guess the spawn of fucking satan is just never going to be fully challanged)
Hillary Clinton has balls...did you see her at the hearing? What fucking difference does it make bitch? We Won! Too bad she isnt a republican...she has more balls than that entire panel had.
Feel free to list any other republicans you can think of who have balls.
Still waiting....
Better have proof though...like Anthony Weiner style proof....and no having obamas balls in your mouth doesnt count as legitimate posession of balls...sorry frum brooks noonan bohner jindal crispycremechristie et al.
Posted by: jeremiah God Damn Barack Obama the Mother Fucking SCoaMF wright at January 25, 2013 11:31 AM (+OTLF)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 11:31 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: bicentennialguy at January 25, 2013 11:31 AM (vg8iE)
Posted by: Chairman, Kate Upton for President in '16 at January 25, 2013 03:29 PM (6TB1Z)
About 99% of the evidence to the contrary....
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 25, 2013 11:32 AM (GsoHv)
Fifty thou a year
Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs an intervention at January 25, 2013 11:32 AM (ZKzrr)
OT, but since I'm not interested in getting tangled in the Palin Wars, I'll forge ahead anyway.
RE: the sidebar item about Obamacare fucking up medical records? Yeah, anyone who's ever A) worked in government; B) worked with large databases; and/or C) worked in the healthcare industry could have seen that coming a thousand miles away.
I used to work for the NH DHHS, which meant I got to work with all three at the same time: gubmint, databases and healthcare info. It's hell. It was too expensive to upgrade the data system because of how much detail and security would need to be put in place, so when I left in 2009 they were still working in DOS style screens with black backgrounds and green or orange text. Heck, how many doctors out there are still using paper files because it's too expensive or time-consuming to transition to electronic? Without having access to a hard number, I'll take a wild guess and say A LOT.
And this is just NH -- we've got fewer people in our whole state than live in Houston, TX alone. The number of records we'd have to work with are MINISCULE compared to most other states. And Obamacare's cheerleaders think they're going to be able to get the entire fucking COUNTRY online and zipping along in no time flat?
If you ever doubted their stupidity (why would you?) then let this be the proof you're looking for. They really ARE this dumb.
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit [/i][/u][/b] at January 25, 2013 11:32 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: CSMBigBird at January 25, 2013 11:32 AM (dgqjL)
Many people had Obama figured out, in 2007. But the reason they were so vehemently attacked and shut up when they said anything was that the Democrat/media complex determined at a very early stage (well before the economy started to tank) that Democrats had to have a Black nominee to win in 2008. They didn't think Hillary could win. They worride after 2004 that Republicans had found a way to get just enough black and latino votes to keep winning. Their only hope was a massive turnout of blacks and Latinos in tribal support of a black candidate. There were definitely powers within the Democratic Party (I think led by Howard Dean) who talked Obama into running (he wanted to be President but wanted to wait until 2012), rounded up a bunch of rich liberals to fund him, and then ruthlessly controlled his image to get him elected. It had nothing to do with "tact" being enforced by the media or anyone else. It was pure message discipline in service of the higher goal - to get the White House back, by any means necessary.
The Vichy Republicans who supported Obama in 2008 willfully ignored everything in his ideological background, in favor of some sort of magical thiking that because he seemed to be temperamentally moderate he would also be idologically moderate. A lot of them also were horrified at Sarah Palin and terrified that if she were elected VP she would then be President someday and she was too big of a dumb so-con hick for them to allow that. (Not MY view of her, please, but I think an accurate description of elitist republican views of her).
In short, they were elitists above all, and supported the elitist canddiate, Barack Obama. The only reason some are recoiling now is because Obama has laid bare not his leftwing policy agenda, but his community-organizing thuggishness and crassness that belies the smooth ceased-pants image they bought in 2008.
Posted by: rockmom at January 25, 2013 11:32 AM (qE3AR)
Posted by: toby928© for TB at January 25, 2013 11:32 AM (evdj2)
yeah but the narcissism is so powerful we could run a fucking city off of it....
Brooks is convinced that what the IVYs "have" is so awesome it is of course the only loyalty that matters, but Bush was an Ivy too and the tribe hated him. Obama is granted license because he thrusts that fucking chin out and looks down at us by looking up. Brooks will never grasp that barack wants to obliterate the old order that Brooks takes such pride in and replace it with a Heliocentric one with Ogabe as "the sun."
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:32 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 11:32 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Jones in CO at January 25, 2013 11:32 AM (8sCoq)
Posted by: MaxMBJ at January 25, 2013 03:26 PM (deaac)
No, Kramer's a lazy bum.
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 25, 2013 11:33 AM (R4Bz0)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 11:33 AM (T0NGe)
Separates the serious from the non-serious.
Posted by: EC at January 25, 2013 03:27 PM (GQ8sn)
I think not. The chances your average journalist is HIV positive? Pretty damn good. Why wipe, just cut.
Posted by: Billy Bob, Pseudo Intellectual at January 25, 2013 11:33 AM (wR+pz)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 25, 2013 11:33 AM (GFM2b)
337 oh, i'm not hating on moneybags at all
he wasn't my first or second choice but hey, you dance with the one you brought
you guys picked him, I did my best to try to get him in
Posted by: navycopjoe at January 25, 2013 11:34 AM (8nyQY)
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 11:34 AM (m2CN7)
Yeah, you sure wouldn't want to nominate a guy to head your party after that.
Posted by: Winston Churchill at January 25, 2013 11:34 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: SurferDoc at January 25, 2013 11:34 AM (6H6FZ)
Like barack Obama....
you ever get bored and need brain filler to stay awake bud you are welcome to explain to me all night how your mutually competing suicide coalition can vote for a guy guaranteed to do them harm....
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:34 AM (LRFds)
If he really decides to do it? Pretty good. But it would have to happen much, much earlier. Look to see if a) he resigns at the end of his current term (2014) and then b) does *not* take up a teaching position at TAMU. If both of those happen, he'll probably run again.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 25, 2013 11:34 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: cardinal fang at January 25, 2013 03:30 PM (Jsiw/)
Ryan would be terrible. House reps cant win and are not guaranteed their state.
Posted by: Flapjackmaka at January 25, 2013 11:34 AM (FKQng)
I'm not inviting you to Mozart's Birthday party this weekend.
Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs an intervention at January 25, 2013 11:35 AM (ZKzrr)
Your bias is showing...badly.
Michaelangelo was a genius. Mozart was a genius.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 25, 2013 11:35 AM (GsoHv)
nah in Noonan's case they were firing harder than the media...
I'll never forgive the self-annoited "intellects" on the right and that includes George Will who I've enjoyed since age 4.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:35 AM (LRFds)
Trumped again....and by a chick!
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at January 25, 2013 11:36 AM (GsoHv)
Bang spot on; I wouldn't change a thing except sprinkle in some profanity.
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 25, 2013 11:36 AM (R4Bz0)
Posted by: Jones in CO at January 25, 2013 11:36 AM (8sCoq)
Uh....hello?
I was not here during Bush but what the high fuck and what do you say in response to that?
Ask how his pony is doing. You know, the one he wanted and wished for when he was a little boy.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 25, 2013 11:36 AM (SY2Kh)
"Rich Lowry: Rush Limbaugh Was Right About Obama"
Rich is a faggot who molests little boys while he is not pretending to be a conservative writer. He is cheerleader for GOP squishes who do not understand that the times have changed and they are no longer considered "conservative" in the American republic. John McCain didn't know it either... thats why he lost against some upstart from Texas in 2000. Didn't stop him from dipping his wick in 2008 though. The GOP has no such thing as a "clue bat" despite having a sound ideology, but no representation.
Posted by: John Derbyshire at January 25, 2013 11:36 AM (f+TdG)
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 25, 2013 11:36 AM (0q2P7)
anywho, anyone here who is smart enough to be in Honolulu...
get your ass over to Honolulu Firearms by 11 and i'll buy your first box of ammo
trying the sig 250 again, may drop the cash for it
Posted by: navycopjoe at January 25, 2013 11:37 AM (8nyQY)
Incidentally sometimes I wonder about this: I think a lot of the Palinistas want something to make her whole, that is, to make up for the bad treatment she got.
I'm not against that idea but what I find to be a dealbreaker is the idea "the only thing we as a nation (or as a party) can do to compensate her for her poor treatment (including by the party) is to nominate her as our party's selection for President."
It's at that point I say: No. It will have to be something short of that.
People like me -- who actually don't *hate* Palin, but we're not supporting her for Presdient, either -- have all sorts of ideas of where Palin could serve. Senator? We're all on board.
But she doesn't want the job. And yet this seems to be held against *us*, as if we're the ones who are refusing.
If it's president or nothing than for me it will be nothing.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 03:22 PM (LCRYB)
------------------------------------------------
Of course she had flaws. One of the bigger ones is that she trusted the MFM to give her a straightforward interview. She most certainly should have known better. And that brings up the flaw of naivete. But I can't beat her up too much about it because most of our RNC candidates have been just that.
As far as the idea of just giving her the nomination, that would be the fault of the electorate. If she wants to run, great. But I want her to go through the same grueling process everyone else has to go through.
If it were a vote between Palin or Perry, well....Perry would get mine without a second thought. But that doesn't mean that I don't share Palin's views.
And I agree with commentors upthread too, that she doesn't seem interested in the job anymore. I want someone who wants it.
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2013 11:37 AM (/ZV9/)
322 -
Where's the evidence? I'm not talking about her political thinking, I'm talking about her actions. She muffed the Veep position (yeah, Katie set her up), let her enemies get the best of her as Gov, and totally blew it when her chance to run for Prez came up.
One failure after another. Doesn't mean she isn't right about most things, but she has no history of succeeding at getting those things done.
Posted by: BurtTC at January 25, 2013 11:37 AM (TOk1P)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 11:38 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 03:35 PM (LRFds)
I have a list and a long memory.
Posted by: SurferDoc at January 25, 2013 11:38 AM (6H6FZ)
Okay, so how do you explain the math prodigy who can solve problems but can't navigate the social scene (Unabomber) or find his way home?
Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 11:38 AM (6TB1Z)
>>>Uh....hello?
>>>I was not here during Bush but what the high fuck and what do you say in response to that?
I want him to be right all the time. That would mean he by and large agreed with me on almost every topic.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Offering Moobats Gasoline and Matches at January 25, 2013 11:38 AM (0q2P7)
She learned quickly about the press.
Who could forget the "Hi mom!" written on her palm that she deliberately let get photographed?
Posted by: EC at January 25, 2013 11:39 AM (GQ8sn)
>>>It can be used for other tasks, but intellect is the ability to assess a complex situation, understand it and draw conclusions from it that can be used in other situations.
>>>Flappin' your gums in your native language is no measure of intellect.
Of course it is. To deny this is to deny that Shakespeare was a genius, or that the guy who wrote Moby Dick or Gravity's Rainbow or Infinite Jest might have some intellectual capacity. It's retarded, sheer bigotry of math geeks versus the rest of the world.
I know this attitude well for the thoughtless (and, ironically enough, theoretically unrigorous) prejudice it is, because my father is a double-Ph.D in mathematics and Physics. I heard it from him countless times growing up, before he softened up. AmishDude, math skill is indeed indicative of a certain (extremely limited) form of intelligence. But it is neither the only form intelligence takes, nor the most valuable and useful. I'm sorry, but no matter how forcefully and/or vulgarly you assert otherwise, it won't suddenly become true.
Posted by: Jeff B. at January 25, 2013 11:39 AM (OQZWo)
Posted by: thunderb at January 25, 2013 11:39 AM (Dnbau)
I've always found a quasi-intellectual, manic depressive lush to be quite scintillating.
Posted by: Marcus at January 25, 2013 11:39 AM (xPfg3)
Goofus says "this Obama fellow isn't quite the person you believe him to be".
Posted by: Highlights for Children, Nov 2008 at January 25, 2013 11:39 AM (Zd/NW)
Posted by: CSMBigBird at January 25, 2013 11:40 AM (dgqjL)
Posted by: SpongeBob Saget at January 25, 2013 11:40 AM (epxV4)
Posted by: Truck Monkey at January 25, 2013 11:40 AM (jucos)
It must be the INTJ in me, I analyze failed system dynamics.
Yeah basically I politely explained to him about the fable of the unicorn king...
"imaginarium and hopium" they act like if we just throw enough money at solyndra it'll work, well "no" there are very economically valid reasons why it can't work LiVs....
and Barry WANTING doesn't alter gravity.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:40 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: Brat Timberlane at January 25, 2013 11:41 AM (Y5I9o)
338 "I would like to see the Federal Government be as inconsequential in people's lives as possible." ~ Rick Perry
That was such a great speech. It's too bad about the follow through. Anyone care to assess his chances of rehabbing himself?
----------
It wasn't just in one speech.
He's been saying that for years...and even further elaborated it in his book, 'Fed Up'.
And yeah, I think he can rehabilitate his image.
But he needs to start now.
Whether or not he runs for Governor again, or not...he needs to start now.
I caught part of his appearance on CNBC last month...where he was on for nearly an hour.
He did great, btw.
Posted by: wheatie at January 25, 2013 11:41 AM (fH4X9)
Posted by: rockmom at January 25, 2013 03:32 PM (qE3AR)
-
And in the future as well, unless they lock up the hispanic vote.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at January 25, 2013 11:41 AM (xtvQl)
352 -
Nonsense. I'm sure I'm smarter than you, but I don't do math. Not because I can't, but because I choose not to.
Your limits seem to be your inability to see the difference.
Posted by: BurtTC at January 25, 2013 11:41 AM (TOk1P)
If he really decides to do it? Pretty good. But it would have to happen much, much earlier.
I hate to tell you this, but he's toast. He's Dan Quayle and Sarah Palin rolled into one, and unlike them, he did it to himself.
Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 11:41 AM (6TB1Z)
Do you think Joey Choo Choo or Chom boy could have done a better job against a opposing MFM?
Posted by: Buzzsaw at January 25, 2013 11:41 AM (81UWZ)
Posted by: rickb223 at January 25, 2013 11:41 AM (GFM2b)
Posted by: Mary Clogginstein from Brattleboro, Vt and Proud of it !!!!!!!!!! at January 25, 2013 11:42 AM (48wze)
Goofus says "this Obama fellow is still full of shit, and Gallant you have some of his shit on your chin, dickbag".
Posted by: Highlights for Children, Jan 2013 at January 25, 2013 11:42 AM (Zd/NW)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 11:42 AM (T0NGe)
heh pretty much, it's just pathetic they actually think "oh well yeah he probably was not ready but WE WERE!"
well no, if you reverse engineered his political past you grasped quick he has NO IDEAS but a LOT of "beliefs"
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:42 AM (LRFds)
I disagree. For the shock effect, you do it in front of another journalist you let live to:
1. prove the point just how f'n real you are.
2. show their bodies are nothing more than meat puppets to you, to be trifled with as you please, then discarded like an empty juice box.
Posted by: EC at January 25, 2013 11:42 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: thunderb at January 25, 2013 11:42 AM (Dnbau)
Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at January 25, 2013 11:42 AM (Y5I9o)
William F. Buckley could "hoist one on his own petard" by using his extensive vocabulary (without the use of obscene words or gestures, I might add) and logic (Socratic approach). So, it can be done.
Unfortunately, we left our literature-based vocabulary back in the 50s and 60s. Isn't there someone out there who can do the same again? Of course, it might take using a dictionary more often.
Posted by: justbecause at January 25, 2013 11:42 AM (scLNg)
Are there any Republicans who meet that standard, though?
This is a serious question. We know that any Democrat who runs wants to be President. They want the power and prestige. They want the personal helicopter and airplane. They want State dinners and to be able to hob-knob with their personal heroes at a moment's notice.
I can't think of a Republican since HW who actually wanted to be President.
Wanted the duties? Yes.
Wanted to lead? Yes.
Wanted the Power? Yes, but not to the same extent.
I seriously think if you had told GW that he could be President, but he couldn't have Airforce 1, Marine 1, etc., that he had to pay for his own dinners, had to pay rent on the White House, and so forth, he would have said "Sold," in a heart beat.
Contrariwise, I believe that TFG, or Hillary, or Clinton would say, "Oh, well, never mind then."
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 25, 2013 11:42 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at January 25, 2013 11:43 AM (8y9MW)
Posted by: Margarita DeVille at January 25, 2013 11:43 AM (C8mVl)
I'd have hit it when I was 14....
of course I'd have hit the wind back then too.....so
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:43 AM (LRFds)
One of the headlines over at Drudge. Gee, this sounds familiar:
Britons, Westerners told to leave Benghazi after 'imminent' terror threat...
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Hobbit [/i][/u][/b] at January 25, 2013 11:44 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: Jones in CO at January 25, 2013 11:44 AM (8sCoq)
Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 03:41 PM (6TB1Z)
Uhhhh have any evidence? Palin(rightfully or wrongfully) is a laughingstock to the public. Most people have already forgotten *who Perry is*.
Assuming his reason for poor performance isn't a cover story, he'll be able to reintroduce himself cogently.
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at January 25, 2013 11:44 AM (xAtAj)
When it came to thee convention, however, Obama was treated with kid gloves, with the possible exception of Clint Eastwood, And how did the DNC reward such tact, painting him as a tax dodging, illness causing Mormon plutocrat,
Posted by: cardinal fang at January 25, 2013 11:44 AM (Jsiw/)
Posted by: Mary Clogginstein from Brattleboro, Vt and Proud of it !!!!!!!!!! at January 25, 2013 03:42 PM (48wze)
Here, have a flyswatter...
Posted by: Meremortal, Watching It Burn at January 25, 2013 11:44 AM (1Y+hH)
Shorter version: Ignore what people say and pay attention to what they do.
Even shorter version: FUCKIN DUH!!!!!!!
Posted by: Warden at January 25, 2013 11:44 AM (HzhBE)
Posted by: torabora at January 25, 2013 11:45 AM (VJeJd)
Amishdude,
Can you mathematically prove your assertion that mathematical ability is the only legitimate measure of intellect?
Posted by: Grey Fox at January 25, 2013 11:46 AM (4vofC)
Where is the middle ground between polite tact, and the hordes of malignant trolls?
Where is our precious diversity, tolerance, and acceptance?
Can't we all just get along, for five minutes? Please!
Posted by: Skandia Recluse at January 25, 2013 11:46 AM (5UVeo)
damndest thing wonder why the media didn't hype Stevens saying that?
Could it be it would have hurt Obama's standing?
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:46 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: JeremiadBullfrog at January 25, 2013 11:46 AM (Y5I9o)
Rainman was a genius, he could have been president in the real world.
I've seen plenty of retarded mathmeticians.
Posted by: The Jackhole at January 25, 2013 11:47 AM (nTgAI)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 11:47 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 11:47 AM (l86i3)
Evidence as in an experimental result? Of course not, this is a matter of opinion. But it is death for a political career when the mention of someone's name brings either derision or contempt. IMO, that's where Perry now finds himself. Furthermore, I don't think people have forgotten him at all, and even if they had, the press will be more than happy to remind them.
Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 11:47 AM (6TB1Z)
Assuming you meant GW both places (you said "since HW" earlier in the comment) I totally agree. Without the perks Moochelle would've gone ahead and divorced his ass during the '08 election like she was threatening. Similarly McCain wanted the nomination as a middle finger to the Bushes, and I'm not sure anymore what Romney was trying to do.
Posted by: Ian S. at January 25, 2013 11:47 AM (OevbG)
She has a certain Fatal Attraction je ne sais quoi.
As in you would wake up in the morning and she would be making rabbit sausage.
Posted by: Marcus at January 25, 2013 11:47 AM (xPfg3)
Hell, unless I could waterboard dems unendingly, you couldn't give it to me.
Posted by: rickb223 at January 25, 2013 03:41 PM (GFM2b)
-----------------------------------------------------
Hehehehehehe.
Posted by: Rick Perry at January 25, 2013 11:48 AM (/ZV9/)
Posted by: Math is Hard [/i] at January 25, 2013 11:48 AM (feFL6)
It distracts Ace from the next movie review he's drafted
Posted by: kbdabear at January 25, 2013 11:48 AM (wwsoB)
most three-year olds figure that out, soon enough
Posted by: Socrates at January 25, 2013 11:48 AM (Dll6b)
I didn't give her grief, initially. The one mention of her in the post was positive-- completely positive.
What I am reacting to is the reaction to that, the grumbling, which never stops, that "you've said bad things about St. Sarah before, repent."
I'm tired of being told I can only say Supportive Things about, as you say, an FNC contributor.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 11:48 AM (LCRYB)
I'd have had to check my crotch to make sure it was wabbit....
but "yeah" I never could get twitterpated over Coulter and I havd this nightmare about walking in on Susan Estrich using a urinal and raping me.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:49 AM (LRFds)
Funny. That's never bothered me.
Posted by: chrissie matthews at January 25, 2013 11:49 AM (01R+Z)
I welcome the New Gynocracy, followed by the Hispanic Hysteria
Posted by: stuff scraped off yer shoe at January 25, 2013 11:49 AM (Dll6b)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 11:50 AM (T0NGe)
I too. But where tact comes in is one just can't blurt out the truth about the new king without being labeled a kook and instantly dismissed. The best argument to make is his recorded actions, though very few. Would remind persons how corrupt Chicago is, and to rise to power from there, one has to have dirty hands, be bought or both. Give few examples of despotic deeds by preezy and his alphabet agencies and give people something to think about and instill doubt.
To answer when being accused of being a birther if one criticizes the commie bastard, would reply know one has control over ones birth circumstances, but is responsible for own actions once an adult. Adult, free choice actions by preezy are under lock and key why?
When arguing with helplessly brain dead liberals, give omens or warnings of what to expect from a fascist leader if preeezy "might" be one. When preezy acts, you are proven right and more doubt instilled in brain dead followers head.
Civility gets one farther. I always end spirited debate with a joke and smile and with peace of mind knowing you know what the hell is going on and if they remain clueless - its their own damn fault. They were warned.
Posted by: Deli LLama at January 25, 2013 11:51 AM (lGu1O)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 11:51 AM (l86i3)
Unfortunately the only way to circle the wagons is to not have a primary and to have the nominee be selected behind closed doors. To expect people not to go negative in a primary campaign is not realistic.
What should be expected though is after the nominee is selected that there be a unified effort to elect that person and to act as if the nominee is the best thing since sliced banana bread whether you believe it or not.
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 11:52 AM (m2CN7)
Michaelangelo was a genius. Mozart was a genius.
Art is about talent, not genius. The term is misused in this case. Do you think Mozart could explain his work? Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 03:47 PM
... and Brian Wilson is a genius!
Seriously, even Brian hates that label. A musician or composer like Brian Wilson is extremely gifted, but they haven't solved the fuel cell, cold fusion, or cured cancer.
Posted by: kbdabear at January 25, 2013 11:52 AM (wwsoB)
#394 yeah, I think so too. I am very curious to see how they try to get that 90% black turnout for Hillary in 2016. She is no Bill when it comes to appealing to black sensibilities. I guess they will trot Bill out one last time to do the shuck and jive.
I asked my liberal husband this AM who he thought could beat Hillary and he said, "anyone besides Rick Santorum." That surprised me.
Posted by: rockmom at January 25, 2013 11:53 AM (NYnoe)
Posted by: BeckoningChasm at January 25, 2013 11:54 AM (xjpRj)
This is simply untrue. Kazynski was desperately focused on meeting women but was so socially inept that he couldn't manage it.
Besides, "navigating the social scene" is not a unique skill, it is common and it doesn't involve understanding a natural or intellectual phenomenon. The intricacies of human interaction are too complex to be known or understood, so they are intuited. This is not genius.
So, only mathematicians are geniuses, but whenever someone brings up an example of why this isn't so, you say they just aren't trying, or else simply define genius as "not those guys".
The intricacies of human interaction are too complex to be known or understood
So is string theory. So what?
Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 11:54 AM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 03:50 PM (T0NGe)
Keep going, you are proving yourself wrong rainman.
Posted by: The Jackhole at January 25, 2013 11:54 AM (nTgAI)
Posted by: Tickle. at January 25, 2013 11:54 AM (l86i3)
and at some point the dark side of their race games will rear its head...
yes yes worst case scenario is Whites will be a "minority" by 2024, but we're still the biggest individual group for a long time, and if they need Black candidates we'll wind up with either the Latinos and Asians or Asians if we try....
the other thing is have babies.
These bastards are trying to import people to blow up the republic....
That is a fun and easy thing to fight, 1) fuck, 2) deal with the aftermath of fucking.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 11:55 AM (LRFds)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 11:55 AM (T0NGe)
Oh Brother. The only people who need to apologize are Beta Male Dickless Wonders like you and your crew, Ed Morrissey, Allahpundit, the NRO boys (except Mark Steyn and Andy McCarthy), the Powerline idiots, Erick Ericson, and every other dickless, balless, spineless excuse for a man who didn't defend Sarah Palin after Tuscon. Forget your attacks on Rush after the Sandra Fluke thing. Forget all the comparisons so-called conservatives make between low life scumbags like Olberman and Maher and Louis CK to Rush. Rush Limbaugh is polite to a fault. He holds back much more than he spews and I listen to Mark to get my fill of righteous indignation. (Rest in peace Andrew Breitbart.)
I wish one of you would write something, ANYTHING, about how Sarah Palin was treated after Tuscon with some ounce of passion. Be a man. Stick up for the woman. Where have all the real men gone? Long time passing.
Posted by: Jaynie59 at January 25, 2013 11:56 AM (4zKCA)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 11:57 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: Ian S. at January 25, 2013 03:47 PM (OevbG)
Since Romney took no salary for the Governorship or heading up the Olympics and spent a great deal of time volunteering for charity as a Mormon, it would be safe to say he would gladly accept the job of President with absolutely no perrk as his reponsiblity as an American citizen and his desire to continue America's exceptionalism.
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 11:57 AM (m2CN7)
campaign was so bad, the Kentucky atty general race, he ran is a case study, in what not to do, he got some kudos handling Arnold's recall campaign, that worked out well, and he picked John Roberts,
Posted by: cardinal fang at January 25, 2013 11:57 AM (Jsiw/)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 11:57 AM (T0NGe)
Bullshit, just yesterday some asshat continued the lie that she was a quitter.
yeah, what a lie. She merely quit her governorship before the end of her term, but that doesn't make her a quitter, that makes her a fighter by other means.
She flipped the script, you know. It was so brilliant of her to do that.
Idiotic. Someone quits their office but we have to argue years after the fact about whether quitting an office makes one a quitter.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2013 02:50 PM (LCRYB)
Ace , you're fucking nuts if you dont understand why she had to.
And pretending it's not a smear in calling her a quitter is dishonest.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at January 25, 2013 11:58 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 11:59 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 11:59 AM (l86i3)
Posted by: justbecause at January 25, 2013 11:59 AM (scLNg)
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn at January 25, 2013 11:59 AM (zjHFU)
Posted by: Jaynie59 at January 25, 2013 03:56 PM (4zKCA)
You are experiencing tunnel vision. This site defended Palin on the charges arising from Tuscon.
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 12:00 PM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 25, 2013 12:01 PM (R4Bz0)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 12:01 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:02 PM (l86i3)
I'd reckon Palin is a person with average to above average intellect. How else could she of achieved the level of Gov. without any familial ties to help her out. Self-made people usually aren't dolts. Its here personality faults and lack of a frame of reference that make her appear less than here peers. She's made some fairly sophisticated arguments in person and in writing, imo. Its here Alaskan-sized blind-spots that limited her political ambitions, not her grey cells.
Posted by: Serious Cat at January 25, 2013 12:02 PM (UypUQ)
Posted by: Jaynie59 at January 25, 2013 03:56 PM (4zKCA)
Yes.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at January 25, 2013 12:02 PM (AWmfW)
Yup pretty much, the correct response would have been to find an equivalent democrat and friendly ethics judge and do the same.
We don't do that, we let the left designate a target and then argue over whether or not they need saved.
I want them afraid to fuck with us.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 12:03 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:04 PM (l86i3)
Posted by: sexypig at January 25, 2013 12:05 PM (dZQh7)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 12:07 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 04:02 PM (l86i3)
No she paid one charge against her. Also her outcry about the law she helped enact, immediately ceased after she resigned. It was like OJ saying he was going to spend his time looking for the real killer. Palin did nothing to advocate revamping the laws said to have caused her to resign.
Also Palin has a record of resigning when the going gets tough. She went through 4 different colleges before she got a journalism degree. She resigned from the Energy Commision in protest and resigned half way through her term in a state where she supposedly had over a 60% approval rating, and did so before making any attempt to fight.
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 12:07 PM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:08 PM (l86i3)
I think smart people sometimes think that they can solve problems rather than just leaving well enough alone.
Posted by: sexypig at January 25, 2013 04:05 PM (dZQh7)
Being President is an executive position and a good one delegates effectively and then acts decisively on what the person assigned reports. Reagan understood this; the JEF is horrible at it as was Slick.
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 25, 2013 12:08 PM (R4Bz0)
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 12:09 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: Serious Cat at January 25, 2013 04:02 PM (UypUQ)
You could say that about Jesse Ventura.
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 12:10 PM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:10 PM (l86i3)
well come now figuring out a way to incentivize keeping the roughnecks going was simple...
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 12:12 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:13 PM (l86i3)
It's string theory. There are axioms and theorems and proof. And there are conjectures, which are reasonable guesses based on intuition.
But the geniuses aren't the ones who intuit, they're the ones who actually prove the shit.
Ah, so experimentalists are the real geniuses. Thanks.
Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 12:13 PM (6TB1Z)
===============
Now this is just getting stupid.
Wasn't she moving a lot during those years? How is it "quitting" to finish a degree through four different colleges following geographic moves?
Or is moving an example of her "record of resigning," too? ("She broke her lease!")
Posted by: Kensington at January 25, 2013 12:14 PM (H84UO)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 04:10 PM (l86i3)
Never said she was an idiot. And the big negotiation she did to my knowledge never came to fruition. I've always though she would make a fine pundit but never was executive material. That said , I defended her every second she was our VP nominee.
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 12:15 PM (m2CN7)
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 04:07 PM (m2CN7)
Changing colleges shouldn't be held against her; it usually hinges on something else going on in a person's life. At least she attained a degree; something that Rove or Brian Williams never did.
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 25, 2013 12:15 PM (R4Bz0)
Wasn't she moving a lot during those years? How is it "quitting" to finish a degree through four different colleges following geographic moves?
Or is moving an example of her "record of resigning," too? ("She broke her lease!")
Posted by: Kensington at January 25, 2013 04:14 PM (H84UO)
Now that is just stupid. Her moving was a result of her quitting college.
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 12:16 PM (m2CN7)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 12:16 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:16 PM (l86i3)
Nice, very nice.
Posted by: HeatherRadish™ needs an intervention at January 25, 2013 03:44 PM (ZKzrr)
Reading up on the exploits of "Goofus and Gallant" is the only reason why I go to the doctor every year.
Well, the free prostate exam is a bonus too.
Posted by: MrCaniac at January 25, 2013 12:17 PM (Zd/NW)
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 25, 2013 04:15 PM (R4Bz0)
I have to be consistent. If I'm going to bash the MSM and their journalism degrees well.....
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 12:17 PM (m2CN7)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:18 PM (l86i3)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon.
-----------
And I thought the left had major PDS. Ace sounds just like one of them.
Was she perfect? No. But I haven't seen or heard anything that she has done to deserve the foaming at the mouth hatred I'm seeing here.
Posted by: Tilikum the Killer Assault Whale at January 25, 2013 12:18 PM (+aCe4)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 12:19 PM (T0NGe)
The humanities, social sciences (incl. polysci), natural sciences, engineering, etc. are all judged by the precise analytic standard.
And in there it's math or nothin'.
Funny, I don't recall much math in my history classes, nor much in the way of a "precise analytic standard," nor in philosophy, nor theology, nor any other humanity I can think of...
Even applied science is pretty subjective in practice, though scientists rarely want to admit that - there is a big intuitive leap between collecting data and forming a hypothesis, and between forming a hypothesis and concocting experiments to test it, for a few examples.
But what do I know, I am just a big dumb historian-type...
Posted by: Grey Fox at January 25, 2013 12:19 PM (4vofC)
Leadership requires more than the snappy use of words and a mellifluous accent. When those are your sole criteria, you end up with someone like Obama.
The critiques of candidates are made mostly by people who earn their livings with words: reporters, political analysts, attorneys, bloggers, etc. All well and good, but talk is cheap, and the fancy speeches do not necessarily mean that a candidate has good character traits, common sense, a flair for organization, or a knowledge of basic math.
Leaving out the divisive Palin, let's look at another contender who was hurt by this standard: Rick Perry. He is not good in debates and was further handicapped by pain from his back surgery and medication to alleviate said pain.
He imploded because of the standard of "words are everything." This is a standard set up by the PRESS. We managed to elect presidents for over 140 years without debates, televised or otherwise. Yeet because of flubs in the "talking on TV" contest, we are to dismiss the most successful governor in the country because he's considered to be "stupid."
I don't give a crap about this. I want plain talk. Non-tactful, as it were. That means I will support Perry, who has a record of accomplishment and tells the feds to go to hell, or Rand Paul, who had no problem telling Clinton she was incompetent and should have been fired.
If you guys continue to allow the press to set the standards on who is acceptable for the presidency based on what THEY like (words, chatter, talk, and TV personna) we are doomed.
Debates should be handled by the RNC. Cut out the networks and livestream them on the RNC web site and put them on YouTube. NO MSM people allowed to be questioners.
Posted by: Miss Marple at January 25, 2013 12:20 PM (GoIUi)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:20 PM (l86i3)
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 04:17 PM (LRFds)
Well it's obviously not necessary to have a successful, happy and full life but the punditocracy dotes on it when it serves their needs.
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 25, 2013 12:20 PM (R4Bz0)
I do think the point can be taken to extremes, I am at a loss when you advance beyond geometry and am able to be a manager and an effective troubleshooter. We are not dealing with hyper complex dynamics in a Constitutional Government that adheres to good economic sense. The problems begin when people delude themselves to the nature of the economic realities with games of "math."
Barack Obama is not a failure because he cannot succeed at 7th grade math, he's a failure because he is a closed mind who does not trust in experimentation and failure analysis.
That is a deficiency in his cognitive ability not his math reasoning.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 12:21 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: polynikes at January 25, 2013 04:17 PM (m2CN7)
Point noted.
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 25, 2013 12:21 PM (R4Bz0)
Posted by: cardinal fang at January 25, 2013 12:22 PM (Jsiw/)
and cheerfully ignores or happily allows its burial when inclined.
I'll put it differently, after watching Piers Morgan's performance against Newt I am fairly certain my grandmother taught me better reasoning by 6 than Piers got in High School.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 12:22 PM (LRFds)
Art, again, is a unique case but do you think a Fields medalist would have been unable to understand the Commerce Clause sufficient to pass a Constitutional Law class? He would regard the whole exercise as a bad joke
You are a pretty proud mathematician, but have demonstrated an apparent inability to grasp basic written English on previous occasions, so it might not surprise me...
Posted by: Grey Fox at January 25, 2013 12:22 PM (4vofC)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at January 25, 2013 12:23 PM (bxiXv)
Yes but you can use math to analyze patterns in history. The main thing being that the folly begins when one applies fomulaic thinking to non symmetrical epochs or tries to juxtapose wildly dynamic cultures' performances. Frankly I suspect the left feels that their deep changes to our national identity they've helped foster will not carry as big a price tag as I suspect.
We'll see.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 12:25 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:27 PM (l86i3)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 12:27 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:28 PM (l86i3)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon.
http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 04:28 PM (l86i3)
You could volunteer to hold up his head....it must be exhausting for him.
Posted by: Tami[/i] at January 25, 2013 12:29 PM (X6akg)
Posted by: Sharky at January 25, 2013 12:30 PM (bKPYs)
That's not what you said. You said a mathematical genius was a genius in all other areas as well. intellect is the ability to assess a complex situation, understand it and draw conclusions from it that can be used in other situations. That is the very definition of social interaction. Now you say that Kazynski doesn't count because of psychological problems, which is another way of saying it's true until I say it isn't.
Lab monkeys? No. They don't prove anything. They provide evidence.
I like you, but it's that kind of dickish comment that the socially inept (the non-geniuses) make.
Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 12:33 PM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 12:33 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:33 PM (l86i3)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at January 25, 2013 12:35 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:37 PM (l86i3)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon.
http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 04:28 PM (l86i3)
You could volunteer to hold up his head....it must be exhausting for him.
Posted by: Tami at January 25, 2013 04:29 PM (X6akg)
BOOM
Posted by: The Jackhole at January 25, 2013 12:41 PM (nTgAI)
You know me well enough to agree, in the end it is a religion.
Heh, the ability to execute system analysis whether intuitive or analytical with a high order of probability of success *is* if not a form of genius at least a valuable aptitude.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 12:41 PM (LRFds)
Old-fashioned, today history is the search for ways to control today's truth.
It is in fact direct Communist rot.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 12:42 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 12:44 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:44 PM (l86i3)
Yes but you can use math to analyze patterns in history
On a micro level, math can be a useful, if extremely limited tool, on occasion. The problem is that historical data is not easily quantifiable, cannot always be taken at face value, is seldom complete, and it is very easy to draw the wrong conclusions from.
On a macro level, in practice it is virtually impossible to even find symetrical epochs or draw valid conclusions - we still don't know why the Roman Empire fell, for example, and theories range from stuff like demographic trends (which are hard to actually know and therefore are not easily analyzed) to stuff like loss of cultural confidence to one-time strategic errors (like Valen's decision to fight immediately at Adrianople, which defeat forced the Romans to break tradition and allow the Goths to settle in the Empire as a cohesive people group). I am always very skeptical about broad theories of history in general - each epoch is best understood on its ownb terms without trying to force it into a pattern.
I was a pretty good math student back in high school, and all I can say is that solving a historical puzzle, which demands one interpret evidence based on language and human behavior, is quite different than a math problem based on numbers.
Posted by: Grey Fox at January 25, 2013 12:44 PM (4vofC)
Posted by: Paul Zummo at January 25, 2013 12:46 PM (81ahw)
Posted by: sexypig at January 25, 2013 12:47 PM (dZQh7)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 12:47 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Kerry at January 25, 2013 12:47 PM (AYfPj)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:50 PM (l86i3)
I really wish He would stop asking me for advice. He's the Supreme Being of the Universe. He should act like it.
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 04:47 PM (T0NGe)
You could try to explain that to Him....but He probably wouldn't understand you.
Posted by: Tami[/i] at January 25, 2013 12:51 PM (X6akg)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 12:52 PM (T0NGe)
501...Posted by: Miss Marple at January 25, 2013 04:20 PM (GoIUi)
Amen to that, Miss Marple.
All of it!
Posted by: wheatie at January 25, 2013 12:56 PM (fH4X9)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 12:58 PM (l86i3)
Well, I've had enough of lawyers, biologists and other academic flotsam telling me what brilliant people they are and how they are fit to rule over me. I'm going to bring them down to the level they belong.
I didn't attack you. I attacked an unnecessarily abrasive comment by you, because it was, how shall I put this, unnecessary. That's the definition of tact, which is a sign of intelligence. Intelligent people aren't deliberately obnoxious simply because it isn't productive. What I have to do with biologists, lawyers and other academic flotsam or who rules over you I have no idea.
Posted by: pep at January 25, 2013 01:02 PM (6TB1Z)
Posted by: PersonFromPorlock at January 25, 2013 01:33 PM (2VCZA)
Posted by: Oldsailors Poet, Author of Amy Lynn available on Amazon. http://tinyurl.com/ahc8poj at January 25, 2013 04:58 PM (l86i3)
But without the gastro-intestinal maladies, no?
Posted by: Captain Hate at January 25, 2013 01:34 PM (R4Bz0)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 01:47 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: Schwalbe: The Me-262© at January 25, 2013 01:56 PM (UU0OF)
And you owe John Derbyshire an apology and maybe his job back.
It's idiots like YOU who have made the Republican brand what it is today: feckless, faithless and cowardly fawning to liberals.
Posted by: Bitter Clinger (aka 3 tooth) at January 25, 2013 01:58 PM (3E2th)
It doesn't matter who I like and don't like. Hell, I like the guy who does The History of Rome podcast (look it up, it's good).
But anything we truly understand, we do so through a mathematical model. Sometimes we don't quite say it that way (economics has a nasty habit of using mathematical ideas without being explicit about it) but that's the way it is.
I get a little frustrated, I must admit, that academic EEs work on problems that are much like mine, except that the results are very much restricted to special cases and not really too impressive even in that context.
But it's essentially mathematics anyway. So are theoretical computer science and theoretical physics.Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 02:06 PM (T0NGe)
Posted by: AmishDude at January 25, 2013 02:17 PM (T0NGe)
You are scum. You should be executed for this.
I am not satisfied with the state of our nation; however, I wonÂ’t respect a hypocritical racist calling the president a liar, epciscally when telling lies about the president himself.
Man, I love being right! Listen to these stupid racists here claim this is a Victory for America! ItÂ’s is NOT! It IS a Victory for the racists, bigots, and extremist black-haters on the right! Heck, ALL these comments prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are racists! You are making the KKK proud with your racist rants!
The Constitution gives the President the authority to make temporary
recess appointments to fill vacant positions when the Senate is in
recess, a power all recent Presidents have exercised. The Senate has
effectively been in recess for weeks, and is expected to remain in
recess for weeks. In an overt attempt to prevent the President from
exercising his authority during this period, Republican Senators
insisted on using a gimmick called “pro forma” sessions, which are
sessions during which NO Senate business is conducted and instead one or
two Senators simply gavel in and out of session in a matter of seconds.
But gimmicks do not override the PresidentÂ’s constitutional authority
to make appointments to keep the government running.
Funny how these racists obviously misquote and misuse the laws of the land to further their hateful desire to get the black man out of the White House. And funny that they didnÂ’t care about the law of the land when Bush was running the show.
Obama broke NO law with recess appointments.
Anyone who calls Obama a Communist is a stupid racist!
Anyone who calls Obama a Marxist is a stupid racist!
Anyone who calls Obama a Dictator is a racist!
Anyone who calls Obama a Traitor is a stupid racist!
Has Obama physically seized the means of production through force of
arms? Has he abolished elections and outlawed opposition parties? Has
he rounded up millions of people and placed them into camps, or executed
them outright? No?
Then heÂ’s probably not a Communist dictator. Not to mention, he has proven Over and Over he is legally able to be President!
You have absolutely zero evidence to back up your assertion that the President is a “Marxist.”
He is not a traitor, but you are.
You go against a constitutionally elected President who was voted for by most of AmericaÂ’s electorate.
Obama is a Christian, not a Muslim. Obama isnÂ’t an elitist, anti-American, Socialist/Statist! The Republican Party is not a cancer in the body of America, a party of racists and religious bigots. The President doesnÂ’t hate this country; I believe the extremist republicans hate this country because Obama is running this country. The President doesnÂ’t cater to one race of people; heÂ’s in this for all races of people. See, this is just an extreme far right post, which is designed to bate racism and hatred towards the President.
There is NO violation of the Constitution until a Federal Court rules it so. Do you mind telling us exactly what the heck you are talking about? That is important because people like you have been crying for years that Obama violates the Constitution every time you hear something you donÂ’t like, which is totally incorrect.
Judge a man by his deeds. There a NO signs and portents to judge Obama as evil.
Obama, born in Hawaii, = US Citizenship. His parents could have been martians. Their citizenship is irrelevant. If you are born in the US, you are a US citizen as far as the US is concerned. The birthers claims with regard to Obama is that he was NOT born in Hawaii.
The proof is in the Pudding, this is NOT about protecting the Constitution, it never was.
This is about keeping the “White” in the White House! All Obama -haters are racists!
Calling the POTUS a POS and a fraud seems to the usual calling call for you right-wing racists and bigots like you!
Posted by: ZaMan at January 25, 2013 03:43 PM (8dQF7)
Fuck you.
When Bush tried to use recess appointments the cocksucker himself used the same gimmick.
He is a red diaper baby asshole.
Posted by: sven10077 at January 25, 2013 03:49 PM (LRFds)
Posted by: Shoot Me at January 25, 2013 04:15 PM (qiXMt)
Wow, fairly shocked at the "Palin not smart enough to be president" stuff. Wow. Sounds like a much dummer, much less experienced me 25 years ago, happily soaking up the self-important DC policy wonk scene. And no, that is not aimed at anyone else, it's a painful admission and memory. Most of the folks here, ace of course especially included, are very smart, very interesting, and clearly have their hearts in the right place.
As others have pointed out, there are many kinds of smart. And almost none of them, at any particular level, are critical to effective leadership in many executive positions.
It does not seem that many posters or commenters here have any experience in government or politics or policy or Beltway shenanigans. If they did, and had outgrown their youthful BS, they'd likewise arch an eyebrow at the line about Palin. Then again, I mostly see the most smug and misguided comments coming from folks who do not appear to have had any real political or policy experience - yet who clearly fancy themselves "realists".
And if the topics of "idol worship" or victimhood or "St Sarah" even crossed your mind just now, then you're not only someone without relevant experience or wisdom, you're probably a very shallow tribalistic sort who approaches politics like sports (our side's great! the other side sucks!). I've never typed Palin's name before this moment. I never worship any political figures. Or demonize them beyond what's merited.
So I don't have much to say about Palin quitting the governorship, on the merits. Or running/not running this last cycle. I don't care about political personalities, but about outcomes, values, rule of law, etc. But the shocking and despicable demonization of Palin and her family - and esp. the acceptance of that process by the "elites" and the press and much of the public - WAS a key element that forever altered (lowered) my estimation of the character of the country. The country has been degraded, just about across the board, and the 2008 race and aftermath are major milestones in that regard.
McCain was not/is not very smart. Truly. (This leaves aside his extreme temperamental unfitness for any executive position - his staff nickname in the 80s was "Psycho"). Very very mediocre on the intellect side, even by congressional standards.
Obama - well as many here seem to recognize, he's completely unimpressive, and uninteresting. Not just his remarkable ignorance and unworldliness (Austrian is a language, complete unfamiliarity with any important policy area from economics to national security to law to science), but his clear lack of brainpower, which shows up in almost everything he says or does. And politically, he is the most buffoonish and disastrously tin-eared mess of modern history ("bitter clingers" has no analogue in modern national politics). I had the perfect introduction to this disgraceful and disastrous idiot, having never heard of him until 24 hours before meeting him and then witnessing how a few of his colleagues (among the smartest members of congress, by far, at the time) regarded him with contempt and astonishment (that he was even thinking of running for president).
Biden. If the surreal scene played out since 2008 weren't enough, his having the VP spot deepens the inadequacy of words. When I want to remind former DC colleagues of how truly hallucinogenically bad things have become, I remind them of a few simple comparisons. Cheney, and Biden. Wolfowitz, and Bill Lynne (nice guy, fun to drink with - are you fucking kidding me, DepSecDef? Beyond absurd.)
So ace, sorry, it's not "elitism" that explains your bizarre statement that Palin was not smart enough to be VP. Not sure what it is, but it seems to me that it per force includes a rather naive and unsophisticated understanding of what "smart" and leadership are, and how they relate to each other in political office.
Buckley's fantastic line about the first 100 names of the Cambridge phone book are so much truer, and more painfully on point, then even the very smart people here (including ace) seem to realize (hey, I did say "seem").
Posted by: non-purist at January 25, 2013 05:13 PM (afQnV)
Posted by: JohnKerryIsADoucheBag at January 25, 2013 09:23 PM (2T1u7)
Posted by: East Bay Jay at January 25, 2013 11:02 PM (7v8o1)
The same fools that elected this fraud in the WH are continuing on the the Kool-aide and belief in fairies, unicorns, and truth from the WH.
Posted by: avagreen at January 26, 2013 02:04 PM (WR2rX)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.3804 seconds, 683 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: RWC at January 25, 2013 10:29 AM (fWAjv)