Powered by TypePad

« GAO On Iraq - Violence Down, Other Benchmarks Mixed | Main | Do NOT Mock Obama! »

June 24, 2008

Comments

kim

Hah, Ann, guess what word that short woman is thinking of.
====================================

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
Round here you're the local minimum.
---

Why thank you, boris! You have no idea how much that means to me coming from you! Are you asking me out?

::blush::

boris

By all means, get out.

Jane

Kim,

Perhaps you two could take it to email.

narciso

Much like Ron Susskind's "We're an empire now, we make our own reality" along with his followup on Zubeydah's confession and
the muktabbar poison gas plot, theapocryphal
"F. .the Jews, they don't vote for us anyways" by Jim Baker, and Maureen Dowd's
Nancy/Frank Sinatra affair with flowed from
one sewer, Kitty Kelley to the NY Times and
ultimately SNL; The October Surprise, (which was Craig Unger's first example of publicity by slander) this is another example of stories to good to check, which is why 89 believes them wholehardedly. By contrast, Kerry's statements andsponsorship of the Winter Soldiers agitprop are on tape, Nicosia conformed the Scott Camil assasination plot (interesting that all his papers were stolen shortly after this was revealed) Sadly these slanders and outright
fabrications almost never get out of circulation; consider the myriad Kennedy conspiracy tales that follow the KGB's disinformation outlined by Mitrokhin,Pacepa,
et al. The earliest and most ludicrous lies
of the 9/11 denialists followed a similar template; Meyssan's investigation, which ignored the witnesses at the sight.

bgates

Ann, that's quite a picture. I didn't know Mitch Pileggi was in the Senate.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
lets talk about a caption for this picture
---

'Geez, Romulus, chill!'

Thomas Collins

I'm surprised that many individuals seem to think it is McCain, not B57O, with a questionable emotional state. McCain survived the Hanoi Hilton, and if my memory serves me correct, a few months ago, B57O complained when reporters asked him several questions in a row (I believe it was eight). If B57O can't gets rattled with reporters' questions, I'd hate to see his reaction to a '73 Arab-Israeli war type situation.

By the way, isn't it McCain who wants several town hall style debates, while B57O prefers the more scripted approach? If McCain has such a temperament problem, why is he famous for bantering with the press while B57O is famous for scripted speeches? Perhaps B57O's next book about himself should be titled "The Audacity of Teleprompter Reading."

Sara

I think it shows an absolute disregard not only for the woman, but it also puts the other people in an awkward situation.

Something we can agree upon. It is a contemptible insult to a woman. If he said it to me, I would not forgive him ever, but it is not my place to judge what happens between two other adults, especially man and wife.

kim

Jane, I'd consider a conversation with the once and future eightnine, but you're right, presently it's just exhausting rather than exhilarating. Time to hit the sack so I can grub the worm to the tune of your coffee.
===============================

kim

TC, you've got a great point; Obama whines and pouts, McCain's anger seems a lot more righteous.
======================================

eightnine2718281828mu5e

link

---
penguin_dance notes a report up at ABC News that high oil and gas prices in the US may be moving jobs back home in a trend that some economists are calling "reverse globalization." It's becoming more and more expensive to ship finished product from other countries, so some companies are moving the manufacturing back to the US. The article hints that this trend may spill over soon to raw materials such as steel. One economist is quoted: "It's not just about labor costs anymore. Distance costs money, and when you have to shift iron ore from Brazil to China and then ship it back to Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh is looking pretty good at 40 bucks an hour."
---

Sara

off

Sara

boris

many individuals seem to think it is McCain, not B57O, with a questionable emotional state

Not many, just one pretender.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
McCain's anger seems a lot more righteous.
---

Just don't joke about his hair.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
many individuals seem to think it is McCain, not B57O, with a questionable emotional state
---

McCain has more of a temper than Dean ever did.

boris

lame

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
lame
---

+1 for brevity, -2 for wit

Porchlight

Hey guys. I apologize for directly engaging 89 earlier in the thread. In general I agree with "don't feed the trolls" as a general rule.

89, for the record, I've actually enjoyed some of your more thoughtful comments, but since the majority of them seem to be of the bad faith drive-by type, I'm back to nonengagement as a policy.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
the bad faith drive-by type
---

I'm not into screeds; I like to make my point with an economy of words.

---
I'm back to nonengagement as a policy.
---

No problem, porchlight; but I'll know you're there lurking in the woodwork. ;-)

Barry

Must be tiring to say nothing for eight hours straight.

Ralph L

He [Kerry] was just surprised that so many people remembered his perfidy so well
Among Democratic activists, his turn-coating wasn't a bug but a feature. You'd think someone--staff, wife, child--would have thought about how normal people would see it, and prepared him for dealing with it, if not innoculating the campaign at the convention with a "heartfelt" apology "to those veterans offended". Rather more serious than Bush's DUI, or TANG service.

Ralph L

I wonder how much skin Hillary had taken off under her chin--and when can I have that done?

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
Must be tiring to say nothing for eight hours straight.
---

While a single post has apparently overtaxed your underdeveloped brain-pan.

JM Hanes

Today's 89 is working on his merit badge in false equivalence. This is not the inadvertent fallacy that results from fuzzy thinking; this is the tactical variety which subverts real debate, as the focus shifts to defensive disputes over deliberately provocative comparisons. You could prove him wrong a thousand different ways, and it wouldn't matter a whit, because he'll just change the subject and float another spurious challenge. Diverting and monopolizing attention, not actual argument, is the entire point of the exercise.

When the generic 89 refuses to proffer or argue a serious point, it doesn't matter if folks think he's an idiot or a housepet, because he's got nothing invested in the outcome. Whether he lacks the confidence to put himself to the test or is feeding a self-image of moral or intellectual superiority, it is the quantity, not the quality, of the attention that is gratifying. Whether he sees himself casting light into the darkness or comes to cast stones, what he won't do is surrender the illusion of existence on a higher plain by risking real engagement.

If his pettifoggery makes participation tedious and exasperating for everyone else who is not inclined or provoked into responding to him ad infinitum, that's not his problem. He'll play with anyone who still shows up, till he starts to bore even himself.

On the off chance that you think you might actually like to stick around, 89, ante up with something other than an endless stream of gibes, quips & quotes. I'm sure you could if you wanted to.

Chris

89,
You're still here? I get it then. You're hourly. Why are you telling us things like McCain has a temper? Are you over or under 22? I'm taking the under, and that's not a swipe at you.

Virtually everyone here has forgotten more about politics than you currently know. McCain has a temper? You don't say? Dude, seriously, get a life. No one here dislikes you. We all recognize you as the idealistic and impressionable young person that you are. Many of us were just as sure of ourselves and our liberal righteousness back in the day.

You're going to end up agreeing with most everyone on this thread in 10-20 years. Don't fight it. Just get out and have some fun while you're young rather than wasting time arguing losing propositions with people who know better.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
You could prove him wrong a thousand different ways
---

One would be sufficient, if you were up to the task.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

Seriously, JMH, you just wrote 4 grafs of psychobabble complaining that I won't discuss substantive topics.

Presumably irony is in your dictionary.

Sara

The Frog Theory

Chris

Alright. Now I know what it is. You're ADD, right?

Chris

Sara,
Loved the Frog anecdote.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
Loved the Frog anecdote.
---

Charming, as most fairy tales are.

 Ann

Congratulations Remus, you have completed your job and you have won. You have turned a wonderful blog into a family fight. You have made people respond to you like the Messiah Obama.
It is so easy being negative, like the code pink girls, you can stop traffic but you can't stop people that believe in a cause that is greater than themselves or in your case yourself.

I am breaking my rule of responding to people like you because you should be ashamed at the amount of time you spend on degrading the nice people here and the great country you live in.

Here is a thought: Why do you need our attention?

eightnine2718281828mu5e

from the frog:
---
They can hide his inexperience and background by turning him into a rock star and singing change and hope.
---

---
Asked in Riverside, Calif., about his remarks on the psychological effects of lifting the moratorium on offshore drilling, Mr. McCain said: “I think Americans want hope. They want some trust and confidence.”
---

Chris

Fairy tales? How dare you invoke Clinton's rebuke of Obama! It's distracting. Now answer Ann's question or shut down mom's computer and go to bed.

Do you have a point you've been trying to make lo these hours?

Rick Ballard

I still haven't seen one word as to why anyone should vote for the Chicago pimp. Not one sentence saying "he deserves your consideration because of X".

It's very understandable considering the fact that Obama hasn't achieved a damn thing since being "carefully selected" to fulfill a quota at Harvard Law Review but it's rather telling that not even sycophants willing to spend hours disrupting threads have anything good to say about the champion of the Mendacity of Dopes.

Very telling.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
the amount of time you spend on degrading the nice people here and the great country you live in.
---

Can you point to any personal attacks I initiated re anyone on this board?

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
It's very understandable considering the fact that Obama hasn't achieved a damn thing since being "carefully selected" to fulfill a quota at Harvard Law Review
---

Now now, Ann has asked us not to be so negative.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
I still haven't seen one word as to why anyone should vote for the Chicago pimp.
---

So Ann, is this an example of one of the nice people on this board?

eightnine2718281828mu5e

Seriously Ann, phrases like 'Chicago pimp' are the currency of the realm here, and you want me to accept the charge that I've somehow coarsened the quality of discourse?

Rick Ballard

Pimp is what they call "community organizers" in IL-1. Sometimes they put "poverty" in front but they never leave out the pimp. Ask Jesse Jackson Jr.

He knows.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
I still haven't seen one word as to why anyone should vote
---

How about this:

"Are you better off now than you were eight years ago?"

Chris

I'll ask once more. What's your point? Or you could answer Ann's question. Why do you need our attention?

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
What's your point?
---

Well, we started out with the claim that flip-flopping is OK, but only if McCain does it.

And I, of course, have an issue with that.

It seems... whatchacallit... 'rigged'.

Others thought rigging it was dandy, so long as, you know, it was rigged for McCain.

Minor point, I know, but it seems kind of important.

Sara

My taxes are lower and I feel a whole lot safer than I did 8 years ago under Bill Clinton.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
My taxes are lower
---

All spending is paid with taxes, and those deficits are a claim against your future income. Future taxes will be higher as a result of those deficits.

You don't see that point in many of Bush's speeches.

Sara

Oy, here comes another one. Bring on the bus.

Maoist Hardliner And Former "Weatherman" Blogs For Obama

More Hope and Change...
Mike Klonsky, an Obama supporter and former member of the terrorist group the Weatherman, received a $175,000 grant from the William Ayers/Barack Obama-led Annenberg Challenge to run the Small Schools Workshop.
Today he posts a blog on the Obama website:
eightnine2718281828mu5e

The war is also being financed by debt; yet more drain on future income.

The Chinese bought a lot of the bonds and financed our national debt.

Let's say they use that money to buy up half a trillion dollars worth of US farmland, or maybe a bunch of oil rights.

That OK with you? Feeling safe in that kind of world?

eightnine2718281828mu5e

Sara; the Chinese communists have liens against our future prosperity and a large standing army; a bunch of has-been no-account no-consequence losers from 40 years ago is *not* today's major strategic threat to our national security.

It is, however, useful to the Republican party to pretend that they are.

Chris

"[H]ow about this:

"Are you better off now than you were eight years ago?"

We're safer and better off than on 9/11/01. We're definitely worse off than we were on election night, 2006.

"Well, we started out with the claim that flip-flopping is OK, but only if McCain does it.

And I, of course, have an issue with that.

It seems... whatchacallit... 'rigged'."

We actually started out with Cohen's claim that O's flip-flop on adhering to public financing of his general election campaign was significant. He laid out a pretty strong case that O doesn't have the reservoir of trust that McCain has built up all the way back to Hanoi.

No one here cares about campaign finance beyond the unconstitutionality involved w/McCain-Feingold. I'm all for O fleecing you guys for your lunch and bong money. It does become a tad annoying when he claims he's got to do it because his opponent and/or his surrogates are racist.

You're not preaching to the converted. No one around this place is under any illusions re: McCain. But we have considered the alternative and drawn our own conclusions. You won't change them, so go get a girl/boyfriend and enjoy the summer.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
reservoir of trust
---

I think that levee's been topped; W's sandbagging, but a hard rain's gonna fall.

hrtshpdbox

"Somehow I think these awards to General Petraeus trump Kerry's rice in the butt or was it the arm, or maybe his foot, who knows, PH......
Army Commendation Medal (with 2 Oak Leaf Clusters)
Army Achievement Medal"

They really don't; the two I took from your list, in particular, are handed out routinely (the two clusters for the Arcom just mean he's received it three times, and I suspect he's got a lot more than one Army A-Cheese-Ment medal). Now of course, Patraeus undoubtedly earned his medals...

GnuCarSmell

I heard a Mitt Romney snippet today that made a lot of sense. He basically said a leader needs to be willing to change his position if conditions change, or if human knowledge advances.

The current example of offshore drilling says it all. McCain's flip-flop in support of drilling recognizes that gas prices have reached a point that our economy (and, collaterally, our national security) is being damaged. Obama sees the same negative consequences and still insists on closing off our oil and gas resources. In fact, Obama admitted he likes high gas prices, but only wishes they had snuck up on us so the pain would not have been so obvious.

There are principled flip-flops and unprincipled flip-flops. I can tell the difference.

Chris

Maybe you should take it up with Cohen, then. And for the last time, as much as this pains you and your fellow travelers, W is not on the ballot this year.

Good night. It's getting late, even on the left coast.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

Petraeus is very competent and by all appearances a helluva nice guy.

Bright, talented, and ambitious, much like someone the members of this board loathe and ridicule on a regular basis.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
There are principled flip-flops and unprincipled flip-flops. I can tell the difference.
---

Great; maybe you could sort this list; I'm sure some of it's crap, but certainly not all of it.

link

* McCain supported the drilling moratorium; now he’s against it.

* McCain strongly opposes a windfall-tax on oil company profits. Three weeks earlier, he was perfectly comfortable with the idea.

* McCain thought Bush’s warrantless-wiretap program circumvented the law; now he believes the opposite.

* McCain defended “privatizing” Social Security. Now he says he’s against privatization (though he actually still supports it.)

* McCain wanted to change the Republican Party platform to protect abortion rights in cases of rape and incest. Now he doesn’t.

* McCain thought the estate tax was perfectly fair. Now he believes the opposite.

* He opposed indefinite detention of terrorist suspects. When the Supreme Court reached the same conclusion, he called it “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.”

* McCain said he would “not impose a litmus test on any nominee.” He used to promise the opposite.

And these come after these other reversals from April and May:

* McCain believes the telecoms should be forced to explain their role in the administration’s warrantless surveillance program as a condition for retroactive immunity. He used to believe the opposite.

* McCain supported storing spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Now he believes the opposite.

* McCain supported moving “towards normalization of relations” with Cuba. Now he believes the opposite.

* McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Hamas. Now he believes the opposite.

* McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Syria. Now he believes the opposite.

* He argued the NRA should not have a role in the Republican Party’s policy making. Now he believes the opposite.

* McCain supported his own lobbying-reform legislation from 1997. Now he doesn’t.

* He wanted political support from radical televangelists like John Hagee and Rod Parsley. Now he doesn’t.

* McCain supported the Lieberman/Warner legislation to combat global warming. Now he doesn’t.

And these are the flip-flops I’ve noticed earlier:

* McCain pledged in February 2008 that he would not, under any circumstances, raise taxes. Specifically, McCain was asked if he is a “‘read my lips’ candidate, no new taxes, no matter what?” referring to George H.W. Bush’s 1988 pledge. “No new taxes,” McCain responded. Two weeks later, McCain said, “I’m not making a ‘read my lips’ statement, in that I will not raise taxes.”

* McCain is both for and against a “rogue state rollback” as a focus of his foreign policy vision.

* McCain says he considered and did not consider joining John Kerry’s Democratic ticket in 2004.

* In 1998, he championed raising cigarette taxes to fund programs to cut underage smoking, insisting that it would prevent illnesses and provide resources for public health programs. Now, McCain opposes a $0.61-per-pack tax increase, won’t commit to supporting a regulation bill he’s co-sponsoring, and has hired Philip Morris’ former lobbyist as his senior campaign adviser.

* McCain has changed his economic worldview on multiple occasions.

* McCain has changed his mind about a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq on multiple occasions.

* McCain is both for and against attacking Barack Obama over his former pastor at his former church.

* McCain believes Americans are both better and worse off than they were before Bush took office.

* McCain is both for and against earmarks for Arizona.

* McCain believes his endorsement from radical televangelist John Hagee was both a good and bad idea.

* McCain’s first mortgage plan was premised on the notion that homeowners facing foreclosure shouldn’t be “rewarded” for acting “irresponsibly.” His second mortgage plan took largely the opposite position.

* McCain vowed, if elected, to balance the federal budget by the end of his first term. Soon after, he decided he would no longer even try to reach that goal.

* In February 2008, McCain reversed course on prohibiting waterboarding.

* McCain used to champion the Law of the Sea convention, even volunteering to testify on the treaty’s behalf before a Senate committee. Now he opposes it.

* McCain was a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, which would grant legal status to illegal immigrants’ kids who graduate from high school. Now he’s against it.

* On immigration policy in general, McCain announced in February 2008 that he would vote against his own legislation.

* In 2006, McCain sponsored legislation to require grassroots lobbying coalitions to reveal their financial donors. In 2007, after receiving “feedback” on the proposal, McCain told far-right activist groups that he opposes his own measure.

* McCain said before the war in Iraq, “We will win this conflict. We will win it easily.” Four years later, McCain said he knew all along that the war in Iraq war was “probably going to be long and hard and tough.”

* McCain said he was the “greatest critic” of Rumsfeld’s failed Iraq policy. In December 2003, McCain praised the same strategy as “a mission accomplished.” In March 2004, he said, “I’m confident we’re on the right course.” In December 2005, he said, “Overall, I think a year from now, we will have made a fair amount of progress if we stay the course.”

* McCain went from saying he would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade to saying the exact opposite.

* McCain went from saying gay marriage should be allowed, to saying gay marriage shouldn’t be allowed.

* McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as “an agent of intolerance” in 2002, but then decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans “deserved” the 9/11 attacks.

* McCain used to oppose Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy, but he reversed course in February.

* On a related note, he said 2005 that he opposed the tax cuts because they were “too tilted to the wealthy.” By 2007, he denied ever having said this, and insisted he opposed the cuts because of increased government spending.

* In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending “dirty money” to help finance Bush’s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.

* McCain supported a major campaign-finance reform measure that bore his name. In June 2007, he abandoned his own legislation.

* McCain opposed a holiday to honor Martin Luther King, Jr., before he supported it.

* McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.

* McCain was anti-ethanol. Now he’s pro-ethanol.

* McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.

* McCain decided in 2000 that he didn’t want anything to do with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, believing he “would taint the image of the ‘Straight Talk Express.’” Kissinger is now the Honorary Co-Chair for his presidential campaign in New York.

GnuCarSmell

Sorry, 89.

Seminar trolls don't impress anyone here. Your Soros talking points have as much caché as fortnight old road kill.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
Your Soros talking points have as much caché as fortnight old road kill.
---

Gotta admit I don't get the Soros fixation; one rich democrat in the world and it drives you guys nuts.

Guess he blows a hole in your 'Masters of the Universe' delusion, where every republican is an alpha and every leftie has bad posture, long hair, and ripped jeans.

Charlie (Colorado)

All spending is paid with taxes, and those deficits are a claim against your future income. Future taxes will be higher as a result of those deficits.

You don't see that point in many of Bush's speeches.

Possibly because it's not true. Happens that was my previous piece at PJM: it turns out that neither deficit nor debt need to force a tax increase, so long as current spending can be constrained enough to grow, on average, more slowly than GDP growth. That's basically what happened during the Clinton administration: the combination of a progrowth tax code inherited from Reagan, a relatively limited attempt at spending control in Congress, and the dramatic productivity gains from information systems and from basic manufacturing moving offshore led to a situation in which GDP grew faster than spending did. Result? Deficit went away.

Then along came the recession, starting in the first quarter of 2000. Happens I wrote a bit about that for PJM too. Then someone went and blew up the hub of international banking, costing the economy trillions of dollars, and we had a little issue of a war, including two campaigns that we're still straightening out, and spending went up for a while. But "national net worth" turned around and started going up again, along with GDP and tax revenues. So things are getting better, and will continue to get beter as long as the rate of growth of spending is less than the rate of growth of GDP.

The problem is that we end up now with politicians promising every little girl a fire truck and every little boy a pony; they want to buy our votes with our own money. But that's not a *deficit* problem.

What really struck me when I did that piece of algebra, in fact, is how tax system changes really have no obvious direct effect over the long term. No one really doubts the "Laffer Curve": just algebraically, there is some point between a tax rate of 0 percent and 100 percent at which revenue is maximized, and it isn't at 100 percent because we know from observation that people stop pretending to work if we don't let them pretend some of their money is their own. But over the long term, whatever point you choose, you will still pay down debt and run a surplus if dGDP/dt > dSPEND/dt.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

But I didn't expect anyone to read the list; I was making the point that it's not just a matter of a couple well-gamed McCain flip-flops to be rationalized away; McCain does it regularly and with abandon.

Even if 2/3 of that list is crap, it's still easy to build an ad campaign exposing him as a flip-flopper.

And it doesn't even have to be particularly damaging; just enough to inoculate Obama from similar charges.

Obama can play to tie in this election; McCain has to go for the clear win, and it's gonna force him into taking risks and making unforced errors.

eightnine2718281828mu5e

---
Possibly because it's not true.
---

Yeah, I think it is; if you increase deficits, future taxes will be higher than they would be if we ran lower deficits. The bond holders expect to get an interest payment, and that comes from your taxes.

You issue a new bond to finance the deficit, your taxes will go up.

---
so long as current spending can be constrained enough to grow, on average, more slowly than GDP growth.
---

Yeah. And over the last 40 years, no Republican president has ever submitted a balanced budget.

---
But "national net worth" turned around and started going up again, along with GDP and tax revenues.
---

Don't look now, but things are headed down. So much for plan A.

---
The problem is that we end up now with politicians promising every little girl a fire truck and every little boy a pony;
---

And a shiny new democracy in the ME; can't forget to put *that* in Santa's sleigh!

---
But that's not a *deficit* problem.
---

spending > revenue = deficit

deficits are the delta between spending and revenue; no amount of semantics will change the basic relationship.

---
you will still pay down debt and run a surplus if dGDP/dt > dSPEND/dt.
---

Too bad Republicans couldn't actually make that work; they spent 30 years blaming it all on Democrats, and whaddya know, turns out it wasn't just the Democrats!

Rocco

Now that I think about it, I should have gone with the Predatory Loans Flop.

From the Black Agenda Report

"The top contributors to the Obama campaign are the very Wall Street firms whose shady mortgage lenders buried the elderly and the poor and minority under predatory loans."
kim

The essence of propaganda is repetition. One wondered what happened to the 100 million dollars that Obama and Ayers squandered in Chicago, to the detriment of the young. Well, it looks like it went to people like Klonsky, a 'no consequence loser who is not a major strategic threat to the nation'.

Wrong. Graft and dirty dealing are a major strategic threat to the nation, and Obama has this written all over him; McCain doesn't.

$175,000 can buy a lot of corruption. Think what half a billion can. There is something rotten in Denmark, and I can smell it all the way over here.
=============================

E Buzz Miller

"Too bad Republicans couldn't actually make that work; they spent 30 years blaming it all on Democrats, and whaddya know, turns out it wasn't just the Democrats!"

We can now see just how effective Democratic leadership is as they run the house and senate...that is, not very.

It reminds us of the glorious 70's, energy crisis, inflation, well probably have higher unemployment. Really does remind us of those times, and I think it was mainly Dems running the show...right?

kim

All that huffing and puffing can't keep the stink off the beast for another four months. Playing for a tie is a pretty sure way to lose.

Amusingly, I think that is what he is going to do. He's been on the defensive since the Wright thing.

Yesterday's RCP had a very interesting article about Scary in the 'Progressive' press.
===============================

PeterUK

"Petraeus is very competent and by all appearances a helluva nice guy.
You missed outstanding General.

"Bright, talented, and ambitious, much like someone the members of this board loathe and ridicule on a regular basis."

Nah ,we love people like that,it's dicks like you that are a nuisance.
BTW,You weren't projecting there were you?

kim

He wasn't talking about himself. He was talking about someone bright, talented, ambitious, and corrupt to the core.
======================================

kim

He wasn't talking about himself. He was talking about someone bright, talented, ambitious, and corrupt to the core; a strategic threat to the nation.
===================

Rick Ballard

"corrupt to the core"

Just like every othr poverty pimp (excuse me, "community organizer") running their cheap hustles in prog fiefs. Obama might be a little worse than most. Taking money from a slumlord who refuses to provide heat or fix buildings, while not uncommon, is still down at the bottom of the septic tank.

Is the $175K to a domestic terrorist worse than the $1 million earmark to the hospital which reciprocated with a $200K raise to his wife? After all, the $175K was stolen from private rather than public funds. Is he a worse thief for having tapped the public purse, or does it just demonstrate versatility on his part?

Eight years ago Clinton was still stinking up the Oval Office. IMO - Obama would stink it up worse than Clinton did.

sbw

[OT, but not so much] NPR, with pretty much a botox face, gave this report on the housing bailout bill. I nearly choked on my morning coffee and dashed off this comment on their website:

Subject: Naylor should report the useful housing bill background --

Wednesday, NPR's Brian Naylor said, "It may have been pride of authorship, but the Housing Bill's Democratic sponsor, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd of Connecticut said, 'The stakes couldn't be higher...'"

Pride of authorship? The key language was taken almost word-for-word from Bank of America, prime suitor for Countrywide, the major failing lendor.

Nailer continued that "Dodd may be guilty of a slight exaggeration...." Dodd got a sweetheart loan deal from Countrywide's CEO, so he and other mostly Democratic senators may be guilty of much more that NPR decided to report.

Don't make it so easy for political hacks to succeed.

[/OT]

clarice

SBW, NPR will never print that or acknowledge it..Newsbusters would love it though.Pr AT.

kim

Housing? Pretty obvious that denizens of public housing are suckers for authoritarianism under the guise of 'community organizing'. No surprise it is Democrats undermining trust in the markets supporting private ownership of homes.

Strategic threat? Yup.
===================================

boris

* McCain drinks coffee in the morning then he flip flops in the afternoon and drinks tea.

BL

Fireman’s Joke

This one I heard on the radio:

A house on fire. The fireman climbs up the ladder. Inside is this curvaceous blonde.

He says: You know, you’re the third pregnant blonde I’ve rescued this month.

The Blonde says: I’m not pregnant!

He says: You’re not rescued yet either!

My PS: (To the melody and rhythm of “And the colored girls say, doop-de-doop-de-doop-de-doop….”)

And the firemen said: What took you so long!

)))))

Now, 89 has inspired me to more, especially part four : )

Part II

The old ladies’ 69 version:

Fireman: You know, this is the third time I’ve come to rescue you this month!
Old lady: Maybe third time lucky : )

))))))

Part III

The nun’s version: Oh! So that’s how one gets pregnant!

))))))

Part IV

A spacecraft crash lands into a convent: “We’ve come to investigate procreation and its effect on global warming.”

And the nuns say: Just follow those red trucks with the sirens : )

Sue

I am so sorry people are losing their homes to foreclosure. I really am. But why should I bail you out? I wonder why my husband and I scrimped and saved and did the right thing, i.e., bought a home we could afford? And then scrimped and saved to pay it off early. If we had played our cards right, the government might have bailed us out too. And I could have had a much larger, nicer home to boot. I don't want to bail out irresponsible people anymore. I can't believe I'm the only one who feels that way.

Porchlight

Obama says he only sent one email to Scarlett Johansson:

"She sent one email to Reggie, who forwarded it to me," Obama said, referring to his 26-year-old personal assistant, Reggie Love. "I write saying, 'thank you Scarlett for doing what you do,' and suddenly we have this email relationship."

Love one of the comments: "I've never heard a grown man use the word 'silly' so much."

You think Michelle gave him a hard time on that one? If she did, I can't blame her. Poor Scarlett will be crushed, though. Well, that's what you get when you text and tell.

Sue

Hope there aren't any emails proving otherwise. ::evil grin::

Porchlight

Hope there aren't any emails proving otherwise. ::evil grin::

LOL. She has less reason to lie about the emails than he does, that's for sure.

Scarlett's Dilemma: expose her crush victim as a liar, or sacrifice her own good name for the sake of electing him. Well, she's part way toward the latter already.

Damn, this is going to make a great movie someday.

Cecil Turner

Even if 2/3 of that list is crap . . .

Okay, I'm too busy to track down every DU/HuffPo claim, but let's take the first three:

  • * McCain supported the drilling moratorium; now he’s against it.
  • * McCain strongly opposes a windfall-tax on oil company profits. Three weeks earlier, he was perfectly comfortable with the idea.
  • * McCain thought Bush’s warrantless-wiretap program circumvented the law; now he believes the opposite.
Evaluating:
  1. Nope, sorry, that's a lie. McCain's position on offshore drilling as far back as it's trackable is to let the nearest state decide. And the similar phrasing and out-of-context quote on this one is too consistent to be anything but malicious.
  2. Also nonsense. He didn't say he was happy with a new tax, and his criticism of Obama's much more ambitious tax proposal is perfectly consistent.
  3. Also a lie. He claimed the President didn't have the authority to circumvent the law, not that he actually had done so. There may be an unspoken assumption here by Dems that the surveillance program is illegal, but they can't expect the rest of us to share.
Well, that's 0 for 3, and based on that sample, one would expect 100 percent are false. Not sure why anyone would continue down the list, but it's obvious that the media outlets who reprinted it don't bother to fact-check.

. . . it's still easy to build an ad campaign exposing him as a flip-flopper.

Well sure, as long as you're willing to lie to do it. I'd also note the interesting convergence of DNC, DU, TIME, and WaPo versions of the drilling issue (with the same misleading 1999 quote), and how well it meshes with Obama campaign rhetoric. Not that anyone thinks they're in the tank for Barry, or anything.

drjohn

There is constant effort at moral equivalence spewing from the Obama camp, but it is irrelevant.
McCain is supposed to the the same kind of politician. It doesn't matter what he does. It does matter what Obama does. He is the one alleging to be different, yet is doing nothing different from every other slimy Chicago politician.

Charlie (Colorado)

Yeah, I think it is; if you increase deficits, future taxes will be higher than they would be if we ran lower deficits.

No, you ninny, that's exactly what the arithmetic doesn't show.

And over the last 40 years, no Republican president has ever submitted a balanced budget.

And only a Republican-controlled Congress has passed one. Now, here's a quiz for you: which branch of the government proposes spending bills?

Too bad Republicans couldn't actually make that work; they spent 30 years blaming it all on Democrats, and whaddya know, turns out it wasn't just the Democrats!

I hate it when he's right. It's a little too easy for all politicians to propose panem et circenses to buy votes, and there's too little to counter it. The Founders thought they had the answer when they made all taxes equally apportioned, but they made it too easy to amend that out, and the urge to spend other people's money is too strong.

kim

eightnine's dilemma is that he appears to be smart enough to realize what a lot of hogwash he is purveying. Can't claim innocence, can't claim honesty. Where are those firemen; someone's pants are on fire.

And there it is.
==========================

Porchlight

Sort of OT:

Presidential playlist: Obama opens up his iPod

The list itself is yawn-inducing. But look at the headline! Yeah, that's going to play well after the Great Seal was abandoned. Some of us think he might not quite be the President yet.

JM Hanes

89:

"But I didn't expect anyone to read the list; I was making the point that it's not just a matter of a couple well-gamed McCain flip-flops to be rationalized away; McCain does it regularly and with abandon."

I thought it was an interesting list, although the story looks a lot different if you actually follow up on the author's links (shades of Glen Greenwald), but you're right about the relevance of actually reading it.

Cohen's point was that in contrast to Obama, McCain has a known history and actual accomplishments which can be weighed in the balance. We've got a 25 year record of votes in Congress; we've seen him take on his own party and conspicuously work across the aisle; we've seen his willingness to engage the press till they run out of questions, for starters.

With Obama, there's virtually nothing of substance to offset the flipflops. We've got a guy who has never held a meeting of his own subcommittee on Afghanistan, who has to take credit for other people's legislation, and who has avoided controversial votes by simply not showing up or voting "present." It's more than just flip flops, we've got a self-anointed "uniter" who can't come up with a single convincing example of bucking his party or working across the aisle and a guy selling a whole new brand of politics which are looking more like politics Chicago-style by the day.

McCain has taken plenty of heat from Republican. The guy with a cult following is Obama.

Wilson's a Liar

Interesting to see that this site has been invaded by the Obamabots. You have to wonder, why do they bother if they are so sure the country is with them and their Messiah is going to win?

I guess their preening moral righteousness has to be displayed constantly in order for them to feel they have accomplished something.

thenakedemperor

I've seen more flip-flops on these two guys than I saw the entire time I last went to the beach.

John Oh

Mary:

89 is an employee of some entity that is funded by George Soros. His mission is to disrupt your conversatiion here. You can tell because unlike many others who post disagreement here, 89 is not listening, only shouting.

So 89, how much does being an online provacateur pay these days?

kim

Honest rhetoricians will yield the point when it is lost; the corrupt ones change the subject.
===========================

KenB

"the psychotic right"

What about the racist right and the warmonger right and the puppy-abusing right and the kitten-skinning right?

david still

How many of those commenting have served during wartime and feel that they know bettyer than all others? bullshit.
Kerry's boatmates now take up the million dollar challenge to prove he was a hero and the swifties were liars. Thus far, the money delayed for make believe reasons!

Count McCain's flip flops and count Obama's and then judge. Oh. some more important than others? Sure: in your eyes but not to the general public's.

McCain's economic plan? zero. energy? drill=that is not going to do anything for ten years and by then the needs will have gone way up. In sum: McCain has no plan, much as his mirror bush has no plan for Iraq.

kim

David, yes the difference in the flip flops matter. Obama can't afford to be seen as an ordinary politician. That he is one is why he'll lose the election. In fact, McCain is the extraordinary politician. In his own maybe Maverick sort of way, you know.
===============================

Cecil Turner

I think it's worth emphasizing how deeply dishonest that first "flip-flop" charge is, apparently started by the Obama campaign, and swallowed whole by Dana Milbank:

During his last run for the presidency, in 1999, McCain supported the drilling moratorium, and he scolded the "special interests in Washington" that sought offshore drilling leases. Yesterday, he announced that those very same "moratoria should be lifted" and proposed incentives for the states "in the form of tangible financial rewards, if the states decide to lift those moratoriums."
Which is a load of horse-puckey. Here is his current position:
Tomorrow I will call for lifting the federal moratorium for states that choose to permit exploration. I think that this, and perhaps providing additional incentives for states to permit exploration off their coasts, would be very helpful in the short term in resolving our energy crisis.
And here's the full quote from 1999:
''The leases for offshore oil drilling should never have been granted without allowing Californians a legitimate voice in the decision-making process. I believe it is up to the voters of California to determine the fate of these leases, and as president, I will respect the decision they make regarding the leases. The people of California deserve to be heard, without being forced to resort to legal action against their own government. As president, I will see to it that the interests of the people of California rise above the special interests of Washington, D.C.'' [emphasis added]
There's no way to claim that's support for a federal moratorium . . . it says exactly the opposite: that the state should decide. And only by truncating the quote as it was done can it even be construed as a generic anti-drilling position. They oughta be ashamed. (But of course they're shameless.)

Korla Pundit

Kerry's biggest flipflop (to differentiate him from McCain, who I have no real use for either) was his military record. First, he served as little time as he could get away with, scamming his way out with self-inflicted minor injuries and possible outright fraud. Then, he came back to the States and slandered all his comrades and superiors and his President with false atrocities that never happened. This not only betrayed his country, but helped condemn the South Vietnamese to a brutal Communist takeover, and helped usher in the Cambodian killing fields. How many millions were killed? I forget.

He even went to Paris to meet with our enemies, illegally, during wartime, to help negotiate our surrender, while real war heroes were dying in rice paddies and stepping on trip wires.

He threw his medals (or were they somebody else's? Kerry can't get it straight.) over the fence in protest. But somehow still has them on display.

He helped slash military budgets and decimated our force and cut our research and development, which made the Soviets very happy at the time.

Then, when it came time to run for President during a war, he saluted at his introduction at the Dem Convention, and shouted "REPORTING FOR DUTY!"

So, are soldiers heroes or baby-killers? It depends if we're currently on "flip" or "flop."

Either way, Kerry is a piece of stuck-up, snobbish traitor-scum.

McCain is simply a jerk.

No comparison.

Cecil Turner

How many of those commenting have served during wartime and feel that they know bettyer than all others? bullshit.

Not sure what your point is here. Have you ever served in combat? (The SwiftVets certainly have. Full tours, even.)

Kerry's boatmates now take up the million dollar challenge . . .

Heh. Comedy Central is standing by.

Diggs

If you must know, four months of honorable service can be wiped out by a day's worth of lying and slandering your fellow servicemen in Congressional testimony, yes. Not that you'd know anything about honorable service, but yes, that will do it for wiping it out.
Do you know of any Republicans that have done that? I can name a Democrat who did that, and earned a near-lifetime senatorial seat because of it.

Korla Pundit

Ummm... Lurch?

glasater

drill=that is not going to do anything for ten years and by then the needs will have gone way up

That is a very tired "untruth". If the congress listened to what the voter wanted--and that is to drill now--the price of oil would drop immediately.
Congress is once again not listening to the voters after all Pelosi knows better.

Salamantis

Lessee...on one hand, we have a fellow who remained in the Hanoi Hilton rather than jump in line ahead of his fellow POWS, who has a quarter century Senatorial voting record, and who has reached across the aisle to co-sponsor substantial legislation several times.

On the other hand, we have a half-term senator from the corrupt Chicago political machine who's good friends with racist demogogic preachers, murderous domestic terrorists, and a Lebanese bag man, and who has neither authored a single piece of significant legislation or reached across the aisle on any significant initiatives, but who is promising changeful hope and hopeful change.

Now which one do I vote for?

Salamantis

If we had begun drilling in ANWR when it first came up, in 1995, we'd have been getting oil from there for years by now.

I don't wanna be saying the same thing 13 years from now that I'm saying 13 years from then.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame