The Huntsman Revisitation

George Will dismisses Newt Gingrich as a faux-conservative with a liberal, big-program for everything mindset, dismisses Mitt Romney as a soulless, unlikeable techocrat cut from the same cloth as Thomas Dewey and Mike Dukakis but with a greater inclination to flip-flop, and exhorts Republicans to reconsider Rick Perry (groan!) and Jon Huntsman (gasp!).

The exhortation:

Before settling for Romney, conservatives should reconsider two candidates who stumbled early on.

Rick Perry (disclosure: my wife, Mari Will, advises him) has been disappointing in debates. They test nothing pertinent to presidential duties but have become absurdly important. Perry’s political assets remain his Texas record and Southwestern zest for disliking Washington and Wall Street simultaneously and equally.

Jon Huntsman inexplicably chose to debut as the Republican for people who rather dislike Republicans, but his program is the most conservative. He endorses Paul Ryan’s budget and entitlement reforms. (Gingrich denounced Ryan’s Medicare reform as “right-wing social engineering.”) Huntsman would privatize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (Gingrich’s benefactor). Huntsman would end double taxation on investment by eliminating taxes on capital gains and dividends. (Romney would eliminate them only for people earning less than $200,000, who currently pay just 9.3 percent of them.) Huntsman’s thorough opposition to corporate welfare includes farm subsidies. (Romney has justified them as national security measures — food security, somehow threatened. Gingrich says opponents of ethanol subsidies are “big-city” people hostile to farmers.) Huntsman considers No Child Left Behind, the semi-nationalization of primary and secondary education, “an unmitigated disaster.” (Romney and Gingrich support it. Gingrich has endorsed a national curriculum.) Between Ron Paul’s isolationism and the faintly variant bellicosities of the other six candidates stands Huntsman’s conservative foreign policy, skeptically nuanced about America’s need or ability to control many distant developments.

As to Perry's debating skills, a President's ability to present his ideas forcefully and cogently can be helpful in rallying public support for his agenda. Of course, we can see how well that has worked for Obama, the greatest speaker in the history of forever, not to mention George Bush, an epic mumblemouth, but still, let's not toss out both baby and bathwater here.  I think a huge part of Newt's appeal is his ability to deliver a conservative message in a way that Rush Limbaugh can but Rick Perry cannot and Mitt Romney will not. Newt may have no ability to govern (or win) but I would pay extra to watch him run.

And while on the subject of Rick Perry, let me steal a point from (IIRC) Jonah Goldberg - Perry adopt a lot of right-wing symbolism, as packing heat to gun down stray coyotes, but that masks some distinctly no-conservative attitudes on, for example, immigration. The net result is that conservatives feel more or less sympatico with the guy even though they don't agree with him on everything.

Jon Huntsman, by pandering for the NY Times endorsement, has managed the opposite trick - people who might actually like his positions can't get behind a guy who clearly doesn't like them.

Troubling.  Still, my commitment to defeating Obama is so great that I will even re-consider backing a guy who thinks I am a knuckle-dragging, unreconstructed maroon.  But only briefly, and only because George told me too.

Comments

[John]

Jon "I [...] trust scientists on global warming" Huntsman is too gullible to be President. If he defers to computer models when we can actually see the physical disconnection between prediction and results, what will he do when economists give him the snow job with computer models? I'm not supporting anyone who doesn't display a healthy skepticism for highly credentialed people whose main argument is "look at what these computer simulations predict."

Yeah, I'm a narrow-minded experimentalist judging on esoterica, but it is what I know. I really do think we need leaders who are not easily swayed by a milligram of insight combined with a kilogram of self-interested rationalization. YMMV.

[henry]

Interesting that when you put up a post on Huntsman, I wake up to 15 turkeys in my front yard.

[Jack is Back!]

Why can't we reconsider Trump? Or write in Palin?

I didn't see the Huckabee forum last night but Ken Cuccinelli was on F&F this morning and did not think Gingrich helped himself and in fact proved to be a bit of blow-hard on certain issues. He also thought Cain was the only candidate so far that had "transformational" proposals such as 9-9-9. Also, something about Bachman making a faux-pas on some legal reasoning behind an issue. Didn't catch it all.

[MarkO]

After the third time will it be Christmas morning?

[Extraneus]

Newt a bit of a blowhard? Say it ain't so!

[Thomas Collins]

Clarice, how about Simon Woods as Eric the Red and Jeneane Garofalo as Buffy?

[Cecil Turner]

Okay, I found the debate far better than I expected. I'll sum it up from my perspective.

• Newt: Bondi's initial amnesty question was a little silly, the rest were pretty good. Lots of stuff on Nancy Pelosi's couch, health mandate, FM/FM, etc. A softball on local solutions to national problems. Newt's answers were so good they looked rehearsed.
• Santorum: Bondi's initial Patriot Act question was a little silly (hey, a trend); the family stuff was actually pretty good, as was the overly broad legislation discussion; separation of powers got a little esoteric, and the DOMA discussion was a group hug that illuminated little;
• Perry got the first truly hard question about executive order non-implementation of Obamacare (along with pointed follow-ups) that he answered fairly well . . . especially on the heels of the non-defense of DOMA issue; illegal immigration discussion didn't clarify much; I liked his response on education dollars, but that may be a personal taste; over-focus on states rights and tenth amendment issues robbed the discussion of deeper meaning.
• Bachmann: looked fundamentally unserious with lots of hyperbole on health care and illegal immigration (full disclosure: I fast forwarded at about 4 min into her answers);
• Ron Paul: is still a nut (fast forwarded at ~2 minutes)
• Mitt: first answer "They don't know what I would do if I were president" (yep, that's the problem--okay, cheap shot) rest of the answer wasn't bad but lacked specific solutions; the 92%/8% discussion about Romneycare was ridiculous--of course it affected those who already had insurance (in cost and minimum coverage if nothing else); education and NCLB got a little long-winded, but generally agreed with Newt;
• the wrap-ups were individual sales pitches and generally pretty good.

Overall the format was much more useful than the gotcha sessions, but still not terribly illuminating. I agree with Will on that point. Santorum in particular was hampered by limited scope of questions, even though he answered the ones he got fairly well. Perry to a lesser degree had the same problem. Newt thrived on it.

Winners (in order): Newt, Perry. Losers: Paul, Bachmann . . . (almost even) Romney. Also-ran: Santorum. (Note the main reason I'd put Perry in the win column is that I liked his answers, and the converse for Romney. I can see a "moderate" watching the same debate and coming to the opposite conclusion.) In particular on conservative bona-fides, Bachmann came across as very (but clueless), Perry was very (and still a bit tongue-tied), Newt looked conservative, Romney looked defensive and unconvincing.

[Danube of Thought]

Minus 19 at Raz today.

[Captain Hate]

Maybe Will should just write about baseball so I can completely ignore him.

[Cecil Turner]

Ken Cuccinelli was on F&F this morning and did not think Gingrich helped himself . . .

Cuccinelli's questions were the best of the bunch (Bondi's were uneven, and Pruitt's softballish), but his conclusions are flawed. He came across loud and clear as thinking Newt wasn't conservative and Perry didn't have the authority to use the power of the Executive to hamstring Obamacare . . . he's wrong on both counts.

[PaulL]

Jonah Goldberg summed up Huntsman best: He has a face that you just want to punch.

[Mark Folkestad]

Will, the bow tie twit, lost me years ago, when he unleashed multiple rants about how louts and thugs had Lionell trains as kids, and bright, polite and civilized people grew up with American Flyer trains. One time could have been excuses as playfully tongue-in-cheek, just barely. Anyone care to guess which toy train I had?

[Clarice]

Will does seem rather taken with himself. I prefer P.J. O'Rourke for his wit and wisdom, frankly.

TC, that would ruin the point of the satire which is only administration suckups can get those soap opera production rants.

[Highlander]

Obama will not be defeated by a former employee who bowed at the altar subverting himself and his 'leadership' to a neophyte.

[Danube of Thought]

I was a Lionel kid from Day One. I always thought American Flyers were tinny junk for punks.

Apparently Will's skin is immune to the crawling blight.

[William Teach]

I spent some time the other day really looking at Huntsman, and, other than two big problems, along with some foolishness on how he is campaigning, he is actually pretty darned good.

I can get beyond his working as ambassador to China under Obama: his unmitigated support for not only anthropogenic global warming, but wanting to enact legislation on it, though, I can't get by.

[Benjamin Franklin]

Here's the WHOLE enchilada, in one honest declaration.

http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/two-points-re-the-euromess/

"But one conversation stuck with me, wherein a German analyst, stressing how deeply unpopular the bailouts are with their electorate, told me in so many words: “we know what we must do; but we have to do it secretly.” Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker of Luxembourg put it this way: “We all know what to do, but we don’t know how to get RE-ELECTED once we have done it.”

[Clarice]

*production Grants**

[Extraneus]

We knew that.

[Extraneus]

Why is it that when a man does something like this, the criminal justice system just about strings him up?

Mindy McCready's 5-year-old son found 'hiding in a closet' with mom

By the time Arkansas authorities took country singer Mindy McCready’s 5-year-old son from her and into custody on Friday evening, one thing had already become apparent to much of America: McCready’s life has come to resemble a bad country song.

[snip]

A Florida judge signed an order Thursday telling authorities to take the boy into custody and return him. It’s not yet clear whether the singer could face criminal charges.

[Benjamin Franklin]

Simple. Ain't it? It's like knowing you have warts on your butt. At what point does the viral spread prompt you to action?

[Extraneus]

Hmmm, that was pretty far OT. I'll try to stay with the program.

[Strawman Cometh]

Googling "Jon Huntsman Jonah Goldberg a face that you just want to punch."
One of the results gave me an additional result/link: the option to
"Block all www.nationalreview.com results"
Hovering it asked if the Corner result is "Not helpful?" and informed me that clicking the link would block all nationalreview.com results in future searches.
It didn't give me this option for Salon.com or theatlantic.com results.
Refreshing he page cleared the "block" link.

[Benjamin Franklin]

It's spot-on topic.

[Benjamin Franklin]

William Teach:

You need to visit more often so you can absorb teh reasonableness.

[Thomas Collins]

I acknowledge that it would change the focus, Clarice. But I think it would also work as a lighthearted psychological study of how power types such as Eric the Red use "people" movements to feed their pretensions of grandeur. But then again, it's your artistic creation, so you get to cast it!

[Jane]

Cecil,

There is no one here whose opinion I respect more than yours. I thought Bachmann and Paul did the best last night, and I am no fan of either. I thought Romney and Perry did the worse.

I wonder what caused the difference in perception.

[boris]

Between Newt and Mitt the analysis by Matt Lewis can be summarized:

These are desparate times and call for desperate measures.

People who believe that's true seem to favor Newt.
People who don't think these are desparate times and don't call for desperate measures seem to favor Mitt.

My observation would be the desperate measures group is more likely to show up and vote. This will be a base vs base election.

[Danube of Thought]

You're a shoo-in for the million bucks, Clarice. Who is this Heidi person?

[Clarice]

There's that, boris, and I think the last presidential election reflects a shift--national elections are now about celebrity and entertainment, not issues. That being that case, who has more entertainment value than Newt?

[Benjamin Franklin]

Money, money, money.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/us/politics/jon-huntsmans-cash-poor-campaign-gets-help-from-father.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

"The group, financed in part by Mr. Huntsman’s billionaire industrialist father and guided by one of his former political advisers, has breathed new life into a campaign that otherwise lacks the resources to do much more than literally go door to door seeking votes."

[Jane]

My goodness Clarice, today's Pieces is simply spectacular. It should be reposted on a billboard somewhere.

[Clarice]

Thanks, DoT, I'll buy you a martini with the rant money just as soon as it comes in. Here's a pic of Heidi who is one of the few young conservative woman celebs.
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20504891,00.html

[Clarice]

ahem *Grant money*

[Ignatz]

George Will kind of reminds me of Newt.
When his party is out of power he's pretty good at criticizing the opposition and sticks to conservative values.
When his party is in power suddenly he's convinced the welfare state is an undefeatable given and it's pointless even trying.

[Clarice]

Thanks, Jane.

[Benjamin Franklin]

Not to worry. Things will be much simpler when we achieve 3rd World status....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-grim-diagnosis-for-our-ailing-us-health-care-system/2011/11/25/gIQARdgm2N_story.html

As societies grow wealthier, people want — and can afford — more health care. Still, U.S. health spending (about $7,960 per person in 2009) is in a league of its own. It’s 50 percent higher than Norway’s ($5,352), the next costliest. U.S. spending is more than double Britain’s ($3,487), France’s ($3,978) and the OECD average ($3,233).

Despite this, Americans aren’t notably healthier than people in other advanced countries, the study reports. Life expectancy in the United States (78.2 years) lags behind Japan’s (83 years) and the OECD average (79.5 years). It roughly equals Chile’s and the Czech Republic’s, says Mark Pearson of the OECD. Americans don’t have much to show for their system’s enormous cost, even if the gaps in life expectancy partly reflect differences in lifestyle and diet.

[Rick Ballard]

Newt owns a fair chunk of the Contract With America and Mitt owns Romneycare. Huntsman wants to slay the dead Skydragon again. We're still waiting on word from Alpha Centauri as to the meaning of Ron Paul's message and Rick Perry has done nothing as governor to impede growing prosperity in Texas.

I'd like to see quick passage of Ryan's Roadmap (immediately after repeal of Son of Romneycare) and I believe Perry would beat Romney and certainly Gingrich in working with the House and Senate for prompt action without insisting on unnecessary clutter in order to claim ownership.

[Thomas Collins]

BFF, the Samuelson article minimizes the impact of our diverse population on overall life expectancy figures. Our health care system is hardly Third World. More likely, potentates from the Third World will come here for care (for example, the Cleveland Clinic for cardiac treatment).

The article does posit two types of system, voucher based and single payer, and does show some skepticism to single payer's effectiveness at containing costs and maintaining effective health care. However, the notion that America's system doesn't have much to show for its costs is simply silly.

[narciso]

TC, Dana doesn't care about details, like that. You would think the OECD would have a higher life expectancy though,
that''s really more with one standard deviation of the US, considering comparable
populations.

[(Another) Barbara]

I recommend to JOMers who have not seen it Commentary magazine's "The Worst Study Ever?" from its April 2011 issue (LUN). It informs about the fraudulent methods used by world health groups to boost longevity figures and other measures of healthfulness in countries with socialized medicine, and reduce the otherwise top-of-the-roster standing of the U.S. Pure political propaganda.

[Danube of Thought]

Found a picture of Heidi. Give her the part, by all means.

[Thomas Collins]

Narciso, the notion that the US would make its health care policy decisions based on the ruminations of OECD functionaries itself makes me sick. Samuelson isn't a bad op edder, but he needs better sources.

[narciso]

Yes, stipulated, TC, Fielding Mellish, would say, 'it's a travesty of two mockeries of a sham'

[Cecil Turner]

I wonder what caused the difference in perception.

Me too. Both Bachmann and Paul were excited . . . but their positions were borderline silly (and Bachmann didn't answer the questions; it appeared to me she didn't fully understand them--the "liberty issue" nonsense in particular was a head-scratcher). Other than very clearly espousing a particular ideology (Paul--libertarianism; Bachmann--conservatism), and vehemently espousing small government, neither appeared very serious.

Cosmetically, Perry sucks. He's got the deer-in-the-lights look (much like Bush did) and an off-putting style of talking (his pleasantries nearly all grated). But his substance on each issue was better than the others' (IMO). The "what authority" badgering by Cuccinelli ate up about half his time (and again IMO, Cuccinelli is wrong; the statute gives the executive the authority to write regulations and it's a perfectly legitimate "check" to write them in a very constrained fashion).

I agree Romney did poorly (both in defensive appearance and answers), but I can see someone being sympathetic to him. I think Perry did well, but I can see someone disagreeing on that as well. I can't see Paul or Bachmann doing well on any scoresheet that wasn't primarily cosmetic in nature, and I'd be interested in hearing why you liked 'em.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Obama will not be defeated by a former employee who bowed at the altar subverting himself and his 'leadership' to a neophyte.

What?

[narciso]

Two facepalm worthy movement,at the Peanut Gallery 'Meet the Press' Gregory, I think, citing Axelrod's critique of Romney as having
no moral conviction, and I didn't hear the singing due to a lightning strike, and in the Daily Mail, Osborne, criticizing the Iron Lady for not going far enough.

[Jack is Back!]

Does anyone else notice the resemblence between Tom Coughlin and Harry Reid?

[narciso]

Such is the absurdity of such a statement,

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/thetorydiary/2011/11/we-needed-osborne-to-be-thatcher-today-but-he-was-brown.html

[Charlie (Colorado)]

BFF, the Samuelson article minimizes the impact of our diverse population on overall life expectancy figures.

That's not as important as the differences in how we define the measures: a 24 week preemie is considered a live birth in the US; if that baby dies, it becomes an "infant mortality" here, which skews the life expectancy a lot. In most of the rest of the world, a premature baby under a certain birth weight or premature by a certain number of weeks, who dies, is considered a stillbirth.

This is why Cuba has such (suspiciously) good infant mortality numbers: they have much lower infant mortality, much high rates of stillbirth.

[(Another) Barbara]

It seems bizarre to me that George Will could get a piece published about the Republican candidates when his missus is a paid consultant to one of them. Yes, he has a disclaimer about that, but of course he would diminish the others and promote his wife's boss. What else could we expect? I think Huntsman was thrown in merely because he has almost zero chance of bettering Perry (or anyone).

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Found a picture of Heidi. Give her the part, by all means.

Um, which part would that be, DoT?

[Clarice]

Ab If it weren't political propaganda what would BF and Sylvia have to post? She loved those figures, too.

[centralcal]

Cecil:

Winners (in order): Newt, Perry. Losers: Paul, Bachmann . . . (almost even) Romney. Also-ran: Santorum.

I agree with the winners and the order. However, I would put Bachmann and Santorum together - I think the Congress is their best and most natural fit.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

It seems bizarre to me that George Will could get a piece published about the Republican candidates when his missus is a paid consultant to one of them.

Why? Ezra Klein gets pieces published about Obama and the Democrats, and he's been consulting to them.

[narciso]

The part of 'Buffy' in Clarice's stage production, of Les Occupants.

[narciso]

He talks himself into these gordian knot situations;

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/newt-07-i-strongly-support-carbon-caps/235741

[Charlie (Colorado)]

The part of 'Buffy' in Clarice's stage production, of Les Occupants.

The art of the double entendre is so lost.

[Jane]

Cecil,

I no longer have any idea. I think I thought at the time that both addressed the legal questions as opposed to Perry who, not a lawyer, dealt with facts more than law. I thought Paul's response on a constitutional basis was very interesting. I wasn't thrilled with his positions as much as how he said he arrived at it.

That being said, i've never been an expert on either the constitution or law, so I certainly could have gotten it all wrong.

[Comanche Voter]

Shortly after The Bamster was installed in office, I woke up one morning around 0230 muttering a single word non printable epithet. My wife, who's wise in the way of my thinking said "You were talking about Obama, weren't you." Spot on.

If, Heaven forfend, Huntsman was elected President and carried out his global warming nonsense, I'm afraid that this early morning exchange would be repeated in 2013--only change would be "You were thinking about Huntsman".

Huntsman may be bright, he may be wealthy (nothing like having your old man make a billion and a half or so buying up cats and dogs in the chemical plant business) but he's got a screw loose on global warming.

[MarkO]

I was still laughing, Charlie. But, it's a tough crowd.

[Benjamin Franklin]

TC;

Comparing apples to oranges, am I? The third world reference is related to cost vs benefit, and the cost has been a big contributor to our financial decline.

"Physicians for a National Health Program, a vocal advocacy group, recently examined the health care systems in 16 industrialized countries. The only measures that the study used to compare the different nations were, not surprisingly, life expectancy and infant mortality."

See the chart

http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA547ComparativeHealth.html

[narciso]

Noonan, has become a satirist, on the scale of Moliere, oh wait she's serious;

The only way to win America right now is to govern selflessly and seriously. His top advisers, those knowing, winking bumpkins, cannot see this. America is in crisis. It knows it’s in crisis. It cannot tolerate the old moves anymore, the “every problem is just an issue to be manipulated for gain.” The president was once seen as an idealist. He was hired to be an idealist! His ignorant shrewdness, his small-time cleverness—it just won’t do. Nobody wants it. It’s why people want to fire him.

[Cecil Turner]

I wasn't thrilled with his positions as much as how he said he arrived at it.

I'm with you. I'm constantly having to assess whether it's the message, how much I agree or disagree with the philosophy, or the delivery. It's tough, and again I think the only part Will got completely right is that it really isn't a great way of selecting an executive. (Though I'm not sure what would be, either.)

[Benjamin Franklin]

would like to stay and chat, but must go...

[narciso]

Speaking of which, you turn over one rock:

http://kleinonline.wnd.com/2011/10/27/revealed-for-the-first-time-sordid-origins-of-obamacare-legislation-traced-to-soros-group-marketed-by-slew-of-radicals/

[Thomas Collins]

BFF, I have always been intrigued by the apples/oranges response. Apples and oranges are readily comparable (calories, vitamins, fiber, sugar, etc.).

As far as the costs and benefits in Third World and American health care systems go, when the Donald Berwicks and Tom Daschles and other similar types promote a system that will ensure Third World style health care for themselves at a lower cost to society, I'll take the cost/benefit arguments more seriously.

Of course, Samuelson at the end of his op Ed was addressing serious issues and possible approaches to them.

[narciso]

True, TC, he is the one decent economics writer at the Post, suspicions that our favorite tenured Anarchist, was proffering
Soros turf was right, even Dr. Evil wasn't so persistent in his mission,

[bgates]

Strawman, you don't see the "block results" option until you have visited the site in question. I had to go to salon.com to confirm that. I hope you appreciate the sacrifice :)

[Jack is Back!]

Clarice,

I have been working on the libretto for Les Occupantes.

What do you think of this song for just before they are arrested:

"Eric the Red:
Ain't it a laugh?
Ain't it a treat?
Hob-nobbin'on Wall Street
Among the elite?
Here comes a Goldman Sachs prince
There goes a Jew.
This one's a queer
But what can you do?
Zuccotti Park at my feet
New York in the dust
And here I'm breaking bread
With the 1% upper crust!
Beggar at the feast!
Master of the dance!
Life is easy pickings
If you grab your chance.
Everywhere you go
99% of the Law-abiding folk
Doing what is decent
But they're mostly broke!
Singing to the Lord on Sundays
Praying for the gifts He'll send.
M. and Mme. Eric the Red:
But we're the ones who take it
We're the ones who make it in the end!
Watch the 1% of buggers dance
Watch 'em till they drop
Keep your wits about you
And you stand on top!
Masters of the land
Always get our share
Clear away the Kelty tents
And we're still there!
We know where the tear gas is blowing
Money is the stuff we smell
And when we're rich as Corzine
Jesus! Won't we see you all in hell!
[Buffy is alone in the shadows, with a bare wooden
cross for company.]
Buffy:
Alone I wait in the shadows
I count the hours till I can sleep
I dreamed a dream Saradon stood by
It made her weep to know I die.
Alone at the end of the day
Upon this wedding night I pray
Take these children, my Lord, to thy embrace
And show them grace.
God on high
Hear my prayer
Take me now
To thy care
Where You are
Let me be
Take me now
Take me there
Bring me home
Bring me home.

[Che’s spirit appears to Buffy.]
Che (interjecting)
Mamesoille, I bless your name I am ready,
Mamesoille, lay down your burden At the end of my days

"

[Clarice]

Terrific , JiB, why not post it in the comments to the piece?

[Jack is Back!]

Helu scores. Skins 7 - Jets 0

"Hail to the Redskins,
Hail victory
Braves on the warpath
Fight for old DC".

[narciso]

This could be just like Swordfish or it could turn horribly, like in the last episode of Burn Notice.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/world/americas/us-drug-agents-launder-profits-of-mexican-cartels.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all

[henry]

Via Insty, policy uncertainty does impact small business hiring. I am pleased to note one author is at Capt H and my old school CWRU.

[Danube of Thought]

The husband of Nina Easton of the Fox All-stars has been a Romney advisor for a long time.

[narciso]

Fox is pretty much a Romney redoubt, find me someone over there, that really takes issue with him, maybe Huckabee.

[Clarice]

Wasn't Greta's husband a Cain supporter? Or was it someone else he was backing?

[narciso]

You're right, Clarice,

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/john-coale-now-advising-herman-cain/

[JM Hanes]

Ben Franklin:

"Comparing apples to oranges, am I?..... See the chart"

LOL! You didn't actually read the original source your excerpt was lifted from, did you? The actual article describes a veritable fruit basket of comparisons and concludes that life expectancy and infant mortality stats are the worst basis for healthcare rankings.

When it comes to worn out tropes, you're like a cat proudly dropping dead mice on the doorstep.

[Clarice]

Very well put as usual, jmh.

[JM Hanes]

"Found a picture of Heidi. Give her the part, by all means."

I'm afraid you're not going to like the transformational before and after in Clarice's proto-iconic screenplay!

[Thomas Collins]

JMH, I was thinking that perhaps I had misunderstood BFF's argument, or that BFF was presenting acknowledging the opposing view, when I looked at the link. Your analysis is more plausible than mine.

[Danube of Thought]

"Fox is pretty much a Romney redoubt, find me someone over there, that really takes issue with him, maybe Huckabee."

Will Bret Baier do?

[Rick Ballard]

Henry,

Thanks for the link. The actual paper is somewhat amusing in that it does not identify the unknowable cost impact of Obamacare as an uncertainty factor. I recognize the difficulty inherent in trying to isolate a 'new' factor but the value of the study is greatly diminished by the authors avoidance of mentioning the possibility Obamacare may have greatly exacerbated business owner's reluctance to make investments or hire people.

One might think that a careful examination of investment and hiring in Massachusetts and Texas over the period of 2006-2010 would provide some scintilla of evidence that the attempted imposition of the collectivization of health care does not stimulate much beyond anxiety and increased usage of food stamps.

[MarkO]

daddy, your Duke Soccer neighbor is a hell of a player.

[Jane]

HUckabee appears to be a Romney fan this go around. And Greta's husband was a Hillary delegate in '08, so Cain would be a big change.

[Jack is Back!]

Dr.K is definitely not a Newt fan and has been somewhat acceptive of Mitt's "presidential" appearance and realism. Hannity is not a Mitt man but O'Reilly is always looking for a middle of the roader pragmatist. If anything, Ailes is probably a Mitt person since he is so much like his old boss. Plus if Palin comes out for Newt (which I don't think she will do) then Fox will definitely get behind MItt 100%.

[Clarice]

Wm Jacobson and I , once again, see eye to eye:http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/12/dont-play-the-baggage-game/

[henry]

Rick, if you look at the definition of small business used (1-49 employees) it may be fair to ignore healthcare in the uncertainty as business this small is assumed by policy elites to provide no healthcare benefits anyway. Anecdotally the slightly larger businesses I talk to (including my own) definitely cite Obamacare as a big problem. Any investment is pushed to equipment or software -- anything to avoid hiring while supporting growth.

[narciso]

And the dagger carrier had to render his viewpoint,

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/11/30/greta-van-susteren-s-husband-defends-role-advising-herman-cain.html

Fox had a Hearstian populist edge, but it has drifted into the Luceian milieu of the nexus 6, even before Murdoch fils, was given the Charles 11 treatment,

[Ignatz]

--JMH, I was thinking that perhaps I had misunderstood BFF's argument...--

You should get worried if you do think you understand it.
And if you ever do, not to worry, he'll change it as soon as you point out its vapidity.

[glasater]

If Richard Nixon can come back from the so-called dead and win in '68, there could be a similar redemption for Newt.

However, I was dismayed by Tom Coburn's comment on FNS this AM saying basically "no way Newt".

[gmaX]

There is a reason he announced he departure. He figured out after his post that the data did not support his vapid point, so he skedaddled. Frankly I can now reliably spot his posts a mere sentence into them, and I therefore scroll without reading and without clicking on anything.

BTW, he is an anarchist, so unless you keep your virus software up to date, be very wary about opening any links. While I dont think he has resorted to viral damage, YET, its quite consistent with his idiotic anarchist philosophy. Tread there at your own risk. Or scroll and reduce the risk.

[(Another) Barbara]

Fox had a Hearstian populist edge, but it has drifted into the Luceian milieu of the nexus 6, even before Murdoch fils, was given the Charles 11 treatment,

I'm laughing, narciso. Was that in code? Unfathomable to me, but so many things are, I suppose.

[Clarice]

It will be important for Newt to have as his VP someone who will do the negotiations with Congress. Spmeone like Perry perhaps.

[Jack is Back!]

(A)B,

Let me translate for you:

Fox was once a network that targetted and appealed to popular (i.e. middle class condervatives) but has now gone designing corporate evils (like in Bladerunner) and they did this before young James Murdoch was destroyed in his battle with the Commons committee investigating the phone hacking scandal much like Charles II was not allowed to inherit his father's kingdom by Crowmwell.

When dealing with Narciso you have to have a Ph.D. in historical and fictional political trivia and the philosophy of Troglodytes.

[Captain Hate]

Noonan, has become a satirist, on the scale of Moliere, oh wait she's serious;

Based on her articles, I have to think that when Nooner sits down at her laptop, she'd get MADD very upset if behind the wheel of 2+ tons of steel, plastic and rubber.

[(Another) Barbara]

When dealing with Narciso you have to have a Ph.D. in historical and fictional political trivia and the philosophy of Troglodytes.

Thanks, Jack. I do have the latter, or so most of my friends would say.

Oh, Charles II. I read that as Charles Eleven or Charles One-One and thought it might be another pet name for an MSNBC pundit or something.

I do have trouble with the insider codes here and sometimes I wonder whether those keep new readers/commenters away. I'm still not sure what/who T1000 refers to, except by implication, and every time I read a paragraph filled with Jug-ears, Clenis, Nexus6, Muffer (tsk!), Android, White togas, etc., etc, I have to stop at each name and replace it with a real identity. Guess it's just me, but it has taken me to a new low in my reading comprehension scores.

[Ignatz]

--Guess it's just me, but it has taken me to a new low in my reading comprehension scores.--

It most certainly is not just you, AB.
I look at it like reading Shakespeare; you can either look up all the footnotes to understand every one of the difficult references but lose the narrative or glide over the hard bits to understand the flow of what's going on.

[Cecil Turner]

Wm Jacobson and I , once again, see eye to eye:

He's pretty invariably solid. Gotta say, though, that's one of his worst postings in terms of grammar and spelling ("cowardess"?) I've seen. It was distracting, but his points are well taken.

On the other hand, I remain convinced Mr Cain is more than a bit of a hound dog. And while that wouldn't be a disqualifier in a Democrat (mostly because you'd never hear about it), the reality is that there's a double standard (usually justified by "hypocrisy," which is self-parody at its best). The other factor explaining the Cain implosion is that his support was broad but shallow and disproportionately based on appearances (IMO), hence it was particularly prone to bubble-bursting. YMMV.

Newt's personal baggage is completely different. He's not accused of being a serial philanderer, and messy divorces are just not the same. I continue to think his demonstrated personal pique from his speaker days would be far more damaging, but apparently that's water under the bridge. I don't think dragging up divorce proceedings (or salacious accusations against someone he subsequently married) will sell very well.