Powered by TypePad

« Rove's Attorney Thumps The Blogosphere | Main | Krugman - Calm, Sensible, And Interesting »

June 14, 2006


Carol Herman

You mean the LEFT realizes they have a problem with moonbats?

Since moonbats are trained at "education" central; the crap taken over by the department of education; it's unlikely there's much of a solution in sight.

Most people go about learning things on their own. Since most teachers are never as skilled as their ace pupils, anyway. And, talent goes farther.

Perhaps, the biggest surprise was the loss of their senses of humor. Once quite a famous factory, from hollywood to the Catskills. The left knew how to laugh at itself. WHile the GOP was accused of being up tight and girdled.

The change is breathtaking.

Of course, to give credit where it's due, our wonderful President has had something to do with all of this. The man has courage. Including courage of his convictions.

I just hope he doesn't leave Libby stranded; hanging there, while Fitzie plays with him. The decent thing to do would be to draw Libby back to his "desk job." And, when the court case comes, he can take time off from work to make those necessary appearances.

Maybe, Fitzgerald could take to carrying a large umbrella? That way, he could open it, and shield his red face. If he has the brains to be shamed by his actions. That's debatable.


good for Kaus...and let the press fawn over Kos...the more exposed the better

OT when it rains it pours...

Insider trading conviction of Soros is upheld

The Associated Press

Published: June 14, 2006

PARIS The highest court in France on Wednesday rejected a bid by George Soros, the billionaire investor, to overturn a conviction for insider trading in a case dating back nearly 20 years, leaving the first blemish on his five-decade investing career.

The panel, the Cour de Cassation, upheld the conviction of Soros, 75, an American citizen, for buying and selling Société Générale shares in 1988 after receiving information about a planned corporate raid on the bank.

At an appeals hearing in 2005, Soros told the court his insider trading conviction had been a "gift to my enemies" in the United States and elsewhere. "My reputation is at stake," he said.

Soros has often drawn criticism for speculating heavily on the collapse of fragile currencies. In 2004 he also angered many conservatives in the United States by pumping millions of dollars into election campaigns to try to unseat President George W. Bush.



Re:Soros,for you lawyer types,

Does this conviction hold the possibility of extradition?

Could his U.S financial activities be effected by this?

The man is, after all a convicted criminal.


Ya think that if Soros sees that his conviction can never be turned, would he whittle all of his money away to keep France from getting it?


he's been whittling a fair bit on the left for some time...I don't get this guy...he's a major speculating capitalist and supports the dummies...maybe he thinks they are easier to bribe


He can't be extradited unless there is a reason to bring him here - a pending crime. And France gets to decide.

Patrick R. Sullivan

Kaus also understands something his friend Robert selfWrighteous doesn't (their podcasts); that Ann Coulter is giving it right back to people who've been asking for it (Jersey Girls, Cyndy Sheehan, and Joe Wilson).

She even spells it out right in her book, and Wright rants, blithely obtuse to the fact he's demonstrating her point for her.


Oooh, oooh, I can throw darts at Kos too. :)

richard mcenroe

The first blemish on Soros' record? So we're not counting his sodomizing the entire economy of Malaysia, or taking one pound in five out of the pockets of every British citizen with his currency speculations?


No one should have that much power and money.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely.


Where's kim?


Scientists respond to Gore's warnings of climate catastrophe

"The Inconvenient Truth" is indeed inconvenient to alarmists
By Tom Harris
Monday, June 12, 2006

"Scientists have an independent obligation to respect and present the truth as they see it," Al Gore sensibly asserts in his film "An Inconvenient Truth", showing at Cumberland 4 Cinemas in Toronto since Jun 2. With that outlook in mind, what do world climate experts actually think about the science of his movie?

Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."



Now we’ll skip over the irony of Chuck Schumer boasting about the Tester win. (I myself am rather happy that the Mavericks are doing well against the Heat , but I’m also aware that I had about as much to do with that as Schumer had to do with Tester’s victory.) No, we’ll go straight to the main course — this is all about incumbency protection. The preservation of entrenched power and maintaining the status quo. The big, fat bird that most Democrats flipped the netroots during the Alito confirmation? Multiply it times ten, they’re flipping it to every registered Democrat in the nation now. It’s All About Them.

at firedogcrater

netroots meets reality


Soros is beneath contempt. And the reason he sides with the lefties is to "buy" coverage.

He's just as bad as the ACLU and Jesse Jackson. I'm sure the ACLU has never sued anyone that's supported them or have sent them money. The same with Jackson. He extorts money from companies to keep the Rainbow Mafia from protesting them.

Soros realized early on he'd get a pass as liberal, but would be torn apart by the Left and the MSM, if he was perceived as the capitalist pig he really is.

He also knows that he can get away with his shenanigans a lot easier on their watch.

It's just good business.

Gabriel Sutherland

I'm willing to cut Kos and Soros some slack. Soros bought himself a solid 10 years with his last three years of spending to shield himself from the left. They're now less willing to focus on his personal finance activities and more willing to get down on their knees and assume the position. The left has "think tanks" too.

I like Mickey's commentary on the Kossacks love affair with Mark Warner. I guess Mark talked Kos out of his little war with the DLC. Speaking of which, did anyone ever fire a shot? Wimps.

I had my sitting chair and popcorn already to watch the show. :(

Gabriel Sutherland

Soros isn't a capitalist. He's a currency speculator that got lucky once. You only have to get lucky once to make it unless you're a Republican President.

Soros seems to be the only speculator that made the right bet on the Bank of England. My local book gets nervous when only one person has picked the underdog and they wagered all their money on it. That's what Soros did.

Soros is to capitalism what the Barry Bonds is to baseball. He's part of it, but he ain't exactly helping it.



I knew I liked you...Go Mavs!!!!


It looks like Kaus' main point about Kos is that he's not really a revolutionary, but just a guy looking for a place at the big table

Patrick R. Sullivan

Over at Real Clear Politics the usually befuddled Froma Harrop says that with friends like Kos, the Dems don't need enemies:

'Will 'Nutroots' Ruin Lamont's Run?"

She points out that the left blogosphere destroyed Howard Dean's presidential bid BECAUSE they defined him. And America's truck drivers and bookkeepers didn't like the definition.

Major John

I imagine that Soros' appeal didn't exactly sway the court when he could only play the anti-American card. Now I know this is a French court - but his conviction was for harming French interests. Nice try, but not good enough.

Wilson's a liar

Isn't Soros' big issue legalization of drugs? He has to have something big he intends to cash in on if the lefties he supports actually gain power. I don't think he's just paying them protection money.


Is Kos the pig who becomes the leader of Animal Farm, post-Rebellion?


Leadership of the Democratic Party has sold out democratic principles.

Gabriel Sutherland

Wilson's a liar: It's not really a big issue for Soros. He's buddy buddy with John Sperling(University of Pheonix founder) who took up drug prohibition when all the legal drugs were troublesome for some treamtents he was receiving in his 50s. Sperling took to marijuana as pain relief and to induce appetite.

Soros is sympathetic to that view. He puts some money behind his opinion but it's not unseat Bush money. It's not even "pay the Center for American Progress bills" big.


"Soros realized early on he'd get a pass as liberal, but would be torn apart by the Left and the MSM, if he was perceived as the capitalist pig he really is".

Sounds a lot like Ted Turner, who was viewed as a right-winger years ago when he tried to buy CBS(?). He found out quickly that only the left is supposed to own major media outlets, so he "grew".

Robert Speirs

Soros is just trying to purge the guilt he feels for making so much money so easily. The kicker is that in making all that money he did more for the world than all of his political contributions could possibly have accomplished, even if he'd been giving them to the "right" politicians.
I used to admire him for making so much money. Now I detest him for flogging himself to ingratiate himself with the left, who will never accept him anyway.


Actually, I think he's NUTS. I read some time ago that paranoia ran in his family and he has always been afraid that it will affect him as well. I think his fears have been realized.



What's odd is the Left's refusal to look at leftish pundits with some sort of track record of getting things right.

or Rightish pundits for that matter.

If you go back and reread Kaus, you'll see events play out 2-3 weeks before they occur.

If you go back and read Kos, you'll read whatever happens when hope meets bile.

In matters political, I'll put money on a Kaus prediction rather than a Kos one.

For that matter, Rush's political analysis is far more accurate than anything you'll find on Kos, MyDD, or Firedoglake.

Rush's ascribition of motives to the Left and his ability to hear people's inner voices notwithstanding, were you to take an assortment of Rush's in-context political race observations and compare them to any lefty Blogger of note, there'd be no question - the one more in accordance with Reality was not written by the Reality-based.

But, obviously, Kos & Co. meant it more.



Heh. Yeah that Wilbur is a real genius.

Its interesting the way they hate. I didn't know they hated Kaus...isn't Slate a left leaning E-Mag?

Whatever. I can't keep up with who is on the left's current list of hatees. Heck I was shocked a couple years ago to learn how much they hate Cheney - I mean, he's just the VP. I don't remember righties hating on Gore like that when Clinton was president. VP's are usually kind of ignored by the political opposition.

I was on a 'basball' blog a while back and about half this guy's content was blasting Laura and the twins. Laura was a hateful bitch, the twins were drunken sluts, etcetera. Its bizarre.

And of course now they even hate Lieberman.


TM, have you been partying hard since the Rove announcenment?

Tom Maguire

TM, have you been partying hard since the Rove announcenment?

Do not let appearances deceive! Actually, a bunch of life-related stuff seemed to happen this week, so I have sort of disappeared.


I think you'd be able to break this "triangle" thing if you started saying the media is Democratically biased instead of liberal. The media, by and large, is not "liberal". They play on behalf of Democrats, not liberals. Which is because most of them are Democrats.

Start telling Daou and the others that the media is infested with Democratic bias, then they might finally shut up about it not being true. They only complain because the media isn't liberal and isn't pushing their liberal agendas. Democratic, that I think they will go along with.

Joe Mealyus

(1) "[Kaus] is an odd, Dickensonian character ... [who] looks like he writes, a Uriah Heap character...."

(2) "He feels that people don't realize his genius...."

(3) "When you read his stuff you sometimes get the feeling that it really isn't his, that he is being fed much of this."

(4) "...he is allowed to say whatever he wants without any repercussions at all..."

(5) "Reading his attack on Markos tonight I thought to myself, oh they are becoming scared of Markos because of all the attention he has been getting and they are hitting back."

Why would someone feel that his genius was going unrecognized if they weren't even putting out their own stuff, just acting as a conduit for shadowy right-wing forces? Perhaps depression over (2) led Kaus to let himself be used like that. But it should cheer him up plenty that he now has (4) a free hand and (5) the confidence of his masters.

I think Wilbur is pretty persuasive on all points (for those who didn't follow the link, he goes beyond the sort of generalities I quoted above and provides many, many well-documented examples), except his literary reference is somewhat off-target. I say Wilbur's portrait of a self-deluded, powerful but powerless man is more Nabokovskian - Kaus playing a Kramlerless (your "burns with bitterness and jealousy" right there) Kinboat to Krugman's Shade, perhaps. (Delving into this reading way, way too far, too many juniper berries and suddenly the plate glass window between you and Iraq doesn't seem to be there any more...).


If I wanted to break a triangle, I would crush it inward at the center point of it's longest side.


This makes for an interesting read

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/06/why_i_left_the_left.html>Why I left the Left

"Since 1993, the overwhelmingly liberal electorate in New York City has voted for Republicans for Mayor. Yet, to this day, many of my liberal friends refer to the decisive and effective Giuliani as a Nazi, even as they stroll their children through neighborhoods he cleaned up."

You see it's more than just the moonbats... the whole party suffers from this delusion. They're all emotions with not a bit of critical thinking from any of them.


Some more reading to go with your morning coffee:

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=15559>Democrats Behave Like Sunni Insurgents







The media, by and large, is not "liberal". They play on behalf of Democrats, not liberals.

This is a subject that really interests me, not so much as something to bitch about but more along the lines of a "what are they doing" kinda way. you make a fair point but I think left/lib/dem media bias is a combination of things.

The first thing the media as a whole is interested in is money. This is why they choose to report what they report and why they behave so strangely at times when they report it. It is also, I think, what the left is really complaining about when they talk about the "corporate media". It is what causes the Katrina thing to turn into 10,000 dead and babies being raped in the super dome with bodies floating by in a river of human waste and toxic excrement - all of which turns out to be false. They do this because its exciting and gets people to watch, it is about ego, money and attention seeking.

The Democrat bias comes into play in stuff like this story the other day in the Houston Chronicle. you can't see it in the online version, but in the paper delivered to my home the story was divided between the front page and a jump. The headline for the jump was full page width, large font "Bush Visit to Baghdad Lasts Only 5 1/2 Hours". Only? Pure Democrat talking point. The "only" is completely unnecessary and contributes nothing to the story.

Liberal bias comes in more subtle stuff. It is in the stories they cover and the adjectives they use, like 'right-wing' etcetera. Here's an example from today's Chronicle, which I was just 'enjoying' with my coffee. "HIGH COURT BACKS NO-KNOCK SEARCH Ruling favoring prosecutors is seen as a conservative shift on the bench". Here's some of the stuff I'm talking about:

"...conservative shift...barge into homes...cheered conservatives...rollback of earlier rulings protective of homeowners...police will now feel free to ignore previous court rulings...court without Justice Sandra Day O'Connor...decision erases more than 90 years of Supreme Court precedent..."

Those are all the reporter's words - not quotes of others.


Bob- correcting myself, not you. I definitely needed an its.


Ahh...what politicians won't say to become
Tom Vilsak Kos Diarists:
Many of us despise Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell for pulling out the stops in 2004 to frustrate voters. Well, Blackwell is at it again: manipulating election laws for himself and his Republican allies. That's why it's urgent to get an Ohio Secretary of State dedicated to cleaning up Ohio elections.




I thought maybe you were my wife :<(

So I was surprised after I had researched "it" that I was actually correct. Actually even after I posted my "it's" I still wasn't sure I was right. They didn't teach that stuff in Engineering school.

So what's an *its* anyway, and did you get one?

Soylent Red


You have hit upon something:

They do this because its exciting and gets people to watch, it is about ego, money and attention seeking.

This is a difficult thing to nail down, but I think it is an undercurrent to everything happening in the press, in politics, and alas, in our culture.

Contrast President Bush with candidates Gore and Kerry. The former speaks rarely of real successes, while the latter loudly trumpets everything they do as the most brave and important acts in human history, even to the point of fabrication.

Compare Cindy Sheehan to Gary Sinise. One, a nobody elevated to celebrity over a dubious claim; the other a celebrity working in obscurity for positive goals.

Compare any one of several conservative voting blocs with the Kossacks. No conservative group I know of holds such a high opinion of itself as to suggest they are kingmakers.

Finally, compare the voter-centric "Contract with America" (this is what we propose to do-now hold us accountable) to the storming-of-the-Bastille "Taking America Back" (put us back in power for your own good).

The examples are too numerous to fully document (culture of victimization, class envy, lack of personal responsibility, etc.)

The Democrat Party is the party of liberal self-absorbtion. They're the embodiment of the underlying mindset of the "American Idol" and reality television culture.

Libs are the ultimate street pushers, seeking power by selling the "it's all about me" mentality. Once the American people are hooked, the pusher becomes the most important person in their lives.

To the degree that the press participates in this, and in fact leads the charge, through their choices of words and phrases, they are liberal. They're like the street level pusher- keeping people connected to the source in order to feed their monkey. Money is simply a byproduct.

Like I said, it's a difficult thing to nail down, but I can definitely see it at work.


Soylent Red:
You have such a way with words- in your concrete analysis and your storytelling. Are you sure you weren't an English professor in a former life or in this one for that matter?
Also left hates Cheney because he is untouchable and unflappable. They can't lay a glove on him.

JM Hanes

"So what's an *its* anyway, and did you get one?"

It's hard to say what its is 'til you know what the meaning of is is, but it's its in its possessive sense, meaning when it's possessive, but it's not its when it isn't. Let me know if I can be of further assistance.

JM Hanes


"If I wanted to break a triangle, I would crush it inward at the center point of its longest side."

Now that's triangulation! And I will never, ever, mess with you.


What if it is a pink triangle?

I think what Wilbur was trying to say was, if you eat a dorito, you should start on the corners.

Oreo Theory to follow...

The comments to this entry are closed.