Spreading Around The Manure
Recently Discovered Photo of Obama Circa 1865
In these final, gasping moments of the Reagan Era we have really reached a dismal, dismal low point in our political discourse. The McCain-Failin' campaign has pulled out all the stops in an attempt to stigmatize the notion of any sort of redistribution of wealth. Merely because Barack Obama vows not to nationalize industry, nor seize all private haciendas, nor confiscate your 7th or 8th home, but rather because he wants to raise the marginal tax rate on those earning a quarter of million dollars a year or more from 36% to 39% i.e. where it was in the year 2001. And that's so he can pay for lowering taxes for 95% of Americans. If that's what spreading the wealth is about, then I am for it. And I imagine millions and millions of others are for it too. One more reason why a landslide is coming a week from Tuesday. Meanwhile, the ludicrous charge that Obama is a Marxist expropriator reveals the ultimate moral bankruptcy of a conservative movement that has totally exhausted itself. It once had a lot of bad ideas (how many of you would presently like to have your social security invested in the stock market?). Now, the Republicans have literally NO ideas, other than to feebly try to scare you. And to brazenly celebrate self-interested greed. It is now apparently a mortal sin to believe there is anything like a commonweal, any notion of mutual solidarity with fellow humans, or any legitimate compulsion to care for the needy. These folks so lavishly deserve the ass-whuppin' coming their way. I had to laugh at Drudge tonight who is running a screamer headline that it found an eight year old piece of audio in which Barack Obama is caught on tape lamenting that the civil rights movement didn't spend enough energy fighting for "redistributive change." Since when has it become an un-American act to skew tax rates and other government entitlement programs to help level the playing field between the ultra-rich and the rest of us? Was I absent that day? Of course, this all distracts from the man most responsible for radical wealth distribution of the last two decades. I refer to former-Maestro-turned-stumblebum Alan Greenspan who helped engineer and lubricate the most accelerated transfer and redistribution of wealth --upwards-- in modern American history. Please, no one pay attention to the man with the dunce hat on in the corner. That CEO's now make 600 times what a line worker does and that real wages have stagnated could never, ever, ever be considered "spreading the wealth." Oh, heavens no. P.S. Quote of the day:"It's easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle…" Well, you know the rest. A very famous quote from a notable un-American Jew. Jesus.
October 27th, 2008 at 4:19 am
Marc: “…government entitlement programs to help level the playing field between the ultra-rich and the rest of us?”
So, now you are among the recipients? Funny, I thought you took pride in earning what you have. Face it, Obama is a socialist and the rest of you yokels are falling for his palaver. You (collectively) are worse than lemmings. Lemmings at least have a biological predisposition for their behavior.
October 27th, 2008 at 4:39 am
The Right loves the notion of “falling” for things. Like no one could possibly be liberal if we “really knew” what those bastards were up to. We’re not falling for anything. Obama told us what he wants to do and we are saying, “Sign us up!”
October 27th, 2008 at 4:56 am
“GM Says” the same ridiculous shit over and over. Please help him his falling (for his own palaver.)
I love watching these idiots further marginalize themselves.
October 27th, 2008 at 4:59 am
sorry – “he’s falling…”
October 27th, 2008 at 5:35 am
The yokels at the international business daily, Financial Times, in a typical lemming-like gesture, have fallen for Obama’s palaver and endorsed the socialist sonofabitch. Who’s next over the Marxist cliff ? Warren Buffet ? Hugh McColl ? Paul Volcker ? If only the FT had the insight, analytical depth and journalistic skills of WFTV’s Barbara West – and of course, GM Roper.
October 27th, 2008 at 5:46 am
“See, under a big government, more tax agenda, what you thought was yours would really start belonging to somebody else, to everybody else. If you thought your income, your property, your inventory, your investments were, were yours, they would really collectively belong to everybody. Obama, Barack Obama has an ideological commitment to higher taxes, and I say this based on his record… Higher taxes, more government, misusing the power to tax leads to government moving into the role of some believing that government then has to take care of us. And government kind of moving into the role as the other half of our family, making decisions for us. Now, they do this in other countries where the people are not free. — GM Roper & Woody in a joint statement
October 27th, 2008 at 5:46 am
Whoops, that should read “Sarah Palin,” not “GM Roper & Woody in a joint statement.”
October 27th, 2008 at 5:48 am
Reg, I’m waiting for McCain’s endorsement of Obama; leaving Sarah Palin to run on her own.
October 27th, 2008 at 5:57 am
C’mon GM,
Obama’s economic policies would make him an extreme free marketer in Europe, much to the right of most, if not all mainstream rightwing parties.
His tax rate on the wealthy is far below the average European country, not to mention he doesn’t mandate universal healthcare. Obama doesn’t guaratee month long vacations, infinite sick days, and anywhere from two to four years of maternity leave. Icould go on and on. Its an understandable campaign tactic, but it is completely untrue.
One more thing, only the worst kind of amoral ignorant dupe would claim Obama is going to turn the USA into a Marxist state. Palin insults every last one of the real victims who suffered or continue to suffer under Marxist states.
Frydek-Mistek
October 27th, 2008 at 5:58 am
GM –
I rarely get you or Woody to respond to these sorts of questions, but you’re vastly more likely to respond than stumpy-joke guy.
So rather than throw charges back and forth over who is being duped and by how much, I’d like to ask you a couple of questions. What percentage of your income do you think it is legitmate for the government to collect? For what purposes can they spend it? Is a regressive taxe system always and inherently unfair? What are the common things–the things in the publilc sphere–that government has an obligation to fund and enable, if any?
I think it might be more revealing to learn what you think is legitmate so we know what we’re all talking about here.
October 27th, 2008 at 6:06 am
More defections: exit…stage LEFT!
Politico’s Alexander Burns: “Former Sen. Larry Pressler (R-S.D.), who was the first Vietnam veteran to serve in the United States Senate, is the latest Republican to back Sen. Barack Obama’s presidential campaign.”
CLICK DU JOUR – “ODD MAN OUT: Chuck Hagel’s Republican exile,” by Connie Bruck: “[H]e’s often mentioned in the press as a possible Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense [for Senator Obama]. In mid-July, Hagel and his friend Senator Jack Reed, a Democrat from Rhode Island, accompanied Obama on a trip to Afghanistan and Iraq. … [Hagel] told me that McCain’s approach to Russia was one of the reasons that he could not endorse him.
October 27th, 2008 at 6:11 am
Frydek-Mistek, it’s like they always say:
“If you’re taking 36% of someone’s income, you’re okay. If you’re taking 39% of their income, you might as well take everything else they own, suppress their freedom of speech, force atheism or your own cult of personality on them, and, if required, kill them because they might vote for your opponents.”
At least, that’s what we say where I’m from.
October 27th, 2008 at 6:12 am
Creepy news item though is the one of McGoo predicting he will be up late election night cause he is going to win by a squeaker.
Now before writing that remark off as the delusional ravings of a desperate lying sack of shit…is deja vu 04 and 00 and the already huge effort to disenfranchise a lot of voters not to mention any other tactic.
I predict the election will be contested. SOMETHING is going to go haywire.
I know…you think I am just as delusional as McCain.
See you at the corner bookie joint.
October 27th, 2008 at 6:19 am
[...] here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, [...]
October 27th, 2008 at 6:25 am
DanO… thanks for the excellent response/questions. Much better than the slime merchant that goes by “reg” let alone his asshole buddy Howie…
First, however FrydekMistek also made a decent argument to which I would respond that just because the Europeans are farther left than Obama, doesn’t mean that Obama isn’t too far left for The United States, but I appreciate the tone of your response.
OK, DanO, lets see. I think fair depends on how the money is earned. If by dint of work and taking risks than say 15%. If by passive investment where the only thing risked is capital then how about say 20-25% but no more. Savings, no taxes on it at all. 401Ks none at all (some one in congress wants to do away with the tax break on 401Ks and I believe she was a Democrat – no suprise there is there?), I’d means test SS but that is maybe too socialist for some.
Spending? Hmmm, tougher but National Defense for sure, secure borders of course, patents, drug effectiveness and the CDC. Health care for the disabled. Medicare? Nope its a boondoggle and a ponzi scheme. Medicaid? Maybe, but with some really tight restrictions. Food Stamps… sure, but only for the truly indigent.
Federal dollars for Education? Nope – plenty of proof that throwing dollars at education doesn’t work… Obama’s CAC ought to prove that if nothing else does… on the other hand, that was private money I guess so if the Annenberg foundation(s?) wants to toss it’s money that is fine with me.
Regressives tax systems are inherently unfair. If you, by taking risks and working hard for your income earn $250,000 and I only am willing to “take a job” and earn 1/5 th of that why should I have any claim on your income? Here are two examples which are far out, but whos truth underlies what I’m saying:
And here is one more!
Hopefully, those humorless folk in here will catch that the two “jokes” are based in reality as most good humor is.
The above, DanO is not an all exclusive list of what should be or should not be paid, but maybe between the more sane of us we can arrive at a mutual understanding.
DanO, FrydekMistek thanks for engaging in “debate.” This conservative appreciates it.
October 27th, 2008 at 6:31 am
Under the totalitarian, ultra-communistic, iron-fisted Eisenhower dictatorship marginal tax rates ran to 91%. I’m old enough to remember those dark days when we had no freedom. Among my most vivid memories, we spent considerable time huddled in front of tiny black and white TV sets, fixated on the antics of a wooden puppet while followers consigned to a proletarian “peanut gallery” sang a nonsensical anthem, mindlessly, in unison. Pretty stark times. My bet, based on the tax issue alone, is that Obama is at least half as socialistic as Eisenhower.
October 27th, 2008 at 6:44 am
I hope to god Roper gets his dream of a GOP that runs on his grab bag of nonsensical nostrums. Dead Men Walking ! Let the rightwing festival of recriminations begin as McPalin goes up in smoke. If there’s somewhere I can send money to assure the crazies like Limbaugh, the religious right and blogospheric wingnuts Roper reliably echoes hold sway in the GOP that emerges from the ashes of 2008, please let me know. I’ll do anything to help. Palin vs. Obama in 2012 ! Let’s get this thing rolling…
October 27th, 2008 at 6:53 am
Oh, and Roper….there’s no such thing as “good humor” with such a long, boring, complicated and ultimately tendentious, straw man set ups. You are about as humor-challenged as it gets. An utter bore. Also suffice to say, you’ve proven yourself the king of slime merchants with the garbage you’ve been tossing at Obama and your persistent ad hominems here. Total fucking piece of shit…we thought you’d retired to your dark corner. Oh well…
October 27th, 2008 at 7:01 am
Regressives tax systems are inherently unfair. If you, by taking risks and working hard for your income earn $250,000 and I only am willing to “take a job” and earn 1/5 th of that why should I have any claim on your income?
I agree, regressive tax systems are unfair, but I think you mean “progressive.” Also, and I think it’s important not to forget this — which is something I know conservatives are wont to do — poor people who “only take a job” don’t take money from anybody. The government does. To pay for things. That we all need. In your scenario, I would gladly pay more than you to the government because you wouldn’t be able to afford it.
Your stories are completely unrepresentative of what actually happens with taxes, and you are trying — whether intentionally or not — to mislead us.
I’ll try to fix your second story, to make it more representative of what goes on:
I’m rich and I eat dinner at a diner that supports Obama. The waiter has an Obama shirt on. I think he gave me exceptional service, and I’m not a dick, so I give him a three dollar tip. Then the waiter and I go outside and pay a homeless guy three dollars to fight in a war. I gave him two while the waiter only gave him one.
You see, there is no redistribution of wealth with taxes. That’s misleading.
October 27th, 2008 at 7:05 am
Obama should react like I react when people are shocked that I’m a socialist (rare)….admit it and hint at re-education camps.
My relative absence explained: http://tao.ca/~cupe3903/web/index.php
October 27th, 2008 at 7:05 am
One more thing, Roper. On your blog you refer to “the crucifixion of Joe the Plumber.” Please explain that one, in the context of your hunger for open debate. McCain’s flying the flag of “Joe the Plumber” – who will get a tax cut under Obama’s plan but not under McCain’s – is one of the biggest frauds ever perpetrated on our national discourse, yet you seem to resent any light being shed on the context of the discussion, or fact checks into this character’s story. Now Joe is talking about parlaying his 15 minutes of fame into a run for Congress, and you have the nerve to talk about his “crucifixion.” What a dishonest, amoral gasbag you are. Zero standards of intellectual honesty. That famous IQ of yours must be as fictitious as Joe’s plan to buy a plumbing business.
October 27th, 2008 at 7:14 am
Via Eschaton
The Financial Times says, Obama is the better choice.
But, but, but … Socialism!
October 27th, 2008 at 7:17 am
Ooops, I note I wrote “regressive” when I meant progressive. Anyway, you knew what I meant.
That waiter story is, at least not totally apocryphal. Long ago when I was waiting tables, I waited on this couple and somehow we ended up talking politics. Turns out he was quite conservative and we went back and forth for the whole meal, and playfully gave each other a hard time. He left, I went to pick up his bill and inside I found a note that said, “Given your liberal views about taxation I’ve decided to give your tip to someone who needs it more.” I thought it was hilarious. Turns out he was waiting in another part of the bar to see my reaction and we had a good laugh over it.
On 401ks, I’m not pretending to know much about that topic, but I skimmed an article about it, and the possible tax change is more complicated than you make it out to be. I’ll see if I can find the article.
The tax rates you propose won’t fund a fraction of the current budget, which I am sure is at least part of the point for you.
In any case, I think there are important political reasons for making sure that disparities in wealth are leavend out. They’ll never be gone for all kinds of reaons, but they should be planed down. Most importantly, money turns into primary poolitical power and our system can be co-opted or grossly distorted by the uber-wealthy.
Conservatives often seem to build this sort of idealized utopia where sufficient hard work always and inevitably leads to wild success, and they choose a bunch of self-selected anecdotal evidence to back this claim. But I don’t think the claim stands up to scrutiny.
Second, I think a strong middle-class makes for the most vibrant democratic culture, and that culture not only starts to wither along with the middle class, but it starts to open the door to wild and radical political tilts to both the left and the right. Redistribution is a pallaitive against such swings.
Third, and most important, we have a communal opbligation to take care of the needy. Needy can take many forms from the totally indigent who for whatever reason cannot care for themselves (for whom the state must stand in), and those who are temporarily in hard times, and for which no good purpose is served if they are allowed to sink. A hand at those times makes sense. In fact it is the humane thign to do. Letting people face the cold vagaries of the market on their own is shameful.
And, of course, there is the hypocrisy of saying no to extended unemployment benefits for some poor schlub who list his job, while handing out 700B$ to banks. I’m sure you agree, GM.
Lastly, (and I apologize for the length), I find there are a lot of conservatives who automatically attribute economic failure to moral lassitude. It sometimes has Biblical overtones–the righteous do not let these things happen to themselves. This is a notion that ignores some basic facts about the world, and I find it often colors the debate it all kinds of subtle and unspoken ways.
October 27th, 2008 at 7:23 am
Anyone spending much time with How Taxes Work attributed to David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D. ought to also look at this entry at snopes.com.
October 27th, 2008 at 7:23 am
“It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.”
-Adam Smith, from “The Wealth of Nations”
The father of capitalism is a socialist! I KNEW IT!
October 27th, 2008 at 7:42 am
Smith was not the father of capitalism. His idealized free market (which has never existed) was in many ways a response to the chaos of the new agricultural capitalism in England. Locke was the first to theorize this capitalism (and venerate it), but capitalism is really a social relation born out of enclosures and marketization of what was previously customary land rent.
Smith certainly did not approve of the greed and concentration of wealth by the new capitalist class. However, he didn’t take his critique far enough. For a good take on Smith see Marx’s 1844 manuscript Wages of Labour. (Marx’s ltov and much of his other concepts originated with Smith)
October 27th, 2008 at 8:36 am
I thought that, according to Ayn Rand, all the successful, smart, resourceful, boot puller uppers, were supposed to go start a commune somewhere and leave the rest of us alone.
I wish they would.
And take Greenspan with them.
October 27th, 2008 at 8:37 am
The less common our nation’s cultural, ethnic and religious roots , the more people will come to see individual freedom and liberty — as expressed in a “don’t tread on me” ethos — as our nation’s guiding principle. Specifically, the more diverse we are, the more difficult it will be to get people to accept paying higher taxes. (While at the same time, the more said diversity will make necessary to raise additional revenue, for infrastructure, health care, education, crime fighting, and other spending needed to maintain a good quality of life.)
October 27th, 2008 at 8:49 am
# Listener Says:
October 27th, 2008 at 7:23 am
Anyone spending much time with How Taxes Work attributed to David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D. ought to also look at this entry at snopes.com.
Oh no ! Are you trying to insinuate that G.M.Roper – he of the 147 IQ and the protestations that everyone here is “humorless” – is peddling a completely fabricated piece of nonsense that is falsely attributed to a Ph.D in economics. Shades of “Joe the Plumber”, the $250,000 business he’s about to buy and all those extra taxes poor Joe will be paying under Obama. Who would have ever guessed Roper was completely full of crap ?
Certainly not “moi”.
Kidding aside – this is the face of contemporary “conservatism.” Dead Men Walking…
October 27th, 2008 at 8:59 am
More insight into Barack’s idea of spreading manure. If the Supreme Court can’t or won’t do it, there is another way:
youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck
It’s only manure if you didn’t earn it. At least we get some honesty and clarity…..finally.
October 27th, 2008 at 9:11 am
Listener, thanks for the update.
DanO I absolutely agree with you re: The $700 billion bail out… what a travesty.. then again, let’s remember that no one asked me (or you) if it was a good idea.
October 27th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Adam Smith was in favor of progressive taxation. Teddy Roosevelt – who McCain claims as a hero – was in favor of national health insurance, as was Harry Truman, the Democrat so many Republicans invoke as one of the last “good ones.” But Obama – who proposes tax cuts for the middle class (upper middle class, even) – is a “socialist.”
What we have in the McPalin campaign and it’s boosters is a profound know-nothingism. As regards Obama, one needn’t think too long or hard to recognize that “cultural” insecurities are at the root of much of the visceral hysteria. The only good thing about this is that I’m convinced that the aftershock of this election will send the GOP into circular firing squad mode. The more casualties the better. And if a total fraud like Paliin manages to oppotunistically rise from the ashes – mostly due to the profound idiocy we see demonstrated by “conservatives” in these comments – they’ll be consigned to the margins for a long, long time.
Incidentally, as for the fundamental claims about “conservative” governance that have some rational resonance – job creation and oppostion to debilitating levels of federal debt – one need only check historical records to refute any notion that the Presidents touting “conservativism” and tax cuts-as-simple-solution have had an empircally verifiable success. Job creation has historically tended to be significantly more dynamic under Democratic Presidents and the debt as percentage of GDP has – since the initial buildup that peaked due to World War II – declined under every President EXCEPT Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, under whom it has expanded dramatically. These arguments one hears from the idiots like McPalin and Roper are total bullshit – a joke when measured against history and empirical evidence – sort of like that essay by “David Kamerschen, Ph.D.”
October 27th, 2008 at 9:16 am
Chart showing debt as % of GDP (which is the measure that matters):
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/debtgnp.gif
October 27th, 2008 at 9:39 am
From 25 facts you didn’t know about McCain:
(I am not making this up)
Fact #24
His wife says her obsession with electronic gadgets and technology is one of his pet peeves.
(!) Is Cindy getting even for the times he sent her to the ER after beating the crap out of her? (see Counterpunch for reference)
#25
McCain has a stuffed dancing hamster on display in his
Senate office.
(This one almost makes him likeable)
October 27th, 2008 at 9:42 am
PS… in the spirit of the thread I was “spreading the manure”
October 27th, 2008 at 9:48 am
Marc: Since when has it become an un-American act to skew tax rates and other government entitlement programs to help level the playing field between the ultra-rich and the rest of us?
This shows a profound difference in our views of America. People immigrated here in great part because our nation offered opportunity. Now, the left throws out “equal opportunity” in favor of government dictated “equal results.” After all, isn’t it more “fair.”
I can hardly wait for wages to be adjusted according to “comparable worth” formulas that the Democrats have tried to force through before. (Is it fair for Chipper Jones to make more than a teacher?)
Each according to his ability…. You get it.
- – -
Regarding Obama’s tax rates, especially with a Democratic Congress, the top rates can be applied to income much lower with a simple act–and you can could count on it him–along with new taxes we’ve never heard of.
When the income tax amendment was being considered around 1909, one Congressman said something to the effect, “Sure the tax rates might only be 2 or 3 percent, but the next thing you know they could be increased to 5 or 6 percent!” We should have listened.
- – -
I’m amazed at the gall and stupidity of liberals like reg, who call Eisenhower a socialist for having a 91% tax rate, when that rate was passed by the Democrats and was as high as 94% under Roosevelt. The maximum rate applied to incomes of $200,000 or more under Roosevel and Truman, but that was raised to $400,000 or more during Eisenhower’s administration. Income levels in the 1950′s were so much lower than today, that the maximum rates applied to very few people.
To Eisenhower’s credit and within the post-war economy of our nation, he did not fight for tax decreases until the federal budget was balanced. When the Democrats regained control of Congress, any hope of cutting taxes or balancing the budget was killed.
So, don’t give Eisenhower credit for that high tax rate. Be honest and state that it was the Democratic Congress and Democratic Presidents who put that and kept that so high. Otherwise, you’re being dishonest…which is not a first for you.
- – -
Now, let’s give President Reagan credit for indexing tax rates to inflation. Under the Democrats, high rates of inflation caused companies to give cost of liviing raises, but with no increase in purchasing power. These raises kept throwing “working people” into fixed higher tax brackets. It was great for Democrats…tax increases without voting for them, as long as they keep inflation raging!
- – -
Quit arguing about specifics and just boil down the Obama campaign to its essence. Obama is a big government socialist wanting a redistribution of the wealth. I don’t think that’s what Americans would want if they were educated enough to understand its long-term negative effects on our country and the opportunities it offers.
October 27th, 2008 at 9:49 am
Actually…after watching Cindy on the stump with Palin–and bobbing her head in agreement like a joke store Nazi-Frau-at Nuremburg “action figure” — the ER seems like a logical destination for her.
October 27th, 2008 at 9:56 am
“That famous IQ of yours must be as fictitious as Joe’s plan to buy a plumbing business.”
Nice
October 27th, 2008 at 10:09 am
Woody,
The debate over the income tax would be a lot easier if the military budget was a legitmate source of possibel cuts. If we were to, say, think of the military as primarily for the defense of the US states, we could the budget at least 50% and probably reduce the tax burden 10% or more on everyone. (I’m making these numbers up, but the principle stands).
Stop making the bloated military budgets totally sacrosanct, and stop calling anyone who wants to cut the budget a traitor, and you can get your tax reduction. In principle we should tax the people as lightly as possible. This is one way to make that happen right away, and without any reduction in our ability to defend ourselves.
October 27th, 2008 at 10:46 am
I am an American. I am a woman and I was born in a welfare hospital. I now am a “tenth man”. I am thrilled I reached a point where I can pay more taxes; I think I should. I am thrilled that I give my employees full medical coverage (even though the coverage is no real source of complete security)–it hits my bottom line but the reason I am the tenth man is because it is my job to figure out how to protect my vendors, shareholders, customers and employees. Simple concept. Quite doable.
October 27th, 2008 at 10:47 am
For all of these erstwhile “conservatives” trying to salvage their reputations by jumping on to a Libertarian taxes-are-theft-coattail, I wish they would also grab hold of a Libertarian’s position on the military. See the section Libertarian Party on Homeland Security.
October 27th, 2008 at 11:05 am
Woody – the only two President since FDR – who was dealing with the Great Depression followed by WWII- under whom the national debt has consistently increased as a % of GDP (which, like debt as a % of household income for a family is the only meaningful measure) were Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. And it increased drastically under both. If that’s “conservative” leadership, you’re welcome to it. As for Eisenhower, he didn’t propose crackpot tax cuts as some economic patent medicine but governed moderately and consistent with an essentially bi-partisan consensus on key issues in his day. JFK cut marginal tax rates a bit, within the bounds of common sense. Nixon declared “we are all Keynesians now!” It’s the Presidents lionized by contemporary conservative crackpots who have gotten us into the biggest piles of deep economic doo-doo. You can blame it on Congress – except that the GOP controlled Congress for most of the last decade and the shit has gotten far worse than ever. There’s no way to explain that other than failure of ideology and failure of leadership. Even Greenspan is starting to fess up…
You and Roper – and your whole goddamned wingnut movement are Dead Men Walking !!! But keep blowing it out of your ass… Some folks might find it amusing. And PLEEEZE get off your couch and work hard to convince the GOP to adopt your POV even more wholesale than it already has. I’ll pitch in with some $$ contributions if it will help your cause become the permanent electoral face of the GOP.
October 27th, 2008 at 11:08 am
listener, the so called “Taxes are theft” meme is not necessarily something conservatives lock onto in order to “salvage their reputation.” From whom I would ask? From the left? Nope, that is what the republicans do in their need to “be liked,” by the left. As far as your other so-called libertarian points and my response in bold:
October 27th, 2008 at 11:09 am
Incidentally, Fed debt as a % of GDP DECREASED under all Democratic Presidents since WWII, as well as under Eisenhower and Nixon, neither of whom were demagogic tax-cutters-uber-alles.
The proof is in empirically verifiable history – Woody and Roper are totally clueless. Ignorant and marginal, at best.
October 27th, 2008 at 11:09 am
Hmmm, bolding either didn’t work or worked too well.
October 27th, 2008 at 11:09 am
Mr McCain, Ms Palin, meet Mr Diebold, your new best friend.
October 27th, 2008 at 11:11 am
reg, talk about your strawman arguments. debt is a function of income vs. spending. cut spending and the debt will go away. You guys are famous for your prolifigate spending and the current crop of repubs aren’t any better. You commented once “Ike’s” 91% tax level, but he inhereted a 92% level when he took office in 53.
You keep bringing up my IQ… jealous?
October 27th, 2008 at 11:12 am
And all that believed were together, and had all things common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. (Acts 2:44-45)
…
Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. (Acts 4:34-35)
October 27th, 2008 at 11:30 am
Not, me, GM. I have nothing to offer on your over-bolded points. I’m not the one promoting a central thesis of the Libertarian Party. The conservatives trying to grab onto Libertarian positions, by advancing a Libertarian argument, can either strive for some degree of intellectual coherence, or not. The GOP is going down in this election, deservedly so, because it has lost its coherence. The only thing Conservatives in the GOP have left to promote is fear. And, fear doesn’t seem to be selling all that well.
October 27th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Meanwhile, Fox Noise give Bobblehead O’Reilly 4 years at ten mil per.
America can rejoice!
October 27th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
The GOP has always been a right-wing statist movement, which used the language of “anti-statism” to advance corporatism.
October 27th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
I hope the socialist Obama raises Bill O’Riley’s tax rate so high he decides to quit working so as not to redistribute his wealth. There is socialism we can all enjoy !!!
October 27th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
GMR – you disingenuous idiot. Address the debt ratio under “conservatives” vs. Dems and moderate GOPers. Don’t give me a kindergarten answer to evade the empirical, historical evidence on the crap merchants you’ve idolized and/or peddled here.
October 27th, 2008 at 12:57 pm
GMR – “Jealous?”
My God…he does have a sense of humor after all.
October 27th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Eisenhower’s reducing the top marginal “spread the wealth” tax rate from 92% to 91% represents a bold break with Truman’s doctrinaire Marxism.
October 27th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Off topic time out — Sen. Stevens guilty on all counts!
Gosh darn it!
October 27th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Roper – any word yet on where I might donate to help people like you, Woody and Palin take over the GOP in the post-November 4 power scramble ? I wish the nutbags all the luck in the world.
October 27th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
reg: Under the totalitarian, ultra-communistic, iron-fisted Eisenhower dictatorship marginal tax rates ran to 91%.
Which I proved wrong. In fact, the highest rate, which was carried over from the Democrats, already existed, was changed to apply to incomes of $400,000 rather than $200,000, which resulted in lower taxes.
If you google “Eisenhower 91% taxes,” then you see all sorts of left-wing nuts repeating false information as reg tries to suggest.
Soon, we miight expect a Congress with a worse approval rating than Bush working with Obama, who has no executive experience, to run taxes as high as possible and private incentives into the ground.
When similar forces ran people out of the central cities into the suburbs, we could get by. But, when Obama and his socialists take over the country and ruin it, then we’ll have reg and Marc Cooper to add to our list of sarcastic thank you’s.
BTW, Roosevelt put in tax withholding from paychecks during the war, but that was supposed to end when the war was over. Did the Democrats forget to take that off like they forgot to properly fund Social Security, as they promised?
October 27th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
“…to run taxes as high as possible and private incentives into the ground”.
Hyperbole alert!
October 27th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
reg, send your check to the RNC and then post a copy of the cancelled check. If you have the guts, make it for say $50,000.00 so you can really share the wealth.
October 27th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Soon, we miight expect a Congress with a worse approval rating than Bush working with Obama, who has no executive experience, to run taxes as high as possible and private incentives into the ground.
One kind of wonders why a numbers guy doesn’t dig any deeper into the numbers. Let me hazard a guess:
Always the facile one, Woody.
October 27th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
If I believe you guys, then Obama is the next Eisenhower, except Eisenhower served in the military and knew something about managing a big operation and was honest.
Forget who did what and quit trying to compare Obama to Republicans–even Lincoln. Pure and simple, Obama is an inexperienced Marxist intent on taking from productive people and giving to the unproductive.
Again, I think about Doctor Zhivago returning to his Moscow mansion during the revolution. When he steps through the door, he finds the house crammed with peasants, who now live there.
“Yes, this is a better arrangement, comrades,” Zhivago says sheepishly. “More just.”
Yeah, more just for people who had nothing to do with building it. Same for Obama’s spread the wealth goals.
- – -
Jim, I have had various clients alter their income levels and the timing of gains simply because of ridiculously high tax rates in the past and the impending doom of Obama.
October 27th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Randy, you are so pitiful in trying to make points.
CONGRESS – Job Rating
Survey Dates / Approve / Disapprove / Unsure
CBS/New York Times
10/19-22/08 17 / 70 / 13
FOX/Opinion Dynamics RV
10/20-21/08 19 / 72 / 9
NBC/Wall Street Journal RV
10/17-20/08 12 / 7 / 9
October 27th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
That last disapproval rate should be 79%.
It would be worse if the press ever pounded on Democratic problems such as Tim Mahoney the way that they covered Republicans.
October 27th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Woody: When similar forces ran people out of the central cities into the suburbs, we could get by. But, when Obama and his socialists take over the country and ruin it, then we’ll have reg and Marc Cooper to add to our list of sarcastic thank you’s.
Obama: “I’m not interested in the suburbs. The suburbs bore me.”
I pretty much nailed that one.
October 27th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
I’ve vowed to keep my interactions with Woody to a minimum. But we are about to elect a president who has been described as potentially transformational. We’re about to elect someone who electrifies huge swaths of previously unplugged parts of the public. We’re about to elect a guy who has demonstrated exceptional intelligence and calm, thoughtful judgement. We’re about to elect a guy who has some intangible element that anyone with decent antennae can sense transcends the typical pols who run for office.
Yet, in the face of all of this all Woody has on offer are cheap smears (he’s a liar!) and more cheap smears (he’s a Marxist!). I feel bad for you, actually. It’s a bit sad that you can’t either see the possibilties ahead of us, or at least have an honorable disagreement over policy.
But, who cares. I intend to enjoy this, and not merely becasue of the glee of seeing so much small-minded posturing go down to defeat, but because this country needs a serious resetting of it’s priorities if we intend to thrive, and no one in the Republican party is currently capable of understanding this, or so it seems.
So, you’ll attempt to carry on the way you did against Clinton, only this time I expect it to be on steroids. But if Obama realizes have of the potential he seems capable of, you’re gonna be in for some very rude pushback.
October 27th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Reg, reg, reg et al
why do you dignify woody with facts and debate. He’s like the Manchurian Candidate programmed to shout “Marxist” whenever the topic of conversation turns to the contemplation of a brown faced man for president.
His mother calls him once a day to remind him…
He’s been “re educated” from being a one man lynching party to just shrieking obscenities in the guise of “argument”.
You forget this is the guy who posts vile racist links. C’mon…and then you are going to have a serious debate with him?
October 27th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
RNC’s the best you’ve got? C’mon – don’t you crazies have your own movement ? I don’t want to just donate to the Palin clothes fund….
October 27th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
You’ve proved nothing wrong about tax rates under Eisenhower being higher than under Obama’s plan. You’re quibbling when the point is that anyone who claims progressive taxation is “socialist” is a nutcase not worth the time of day.
We’re just sticking the forks in you, Woody – ‘cuz you’re done. Dead Man Walking….
October 27th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Marc. Do I look all rancid and clotted? You look at me, Marc. Eh? Look, eh? And I drink a lot of water, you know. I’m what you might call a water man, Marc – that’s what I am. And I can swear to you, my boy, swear to you, that there’s nothing wrong with my bodily fluids. Not a thing, Marc.
October 27th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
GM, do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why, there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk… ice cream. Ice cream, GM, children’s ice cream.
October 27th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Marc. Nineteen hundred and forty-six. Nineteen forty-six, Marc. How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh? It’s incredibly obvious, isn’t it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That’s the way your hard-core Commie works.
October 27th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
Yes, GM, a uh, a profound sense of fatigue… a feeling of emptiness followed. Luckily I… I was able to interpret these feelings correctly. Loss of essence.
October 27th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
I can assure you it has not recurred, Woody. Women uh… women sense my power and they seek the life essence. I, uh… I do not avoid women, Woody. But I… I do deny them my essence.
October 27th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.
October 27th, 2008 at 4:11 pm
And, another freak show parade: http://tinyurl.com/5qurqr
October 27th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Dan O, it’s not smearing someone by applying the appropriate label. Obama is a Marxist. Do I need to continue providing examples to illustrate that? At what point will you admit it? It’s not like I’m calling him a Muslim.
Some things that you left off when you were repeating “we’re about to elect a guy who (fill in the blank)” are these:
• You’re about to elect a guy who lacks experience and wisdom.
• You’re about to elect a guy uses the guns of government to take money from some people to hand it out to others.
• You’re about to elect a guy who is terribly naive and idealistic about international politics and unprepared, just like JFK. He will be tested early.
• You’re about to elect a guy who is committed to cutting our military and military research, setting us up to be unable to defend our interests and requiring a future, time consuming rebuilding when that military is needed.
• You’re about to elect a guy who does not consider the war on terror to be a priority.
• You’re about to elect a guy who will pull U.S. forces from their mission before it is finished and label them losers.
• You’re about to elect a guy who cannot possibly fund his wars on poverty, education, global warming, capitalism, health care, etc. without major tax increases–for everyone.
• You’re about to elect a guy who would keep our nation dependent upon foreign oil because he opposes new domestic drilling and opposes nuclear energy.
• You’re about to elect a guy who would appoint Supreme Court justices unwilling to interpret our Constitution by intent and anxious to substitute their own left-wing views as interpretations.
• You’re about to elect a guy who uses threats and personal destruction to deal with critics–both political and the ordinary Joe’s.
• You’re about to elect a guy who has taken part in and trained people in the art of vote fraud.
• You’re about to elect a guy who has refused to salute our flag.
• You’re about to elect a guy who will divide this nation.
• You’re about to elect about the worse type of President to maintain the U.S. as a powerful world leader.
Thanks for making our enemies so happy and making this country something that clearer and brighter minds tried to save.
October 27th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
To clear up the last sentence: Thanks for making our enemies so happy and making this country something that clearer and brighter minds tried to protect us from becoming.
October 27th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Also Woody.
I have here in my hand a list of two hundred and five people that were known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping the policy of the State Department.
They are all Democrats of course.
McCain is Americanism with its sleeves rolled.
October 27th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
Woody.
Provide an example of what Obama proposes. Cite a text by Marx or by a major Marxist theorist that even appears to reccomend such a thing.
I say this knowing that it is disgusting when one has to deny beign a Muslim or a Marxist, but also knowing full well that Obama, a cautious middle-of-the-roader.
October 27th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
Today we are engaged in a final, all-out battle between communistic atheism and Christianity. The modern champions of communism have selected this as the time, and ladies and gentlemen, the chips are down — they are truly down.
October 27th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
As you know, very recently Obama proclaimed his loyalty to a man guilty of what has always been considered as the most abominable of all crimes — being a traitor to the people who gave him a position of great trust — high treason. … He has lighted the spark which is resulting in a moral uprising and will end only when the whole sorry mess of twisted, warped thinkers are swept from the national scene so that we may have a new birth of honesty and decency in government.
October 27th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
A better picture for Marc’s post
Oh, jc, Obama is not a middle-of-the-roader, unless you consider voting “present” rather than taking a position as being neutral. Please don’t waste my time by asking for evidence of Obama’s Marxist influences and positions. Don’t be so desperate to argue over the obvious.
October 27th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.
http://www.miracosta.edu/home/gfloren/ripper_anim.gif
October 27th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Sergio
Go ahead and joke about it. Me and Woody know better. YES it is true. Marxism uses fluoride as key tool to weaken America. Communists!
Obama worked to provide toothpaste to poor kids. Why? So he could poison them and then brainwash them and poof! They are part of the communist cause.
Marxism will never die Jcummings. They are everywhere, in every corner of the earth. Lingering. Waiting for an opening. Waiting to take power!
October 27th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Woody…
What have you read by Marx?
October 27th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
LOL@Woody’s “you’re about to elect a guy who” list. Woody, are you for real, or are you a plant by the Democratic Party? You are giving Colbert a run for his money, although in your case I cannot tell if your comedy is intentional or unintentional….
October 27th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Five years ago, few people who were thoroughly familiar with the main divisions of Communist strategy saw any chance of keeping the Negro Revolutionary Movement (Obama) from reaching decisive proportions. It was to supply the flaming front to the whole ‘proletarian revolution,’ as planned by Bill Clinton and his stooge, Marc Cooper
October 27th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
DanO, regarding your freak show…
A Halloween decoration showing a mannequin dressed as vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin hanging by a noose from the roof of a West Hollywood home is drawing giggles from some passers-by and gasps of outrage from others. Chad Michael Morisette, who lives in the house,… “it should be seen as art….”
Also displayed at the West Hollywood home was a mannequin of John McCain emerging from flames.
October 27th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
As Westbrook Pegler said“[It is] clearly the bounden duty of all intelligent Americans to proclaim and practice bigotry.”
October 27th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
You guys sure are caviler over a political movement that is responsible for the tortures, starvation, and murders of millions of innocent people.
October 27th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Certifiably insane….go crawl back in your cave.
October 27th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
There is some news about results of Americans being fed up with liberal newspapers:
Newsroom staffing at the Los Angeles Times is shrinking again. …The Times, which is owned by Chicago-based Tribune Co., reduced its overall staff by 250 people last summer, including 150 from the newsroom.
Marc needs to tell his journalism students that they should do about an about face if they want to survive.
October 27th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
reg, I don’t mind someone calling me insane, but you…someone who is as psycho as they get? Well, go to the mailbox and wait for your check from Obama. How does it feel to sell your vote?
October 27th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
I guess I’ve learned my lesson….again.
October 27th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
That’s all the thanks that I get for trying to have a discussion with Dan O.
October 27th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Go fuck yourself Woody. You’re a despicable little weasel literally foaming at the mouth with false, foolish and malicious allegations. But more to the point, in the political scheme of things, garbage like you doesn’t much matter any more. Dead Man Walking.
Now – here’s a link to none other than Christopher Hitchens following up very well on Palin’s KnowNothingIsm. The woman is an embarrassment, and I hope she becomes the “future” of the GOP. They deserve to sink with this utterly ignorant drivel-spouting Half-Baked Miss Alaska.
In a gesture of tolerance and mutually shared concern that we continue to live in a post-Enlightenment cultural context, I’ll hoist one for Hitchens tonight. the link is below
http://www.slate.com/id/2203120/
October 27th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
I’m starting to realize that Woody types take themselves seriously. Some of them have recently been apprehended.
October 27th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
Regarding the selling of fear, see here.
Declined. No sale.
Needs better marketing.
October 27th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
Obama and the LA Times are hoping that time will expire before they are penalized for hiding a tape of Obama praising PLO terrorist spokesman Khalid. Why is the Times refusing to release the tape?
Meanwhile, subscriptions at the LA Times continue to drop and staffers continue to lose jobs as people lose confidence in what the paper reports. Maybe Marc can let his class laugh at what happens to left-wing journalists who “know better” than their customers.
The L.A. Times Suppresses Obama’s Khalidi Bash Tape
LA Times: Allies of Palestinians see a friend in Barack Obama
There is a lot to know about Obama that the press won’t investigate or it hides. Hillary Clinton was right when she said that Obama had not been adequately vetted. I know that liberals are just hoping for the election to take place before the public realizes just who Obama really is.
As the Democrats always say, “Party before country.”
October 27th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Rashid Khalidi is a prominent liberal international relations scholar, and a supporter of the US backed Palestinian authority.
October 27th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
I’m not trying to convince you guys to come clean. I’m just letting you know that not everyone is fooled by Obama or your twisted tales.
October 27th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
…and Khalidi worked for Yasser Arafat when the PLO was at its terroristic worst…or, as liberals say, he is a respected scholar.
Obama chooses his friends carefully, bad ones, but won’t be honest with voters about his relationships with them and his intentions for the U.S.
October 27th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
I should say that Khalidi is not an uncritical supporter of the Palestinian authority as anyone who read his brilliant piece in the nation a couple months ago would know, but Cummings is right to say that he is hardlyy a radical..not like this matters to Woody and GM Roper. No for them the very fact that he is Palestinian is itself a crime.
October 27th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
The voters don’t care. And Guantanamo stays open for you.
October 27th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
Ahmed I stand corrected.
October 27th, 2008 at 7:05 pm
You’re not entirely wrong as Khalidi was heavily involved in the PA as a negoatiotor I think around Oslo and it tends to show in some of his work. Here’s the Nation piece, I recommend Woody at least bother to read it , since he has mentioned Khalidi now several times on his blog and here, as a way of smearing Obama. If you’re going to keep repeating his name, you should at least be familiar with him.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080526/khalidi
October 27th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
I just read it. Its a good piece – I have no quarrel with it whatsoever, and in fact it perfectly articulates my own view.
October 27th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
Ahmed: …for (Woody & G.M.) the very fact that he is Palestinian is itself a crime
Ahmed, you know better than that. Your statement is not true.
My comments about Obama, however, are true.
Okay, just to let you know how macho that I am, the reason some of you want to believe, I’m cutting off further discussion to watch Monday Night Football and, especially, the World Series, which is being played in heavy rain, which makes it interesting.
I hope, I REALLY hope, that there are similar heavy rains on election day. Everyone knows that blacks, college students, and people who don’t have much commitment generally don’t turn out to vote when the weather is bad.
I’ll be cloud seeding the nation the first week of November.
October 27th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
By the way Woody, if anything I have a far greater respect for Obama because he once shared a dinner table with Edward Said, is a friend of Khalidi’s, said that “no one suffers more than the Palestians” when speaking about the occupation and is a fan of Reinhold Niebuhr. Unfortunately, I think that the evidence suggests that none of these experiences will have much of an effect on an Obama presidency
October 27th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Randy, you are so pitiful in trying to make points.
Woody,
The Senate is nearly half Republican and the House is 46% Republican. There was nothing factually wrong with the information I linked to.
Please, by all means link to something that refutes the following:
October 27th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Wow, cummings what a change of heart, less than an hour ago, according to you, Khalidi was nothing more than a supporter of CIA policy in Palestine.
October 27th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Correct, Ahmed. Edward Said is truly missed.
AIPAC and the nuclear armed Israeli war state and its End of Days supporters will have plenty of voice in an Obama administration.
October 27th, 2008 at 7:25 pm
No. I was genuinely mistaken..
October 27th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
It happens sometimes. I guess I’ve read a lot of ultra-left critiques of Khalidi without making up my own mind.
October 27th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
The statement is categorically true Woody. Palestinian is to you a dirty word, so you smear Obama with an identity, which you have already criminalised. You’re a jerk. When you and Roper say that Obama is allied with a Palestinian or that he is “pro muslim”, or a black seperatist or other crap you’re revealing really nothing about Obama, as what you’re saying is bullshit, but instead illuminating a perverse and dark pathology haboured by you, Roper and others, infused with ignorance, bitterness, hatred and contempt. The more I read from you and Roper (dumb and dumber) the more I’m convinced that it absolutely vital for your side to suffer devastating political defeat
October 27th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
>Everyone knows that blacks, college students, and
>people who don’t have much commitment generally
>don’t turn out to vote when the weather is bad.
racist + 1, if we’re still counting.
October 27th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
Blacks and college students are going to shove something very painful up your soft white ass on election day, Woody. I hope I get to hear your scream.
Woody is a Dead Man Walking….
October 27th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
The Presidential race is so tight in Montana – a state that Bush won by 20 points in ’04 – that the RNC is forced to shift ad buys into this deep “red” turf. Incredible. Let’s have a shout-out (“Yeeehaaaah!”) for Howard Dean for having the foresight to move the Dems toward a 50-state strategy. And to Obama and David Axelrod for having the guts to pick up that ball and run with it. Brilliant.
October 27th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
One Jewish leader said he viewed Obama’s outreach to Palestinian activists, such as Said, in the light of his relationship to Wright.
“In the context of spending 20 years in a church where now it is clear the anti-Israel rhetoric was there, was repeated, . . . that’s what makes his presence at an Arab American event with a Said a greater concern,” said Abraham H. Foxman, national director for the Anti-Defamation League.
This is simply more evidence that the ADL, an organisation which spied on pro ANC solidarity groups, is far more concerned with shielding Israel any crtique of its brutal occupation than combatting anti semitism, the latter being a just struggle. This is the same ADL which refuses to condemn far right Israeli political parties which call for the mass expulsion of Palestinians for the West Bank and Gaza. It’s good to see Foxman outing himself by spewing this anti arab trash
October 27th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
“Correct, Ahmed”
Thanks, Sergio, holler atcha boy
October 27th, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Summation: Andrew Sullivan
October 27th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
“I think that the evidence suggests that none of these experiences will have much of an effect on an Obama presidency”
I’m not one who is even hoping, much less betting, that Obama will govern from the perspective of the most “leftwing” version of his persona one could mentally – or mythically – construct. But I think it’s presumptuous – maybe even a bit cynical – to assume that the varied life and intellectual experiences that make Obama an interesting and attractive figure will have no significant effect on his Presidency. Or that he won’t do some things – maybe not the things we would anticipate – quite differently than a more conventional liberal Democrat with a longer history in the Beltway – like Hillary Clinton.
I know Obama’s going to be measured – and I want him to be – but he’s already a more overtly transformational figure with a more progressive agenda than FDR was in 1932, and the fact that his campaign was “movement” and grassroots is likely to have an interesting impact on his style of governance. If he’s smart, post-election (and he’s pretty obviously smart) the Obama team’s strategy re: his “base” will be to unleash energy at the grassroots that Obama will not simply capitulate to, but that can help shift the “center” so that his centrism is consistently more progressive than, say, Clinton’s triangulations. He’ll need to govern from a perceived “center” but that doesn’t mean he can’t re-define what constitutes “the center” in the next era.
If moderate liberalism, competently managed by a figure with great communication skills, becomes “conventional wisdom” and empirically generates a perceived measure of success – certainly relative to what’s gone before -a more agressive liberal critique also gains greater credibility. On foreign policy, I believe he’s shown that his instincts are far superior to most of the Democratic pack, speeches at AIPAC and other campaign artifacts notwithstanding. He’ll do a better job of protecting US interests without overreach. These are my best hopes. I think they’re realistic. And I’ll opt for a fairly modest realism because I’d rather be pleasantly surprised than deeply disappointed.
October 27th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
How these gibbering numbskulls came to dominate Washington
The degradation of intelligence and learning in American politics results from a series of interlocking tragedies
Comments (43)
* George Monbiot
*
o George Monbiot
o The Guardian,
o Tuesday October 28 2008
o Article history
How was it allowed to happen? How did politics in the US come to be dominated by people who make a virtue out of ignorance? Was it charity that has permitted mankind’s closest living relative to spend two terms as president? How did Sarah Palin, Dan Quayle and other such gibbering numbskulls get to where they are? How could Republican rallies in 2008 be drowned out by screaming ignoramuses insisting that Barack Obama was a Muslim and a terrorist?
Like most people on my side of the Atlantic, I have for many years been mystified by American politics. The US has the world’s best universities and attracts the world’s finest minds. It dominates discoveries in science and medicine. Its wealth and power depend on the application of knowledge. Yet, uniquely among the developed nations (with the possible exception of Australia), learning is a grave political disadvantage.
There have been exceptions over the past century – Franklin Roosevelt, JF Kennedy and Bill Clinton tempered their intellectualism with the common touch and survived – but Adlai Stevenson, Al Gore and John Kerry were successfully tarred by their opponents as members of a cerebral elite (as if this were not a qualification for the presidency). Perhaps the defining moment in the collapse of intelligent politics was Ronald Reagan’s response to Jimmy Carter during the 1980 presidential debate. Carter – stumbling a little, using long words – carefully enumerated the benefits of national health insurance. Reagan smiled and said: “There you go again.” His own health programme would have appalled most Americans, had he explained it as carefully as Carter had done, but he had found a formula for avoiding tough political issues and making his opponents look like wonks.
It wasn’t always like this. The founding fathers of the republic – Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, John Adams, Alexander Hamilton and others – were among the greatest thinkers of their age. They felt no need to make a secret of it. How did the project they launched degenerate into George W Bush and Sarah Palin?
On one level, this is easy to answer. Ignorant politicians are elected by ignorant people. US education, like the US health system, is notorious for its failures. In the most powerful nation on earth, one adult in five believes the sun revolves round the earth; only 26% accept that evolution takes place by means of natural selection; two-thirds of young adults are unable to find Iraq on a map; two-thirds of US voters cannot name the three branches of government; the maths skills of 15-year-olds in the US are ranked 24th out of the 29 countries of the OECD. But this merely extends the mystery: how did so many US citizens become so stupid, and so suspicious of intelligence? Susan Jacoby’s book The Age of American Unreason provides the fullest explanation I have read so far. She shows that the degradation of US politics results from a series of interlocking tragedies.
One theme is both familiar and clear: religion – in particular fundamentalist religion – makes you stupid. The US is the only rich country in which Christian fundamentalism is vast and growing.
Jacoby shows that there was once a certain logic to its anti-rationalism. During the first few decades after the publication of The Origin of Species, for instance, Americans had good reason to reject the theory of natural selection and to treat public intellectuals with suspicion. From the beginning, Darwin’s theory was mixed up in the US with the brutal philosophy – now known as social Darwinism – of the British writer Herbert Spencer. Spencer’s doctrine, promoted in the popular press with the help of funding from Andrew Carnegie, John D Rockefeller and Thomas Edison, suggested that millionaires stood at the top of a scala natura established by evolution. By preventing unfit people being weeded out, government intervention weakened the nation. Gross economic inequalities were both justifiable and necessary.
Darwinism, in other words, became indistinguishable from the most bestial form of laissez-faire economics. Many Christians responded with revulsion. It is profoundly ironic that the doctrine rejected a century ago by such prominent fundamentalists as William Jennings Bryan is now central to the economic thinking of the Christian right. Modern fundamentalists reject the science of Darwinian evolution and accept the pseudoscience of social Darwinism.
But there were other, more powerful, reasons for the intellectual isolation of the fundamentalists. The US is peculiar in devolving the control of education to local authorities. Teaching in the southern states was dominated by the views of an ignorant aristocracy of planters, and a great educational gulf opened up. “In the south”, Jacoby writes, “what can only be described as an intellectual blockade was imposed in order to keep out any ideas that might threaten the social order.”
The Southern Baptist Convention, now the biggest denomination in the US, was to slavery and segregation what the Dutch Reformed Church was to apartheid in South Africa. It has done more than any other force to keep the south stupid. In the 1960s it tried to stave off desegregation by establishing a system of private Christian schools and universities. A student can now progress from kindergarten to a higher degree without any exposure to secular teaching. Southern Baptist beliefs pass intact through the public school system as well. A survey by researchers at the University of Texas in 1998 found that one in four of the state’s state school biology teachers believed humans and dinosaurs lived on earth at the same time.
This tragedy has been assisted by the American fetishisation of self-education. Though he greatly regretted his lack of formal teaching, Abraham Lincoln’s career is repeatedly cited as evidence that good education, provided by the state, is unnecessary: all that is required to succeed is determination and rugged individualism. This might have served people well when genuine self-education movements, like the one built around the Little Blue Books in the first half of the 20th century, were in vogue. In the age of infotainment, it is a recipe for confusion.
Besides fundamentalist religion, perhaps the most potent reason intellectuals struggle in elections is that intellectualism has been equated with subversion. The brief flirtation of some thinkers with communism a long time ago has been used to create an impression in the public mind that all intellectuals are communists. Almost every day men such as Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly rage against the “liberal elites” destroying America.
The spectre of pointy-headed alien subversives was crucial to the election of Reagan and Bush. A genuine intellectual elite – like the neocons (some of them former communists) surrounding Bush – has managed to pitch the political conflict as a battle between ordinary Americans and an over-educated pinko establishment. Any attempt to challenge the ideas of the rightwing elite has been successfully branded as elitism.
Obama has a lot to offer the US, but none of this will stop if he wins. Until the great failures of the US education system are reversed or religious fundamentalism withers, there will be political opportunities for people, like Bush and Palin, who flaunt their ignorance.
monbiot.com
* Print thisPrintable version
* Send to a friendSend to a friend
* Share thisShare
* Clip thisClip
* Contact usContact us
* larger | smaller
Email
Close
Recipient’s email address
Your name
Add a note (optional)
Your IP address will be logged
Share
Close
* Digg
* reddit
* Google Bookmarks
* Yahoo! My Web
* del.icio.us
* StumbleUpon
* Newsvine
* livejournal
* Facebook
* BlinkList
Contact us
Close
* Report errors or inaccuracies: reader@guardian.co.uk
* Letters for publication should be sent to: letters@guardian.co.uk
* If you need help using the site: userhelp@guardian.co.uk
* Call the main Guardian and Observer switchboard:
+44 (0)20 7278 2332
*
o Advertising guide
o License/buy our content
World news
* US elections 2008 ·
* United States ·
* Barack Obama ·
* John McCain
More comment
*
More on this story
*
Obama: We’re one week from change
*
Democrats aim at fail-safe Senate majority
*
McCain’s last stand in ‘must-win’ states
*
Michael Tomasky: McCain’s attacks won’t help
*
Video: Obama revelations – the antichrist?
*
Campaign diary: Marx attacks
*
Video Video: ‘Waaaasup’ with Barack Obama?
*
Full US elections coverage
Related
Oct 13 2008
US election: Hofstra University prepares for final presidential debate between Barack Obama and John McCain
Oct 6 2008
Michael Tomasky: Whisper it: this election will be decided on the issues
Sep 20 2008
Obama attacks McCain’s economic philosophy
Sep 10 2008
Barack Obama is just the latest politician to use the expression ‘lipstick on a pig’ – John McCain has as well
* Print thisPrintable version
* Send to a friendSend to a friend
* Share thisShare
* Clip thisClip
* Contact usContact us
* Article historyArticle history
Email
Close
Recipient’s email address
Your name
Add a note (optional)
Your IP address will be logged
Share
Close
* Digg
* reddit
* Google Bookmarks
* Yahoo! My Web
* del.icio.us
* StumbleUpon
* Newsvine
* livejournal
* Facebook
* BlinkList
Contact us
Close
* Report errors or inaccuracies: reader@guardian.co.uk
October 27th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
ooops sorry about all the gibber at the end. maybe you can edit it out, marc?
October 27th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
Reg, I agree that Obama is far more progressive than FDR was in 1932. Compare Roosevelt and Hoover in 1932, and you will find even less policy differences in that year than what exists now in 2008 between Obama and McCain. However, FDR became more progressive after the 1932 election for two reasons, the second of which was the consequence of the first: (1) the economy became horribly bad by the day in exponential measurement, and (2) the country demanded (angrily) more of FDR than he had promised on the campaign stump in 1932. I hate to say this, but I am not sure that I want (1) (and by default, #2) to occur…I have heard some real horror stories about the Depression era from relatives….
October 27th, 2008 at 9:37 pm
“I hope, I REALLY hope, that there are similar heavy rains on election day. Everyone knows that blacks, college students, and people who don’t have much commitment generally don’t turn out to vote when the weather is bad. ”
More racist trash coming from Woody. What makes this comment is especially brutal is the fact that movment for civil rights and racial equality have historically enlarged the franchise for more and more Americans; although I woudn’t be surpirsed to hear that Woody supports returning to the days when only white property owning men could vote… the people he imagines have real “commitment”. On this topic, Eric Forner has a great peice over at the Nation, arguing that without the incredible commitment and courage of reconstruction ere black politicians we would not have an Obama running for president.
October 27th, 2008 at 10:04 pm
“I hope, I REALLY hope, that there are similar heavy rains on election day. Everyone knows that blacks, college students, and people who don’t have much commitment generally don’t turn out to vote when the weather is bad.”
This goes over the line. References to Neil Boortz, Rush Limbaugh, and other flunkies make this blog look bad enough, but overt racism of this degree from Woody makes me more contentious toward Marc Cooper for allowing him to blog his racism here in the first place. Woody should be banned from this site. Katha P. did this on her Nation blog, you can do it here as well, Marc.
October 27th, 2008 at 10:06 pm
Katha banned others like Woody (not Woody himself), is what I am saying.
October 27th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
GM Roper:
Yesterday on my way to lunch at Doe’s, I passed one of the homeless guys in that area, with a sign that read “*Vote *Obama*, I need the money.” *Once inside Doe’s my waiter had on a “Obama 08? tee shirt.
I dropped that bullshit in a Google Search. Its in a slew of right wing blogs dating from at least 3 days from before GM posted it here.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Yesterday+on+my+way+to+lunch+at+Doe%E2%80%99s%2C+I+passed+one+of+the+homeless+guys+in+that+area%2C+with+a+sign+that+read+%E2%80%9C*Vote+*Obama*%2C+I+need+the+money.%E2%80%9D+*Once+inside+Doe%E2%80%99s+my+waiter+had+on+a+%E2%80%9CObama+08%E2%80%B3+tee+shirt.&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&oq=
October 27th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
The bitterness you find in GM and Woody should be cherished. It is white man’s bitterness.
They feel that they are losing their grip on things and have to resort to lies and slander (like McCain) in order to sleep at night.
Stop paying attention to them for gods sake.
October 28th, 2008 at 12:10 am
Off topic but Frank Rich has a very good article in Sunday’s Times. Here’s the conclusion, a nice antidote to GM and Woody’s race baiting nastiness
“Nor is America’s remaining racism all that it once was, or that the McCain camp has been hoping for it to be. There are even “racists for Obama,” as Politico labels the phenomenon: White Americans whose distrust of black people in general crumbles when they actually get to know specific black people, including a presidential candidate who extends a genuine helping hand in a time of national crisis.
The original “racist for Obama,” after all, was none other than Obama’s own white, Kansas-raised grandmother, the gravely ill Madelyn Dunham, whom he visited in Hawaii on Friday. In “Dreams From My Father,” Obama wrote of how shaken he was when he learned of her overwhelming fear of black men on the street. But he weighed that reality against his unshakeable love for her and hers for him, and he got past it.
When Obama cited her in his speech on race last spring, the right immediately accused him of “throwing his grandmother under the bus.” But Obama’s critics were merely projecting their own racial hang-ups. He still loves his grandmother. He was merely speaking candidly and generously — like an adult — about the strange, complex and ever-changing racial dynamics of America. He hit a chord because many of us have had white relatives of our own like his, and we, too, see them in full and often love them anyway.
Such human nuances are lost on conservative warriors of the Allen-McCain-Palin ilk. They see all Americans as only white or black, as either us or them. The dirty little secret of such divisive politicians has always been that their rage toward the Others is exceeded only by their cynical conviction that Real Americans are a benighted bunch of easily manipulated bigots. This seems to be the election year when voters in most of our myriad Americas are figuring that out.”
October 28th, 2008 at 5:13 am
what reg said: “The only good thing about this is that I’m convinced that the aftershock of this election will send the GOP into circular firing squad mode. The more casualties the better.”
It’s even more beautiful than that, in blogland, they can argue all day that they’re immune to bullets, can hide in the corners of a circle and only eight rifles in a firing squad means a 1 in 5,000 chance of dying, and if you don’t believe them, ask Sean Hannity…
October 28th, 2008 at 6:20 am
Ahmed: Palestinian is to you a dirty word.
Ahmed, your statement would only be true if ‘Palestinian” and the terroristic, murdering PLO under Arafat mean one and the same. I don’t think so, but correct me if you believe that all Palestiinians want to kill Jews.
- – -
Hey, this headline had me laughing….
Obama Campaign Calls on Americans to Not Work on Election Day
As this doesn’t affect his own voters, why does Obama want to help those for McCain?
October 28th, 2008 at 6:31 am
reg: Blacks and college students are going to shove something very painful up your soft white ass on election day, Woody. I hope I get to hear your scream.
So, this campaign is all about race, after all. At least you admit it. But, I didn’t know that you were visualizing my backside. Do you prefer whites males over blacks?
I guess you discussed your statement with your wife, who said that black people NEVER tell the truth to whites. Is she a racist?
- – -
Obama is going to double my tax business as people look for ways to beat his “share the wealth” tax system. The Obama scare has already started.
Wayne Huizenga wants to sell Dolphins
before Barack Obama raises tax
Uh, oh. Now the Obama campaign will investigate Wayne Huizenga and try to destroy him.
October 28th, 2008 at 7:48 am
“I hope, I REALLY hope, that there are similar heavy rains on election day.”
I’m hoping for impenetrable darkness and boils and hail storms, for the first born of every Republican household to be spirited away to Alaska where they will be put under the watchful eye of the Alaska Independence Party until such time as the rest of our beleaguered nation is raptured to the north where God’s pipeline will be laid.
October 28th, 2008 at 8:40 am
While on the subject of banning, I appear to have a hard time posting as “white cornerback.” I must have said something offensive, more offensive than Reg’s obnoxious taunt prior to the Pennsylvania primary that “those angry, bitter whites are going to shove something very painful up your soft black ass on election day…I hope I get to hear you scream”
Woody — you seem more concerned about protecting rich people who don’t want to pay their taxes than with the social and cultural dissolution of Western Civilization.
Finally, Anna quotes someone named moonbat saying “Religion makes you stupid”?
Of course, he is talking about a certain type of Christianity, the Christianity of Sarah Palin. Not the Christianity of Jeremiah Wright, Rev. Phleger, or this idiot, who wants to institute Sharia law in England:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7232661.stm
October 28th, 2008 at 9:20 am
So, Obama can’t close the deal.
He and Biden are campaigning like mad in these last days, while you guys are pretending that it’s over. Obama couldn’t close the deal on Hillary Clinton and had to rely on delegates from months earlier, but, in this case, all the votes are cast on one day.
You should be worried.
- – -
WC, no, I would say that I’m concerned with fairness and maintaing a free, minimal government system. It’s not the rich that I want to protect. You see, itt doesn’t take much to reduce the income levels subject to Obama’s maximum tax rate, and you and others will be there as Obama grows government strength in increments.
October 28th, 2008 at 9:29 am
You’ve created a little hell for yourself with your hysteria, Woody, and you’re now about to live in it. It’s not about race, it’s about ignorance. Insofar as your own fantastical projections – like those racist attacks on black people or the ignorant attack on college students – related to this election have any minor significance, they’re all about you. You’re a dinosaur and we’re saying goodbye to you. You’re no longer a viable species… blatantly racist, deliberately dishonest and remarkably narcissistic with your steady stream of horseshit. The country doesn’t have time for clowns like you. Continue in 24/7 shrill mode on November and experience the pain of your own insanity. The truth is, nobody could shove anything up your ass because it would be blocked by your head.
It’s just a damned shame that every thread here gets turned into a dialog with a dickhead who doesn’t deserve the time of day. I’ve been more guilty than most, but this has just gotten boring. This jerk has nothing to say. As the election has neared the sheer craziness and dishonesty of this UberCracker becomes more and more transparent. Occasionally we’ve had some interesting discussions start and the Woody performs his deliberate ritual outrage so that – like a nasty little child – all attention turns to him. He deserves to be consigned to oblvion one way or another because he has absolutely nothing to offer. He obviously loves poking people in the eye. Just an unpleasant little man. I think “little man” probably sums up the root of his attention-getting antics. Classic minor pathology that no doubt accounts for this weasel digging himself his particularly nasty hole from which he shouts and yells at the world.
October 28th, 2008 at 9:48 am
PEW:
Barack Obama leads John McCain by a 52% to 36% margin in Pew’s latest nationwide survey of 1,325 registered voters. This is the fourth consecutive survey that has found support for the Republican candidate edging down. In contrast, since early October weekly Pew surveys have shown about the same number of respondents saying they back Obama. When the sample is narrowed to those most likely to vote, Obama leads by 53% to 38%.
A breakdown of voting intentions by demographic groups shows that since mid- September, McCain’s support has declined significantly across most voting blocs. Currently, McCain holds a statistically significant advantage only among white evangelical Protestants (aside from Republicans). In addition, Obama runs nearly even with McCain in the so-called red states, all of which George W. Bush won in 2004.
Just as ominous for the Republican candidate, Obama holds a 53% to 34% lead among the sizable minority of voters (15%) who say they have already voted. Among those who plan to vote early but have not yet voted (16% of voters), 56% support Obama, while 37% support McCain.
While Obama’s support levels have not increased much in recent weeks, a growing percentage of his backers now say they support him strongly. Currently, 74% of Obama voters say they support him strongly, up from 65% in mid-September.
October 28th, 2008 at 9:50 am
OK, reg, so let’s ignore him. I’m in. Anyone else?
I held out hope for a long time that he could be a reasonable conversant, but that’s just not true. So forget him. Let’s stop responding until he can act like an adult, which will be…
October 28th, 2008 at 9:52 am
reg, does it bother you that Obama’s ACORN has had at least 230 tax liens totaling more than $3.7 million filed against it, but still receives grants paid with tax money from others?
The liens filed against ACORN and their associated groups come from the Internal Revenue Service and government officials in fifteen different states. The IRS filed a lien on ACORN for $306,407 on March 6, 2008. A different lien was filed for $547,312 against ACORN on March 10, 2008 and another was filed on March 14 for $132,997.
I didn’t think so.
But, it’s you guys who will be left squirming after taxpayers find ways around the new money grab or give up working to join the ranks of the takers rather than the taken.
October 28th, 2008 at 10:06 am
Want a connection with Obama and Marxists?
“It’s not who votes that counts, it’s who counts the votes.” – Joseph Stalin
Hillary Backers Decry Massive Obama Vote Fraud
With accusations of voter registration fraud swirling as early voting begins in many states, some Hillary Clinton supporters are saying: “I told you so.”
(It’s nice to be able to post these comments without having to see your pitiful and foul responses.)
October 28th, 2008 at 10:36 am
WC/white corner boy
you are being monitored
October 28th, 2008 at 10:37 am
Goodness. How can those All-American Republicans
possibly lose to those Marxists, er a, Democrats?…
Bill Bradley brought up a good question yesterday
regarding Sen. Stevens: would a conservative act on
principal and call for the resignation of Sen. Stevens?
Well how about it, Gov. Palin?
Bradley predicts — nope.
Me too.
A Democratic Senator from Alaska?
Who woulda thunk it?
October 28th, 2008 at 10:55 am
…well, I’ll be darned.
At least half the mavericks have the nerve…
McCain Says Alaska Senator Should Resign
By NEIL A. LEWIS and DAVID STOUT (NYT)
Published: October 29, 2008
A day after Senator Ted Stevens was convicted of violating federal ethics laws, his fellow Republican Senator John McCain called on him to step down.
October 28th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Palin has also thrown her grandfather under the bus…uh…I mean the crook she palled around with.
Here’s Obama’s speech yesterday in Ohio. I like this guy…
http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/10/the_fierce_sonnage_of_now.php
October 28th, 2008 at 11:03 am
Because I registered as an Independent–long before primary season began and because I thought I may be voting for Nader or?–I now receive mail outs from the Repubs. Just got an anti Obama one, today.
I called the state’s Repub HQ and told them 1) I consider any propaganda from the Republican party to be a terrorist attack and 2) that because of its conduct in this election I now consider the Republican party both anti- American and a terrorist organization.
October 28th, 2008 at 11:07 am
Anna,
I frightened. Are you an informant for the Stasi?
October 28th, 2008 at 11:14 am
“Ahmed, your statement would only be true if ‘Palestinian” and the terroristic, murdering PLO under Arafat mean one and the same. I don’t think so, but correct me if you believe that all Palestiinians want to kill Jews.”
Have you read Khalidi’s article (which i posted), in which he pushes for mass, democratic and non violent strategies in opposition to the Israeli occupation, an occupation which regularly and delibately engages in massive human rights violations, and engages in indiscriminate killings according to any human rights organisation which have looked at the matter. An occupation which you support.
October 28th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Btw, as much as I admire Marc’s libetarian attitude in regards to tgis blog, I’m starting to think that Katha Pollitt is right in to ban outright racists as Balter was suggesting be done here. That comment about “blacks” having no commitment to voting was disgusting, on top of the other overtly racist statements Woody has been making. GM has cosigned himself and enaged in the same sort of thing, Pathetic
October 28th, 2008 at 11:24 am
I know I’m going off topic, but how much more is there to say about Democrats and Socialists? The horse hasn’t moved for the pummeling it’s received in at least the last 24 hours.
One thing that is coming down the pike in an Obama presidency is fiscal policy. Frankly, the Fed has done all it can. We’re nearing a liquidity trap (if we’re not already there), and consequently, it’s now down to what other stimulus does the government have at its disposal. Note: I consider tax cuts to be part and parcel of that same lifeless equine.
Kevin Drum has a graphic that I think can help frame the options, and attaches a value to the options being discussed. Anyone having had the sorriest of Econ101 classes can decipher it – even if you got a D in that class. It’s not too early to begin thinking in these terms. I see it as easily within Obama’s first 100 days. Ideally, it’d begin November 5.
Do you suppose there’s any chance Bush might want to retire sooner. Obama has made sure that he’s got a team ready to hit the ground running. I’d like to think that someone could step forward (I’m talking to you George Soros, William Buffet, and/or Bill Gates) and buy out Bush’s contract.
October 28th, 2008 at 11:48 am
Ahmed–White corner boy alias now WC is just as vile.
He just plays games positing what seem to those not watching closely points worth debating–but he has fully revealed that he is part of the crack pot fringe concerned about “preserving” a non existent white American culture. He is part of the ‘American Renaissance’ moonbat-fascist-nationalist gang.
He has dumped huge non sequitor racist slurs in other threads.
And on another forum he made comments without the cloke of so called intellectual arguments. Just pure racist filth in response to a thread about Obama’s grandmother! Makes him lower and sicker than Woody or GM Roper.
October 28th, 2008 at 11:53 am
http://www.observer.com/2008/media/election-night-abc-news-transform-times-square-outdoor-global-viewing-event
Times Square election night coverage shingdig
October 28th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
If anyone can watch the video reg linked to and not be moved by that speech, then I might just have to check you for a pulse.
October 28th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
“Ahmed–White corner boy alias now WC is just as vile.”
But not you Anna.
October 28th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Ditto on what DanO said. reg, you’re cranking out some excellent comments and links here.
October 28th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
“…an(Israeli) occupation which regularly and delibately engages in massive human rights violations…”
Could this be due to regular and delibrate engaging in massive human life violations Ahmed? Does one not have the right to restrict the rights of a violent aggressor in order to protect their own?
Has not Israel tried to stop the need for occupation by building long and expensive walls? Has it stopped those demanding the end of occupation from continuing to attack anyway?
Maybe there is some other root cause here Ahmed. Could it be the cause to destroy the State of Israel? Could really be just this simple?
October 28th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Ahmed, why are you so offended by what most people know to be true–black voter turnout in bad weather turns out to be very low? Is that wrong to say? Why? Even Democratic leadership knows that. Obama isn’t taking any chances, so he’s out there trying to get them to vote early and often and to even skip work to vote for him.
And, Ahmed, Khalidi did work for Yasser Arafat–a terrorist. That’s serious. Khalidi appears as unrepentant for serving the radical PLO as is Bill Ayers for his terrorism. If Khalidi has never expressed remorse for serving this terror movement, then nothing he says today in moderation can be taken at face value.
Did you know that Khalidi and Ayers were best friends, too. There’s a few too many terrorist links with Obama’s friend Khalidi for me to give Khalidi a pass as some benign mideast expert.
If Marc followed your calls for bans, he could lead off with you who defend terrorists and terrorism. People who state the truth, no matter how unpopular to the left, don’t threaten the nation, but terrorists do.
October 28th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
More vote rigging in a toss-up state:
This illustrates one more time why it’s important to reject a Presidential candidate who would appoint justices who ignore the law and place their party’s needs over justice.
October 28th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
When Khalidi worked for the PLO, it was internationally recognized as the legitimate and popular representive of the Palestinian people, a people let me remind you who havw born the brunt of a violent occupation aimed at colonising thier land. I don’t regard the PLO as a terror organisation and if Woody simply used the same standards to measure the behavious of the IDF as he deos the PLO than I imagine the IDF should be regarded as terrorist on a mass scale, supported by every modern American presidentr. For Woody Palestinians lives are simply worthless. He smears Khalidi, over again, yet doesnt even bother to read his work, which I’ve posted here. The fact is that no Palestinian in the Territories 40 years old and younger has ever known anything other than Israeli occupation; the same is true of the majority of Israeli Jews, who’ve experienced only the domination of another group of people, and a political culture held hostage to the demands of ‘security’. The enormity of those facts, and the attempt to understand them here on a continent where people get in fistfights over stolen parking spaces but think the Palestinians should be able to absorb themselves without complaint into Jordan or Lebanon, recalls an aphorism from the region about camels passing through the eyes of needles. The wall, which was condemned by the International Court of Justice, violates the 1967 borders and uproots thousands of Palestinians and is aimed at protecting the settlements. No one is stopping Israel from pulling its tens of thousadns os settlers abnd troops from the West Bank and Gaza, settlements (structural abnd territorial forms of violence) in fact expanded all through the nineties, yet Jim R simply wants us to forget all of this.
October 28th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
“If Marc followed your calls for bans, he could lead off with you who defend terrorists and terrorism.”:
You’re an idiot Woody
October 28th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Here’s the wikipedia entry for the man who Woody, in his typically racist way, calls a terrorist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashid_Khalidi
October 28th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
So, anytime I disagree with Ahmed, I’m a racist. Boy, this gets old. That has less accuracy than if I called him stupid every time that he disagrees with me.
Despite what you claim, Ahmed, Rashid Khalidi worked with terrorists and is anti-Israel and anti-U.S. Of course, the LA Times could let people know how he feels and what was said at his party with Obama, if they would simply release the tape–and, before the election. Why don’t you sign the petition to ask them?
For your source, everyone knows that political issues in Wikipedia are monitored and constantly “cleansed” by liberals with nothing better to do, so as to make liberals and radicals look nice, like Ward Cleaver or Barney the dinosaur. Just look at all the edits to Khalidi’s listing! There are almost 500! Don’t you love the section headed up “Allegations of PLO Connections,” when the allegations are actually facts.
Now, I don’t think that Palestinians are worthless. However, for once, I was offended when they beat their chests and cheered when the Twin Towers fell.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
A bad example for journalism students: (My offer is still open.)
Do you think that the tape might hurt Obama?
October 28th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Samuel @ 12:14 pm: reg, you’re cranking out some excellent comments and links here.
I actually scrolled back to find them and I have no idea where these most excellent comments can be found.
- – -
Okay, I’m finished. You guys think that this is your blog and is for liberals only, so keep working on your mutual admiration society and ignore the other ninety percent of the country, who aren’t unaccomplished elitists like you. You guys get more repetitive and boring, but you can’t get more stupid.
October 28th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
You guys think that this is your blog and is for liberals only
Thats right, Woody. You need to go to solipsistsrus.com where “your” people congregate.
You keep saying you are finished and do this huff thing. Then you come back. You are SUCH a girl.
October 28th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Anna, for you…I’m not huffing. I’m laughing.
October 28th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
More idiots on parade: http://www.prosebeforehos.com/video-of-the-day/10/26/hey-free-racism/
October 28th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
For what it’s worth I will no longer engage Woody as we all know that it’s a waste of time, yet we disregard it all the same. Vigorous and honest disgreement is great but Woody is simply a performance artist, who increasingly pedals in truly vile stuff. That said, if Marc takes up Woodsters offer and invites him as a guest speaker to to his class, I’d love to see the youtube video
October 28th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Woo Hoo!
Republican Florida Governor Crist sticks a stake in the heart of the McCain campaign. He is extending the early voting hours by another 4 hours per day.
McCain camp’s response: He has just blown it for McCain.
Right. Meeting the demand to vote to support the democratic process is a partisan move.
Woo HOO! In this case it is!
October 28th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Echoing DanO’s and Samuel’s sentiments on the Obama speech reg linked to. Wow. I’m looking forward to finally casting a presidential vote I can feel good about. It’s been a long time….
Oh, and great post, Marc. Per usual.
October 28th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
A few leonine words from Vidal: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20081027_mccain_in_the_echo_chamber/
October 28th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
I would like to have it on record that no, I do not give a shit about ACORN. But then, with a miserable, useless, intractable war, a great city devastated, real wages for workers stagnating while the rich fill their pockets, eight years of unparalleled corruption, and the economy in a state of collapse, neither does anybody else.
October 28th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
Thanks, Dan O, for the Vidal link.
love this:
“…Chancellor Bismarck’s remark about us Americans in the 19th century when he said: “God looks after drunks, little children and the United States of America.”
October 28th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
Marc will never ban Woody — that would amount to conceding that he had taken an incorrect position.But why oh why do you folks take up the absurd talking points of a pathetic idiot who claims that Obama refuses to salute the flag? Khalidi? The only thing relevant about him is what tarring Obama based on his attending a party with a professor with whom he disagrees — and who is, OMG, not a raving Zionist — says about the McCain campaign, its supporters, and political dialog and attitudes toward intellectual inquiry in the U.S.
October 29th, 2008 at 1:31 am
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/28/mccain-funded-work-of-pal_n_138606.html
The latest guilt-by-association target that the McCain campaign is using to hit Barack Obama could carry some collateral damage for its own candidate.
…
In regards to Khalidi, however, the guilt-by-association game burns John McCain as well.
During the 1990s, while he served as chairman of the International Republican Institute (IRI), McCain distributed several grants to the Palestinian research center co-founded by Khalidi, including one worth half a million dollars.
A 1998 tax filing for the McCain-led group shows a $448,873 grant to Khalidi’s Center for Palestine Research and Studies for work in the West Bank. (See grant number 5180, “West Bank: CPRS” on page 14 of this PDF.)
The relationship extends back as far as 1993, when John McCain joined IRI as chairman in January. Foreign Affairs noted in September of that year that IRI had helped fund several extensive studies in Palestine run by Khalidi’s group, including over 30 public opinion polls and a study of “sociopolitical attitudes.”
Of course, there’s seemingly nothing objectionable with McCain’s organization helping a Palestinian group conduct research in the West Bank or Gaza. But it does suggest that McCain could have some of his own explaining to do as he tries to make hay out of Khalidi’s ties to Obama.
October 29th, 2008 at 7:25 am
Woody, how can you believe for a second that there is even the most remote possibility of a low black voter turnout? Obama’s candidacy has put North Carolina in play for godsakes. This IS a historic election particularly if you’re black, and turnout will be good come hell or high water. Frankly, a big problem will be the unconscionably long lines in black neighborhoods, which I hope you can admit was a serious problem in 2004.
Also, if Ted Kennedy was the nominee, do you think that Republicans would be suggesting he’s a socialist? I doubt it. I think they would be saying that he was “ultra-liberal.” So the use of “socialist” is a bit fishy. It’s almost like another way of saying that he’s “beyond the pale.”
On Khalidi, as long as there is a bipartisan consensus that the America-first foreign policy that I support is “wicked” or “evil,” the USA will need to play some kind of peacemaking role in Middle East. Cultivating relationships with people like Khalidi, and other Palestinians who are pro-Palestinian, even pro-PLO, but not anti-Western, and open to accomodation with Israel, is an essential part of that process.
October 29th, 2008 at 10:10 am
Should McCain Be Rooting For Bad Weather?
October 29th, 2008 at 11:52 am
Woody, how can you believe for a second …
Woody’s beliefs don’t spring from external facts but rather from his internal prejudices.
Early voting already indicates a high black turnout.
Conventional wisdom (and at least one econometric study) holds that poor weather does indeed help the Republicans.
“does indeed”? Ahem. “help the Republicans” was not the claim — that could because, for instance, the elderly are less likely to turn out and more likely to vote Democratic. Here is the claim again:
“Everyone knows that blacks, college students, and people who don’t have much commitment generally don’t turn out to vote when the weather is bad.”
Breaking it down:
a) Everyone knows that people who don’t have much commitment generally don’t turn out to vote when the weather is bad — ok
b) college students don’t have much commitment — gross overgeneralization
c) blacks don’t have much commitment — blatant racism
October 29th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Well “people who don’t have much commitment” are not necessarily the same set of people as “blacks” and “college students” in his sentence.
But that aside, if in fact blacks statistically don’t usually turn out to vote when the weather is bad…well that’s just a fact, and there are no such things as a “racist” facts, just correct or incorrect ones. I simply think he ignores the transcendent importance of this election to black America (and also young Obamaniacs of all races), thus drawing the wrong conclusion that they won’t vote if it rains, or snows, or hails.
Promiscuous use of the term “racism” renders it meaningless. A racist is someone who thinks Obama has more in common with Snopp Dogg or Al Sharpton than he does with Bill Clinton.
October 29th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
Well “people who don’t have much commitment” are not necessarily the same set of people as “blacks” and “college students” in his sentence.
So it might seem to someone who is both absurdly dishonest and doesn’t understand what the word “generally” is doing in that sentence.
But that aside, if in fact blacks statistically don’t usually turn out to vote when the weather is bad…well that’s just a fact
That’s ridiculous — there’s no debate about whether a hypothetical is true if it is in fact true. Rather, the point is that Woody states it as general fact about blacks, but only a racist could entertain the possibility that all blacks lack commitment.
Promiscuous use of the term “racism” renders it meaningless.
Nice question begging try, but my use was not in fact promiscuous.
A racist is someone who thinks Obama has more in common with Snopp Dogg or Al Sharpton than he does with Bill Clinton.
Such intellectual dishonesty. Aside from the fact that Woody thinks just that, anyone who thinks that all blacks don’t have much commitment definitely is a racist.
October 29th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
P.S.
Well “people who don’t have much commitment” are not necessarily the same set of people as “blacks” and “college students” in his sentence.
Then why would everyone know that the latter don’t turn out in bad weather?
And it’s not “the same set”, it’s a superset, according to that sentence.
October 31st, 2008 at 10:48 am
Everyone knows that blacks, college students, and people who don’t have much commitment generally don’t turn out to vote when the weather is bad.
You idiots. In that sentence, each group is a separate set, and is correctly intended and worded to indicate such.
I didn’t know that grammar and punctuation were so confusing to you that it would start a discussion. It must take years for you to finish a book and understand what it says.
October 31st, 2008 at 12:35 pm
I will again note that, by any parsing, there is no reason to think that “everyone knows” what Woody says they know unless one is a racist — which everyone here knows is true of Woody.
October 31st, 2008 at 12:37 pm
P.S. Black turnout is extraordinarily high in early voting. There’s a strong indication of an impending landslide.
October 31st, 2008 at 6:39 pm
What does it tell you when blacks are voting in record numbers? It tells me that about half of them never cared enough in the past to get to the polls.
October 31st, 2008 at 7:00 pm
What does it tell you when blacks are voting in record numbers?
It tells me that Obama is gonna win, sucka, and that your hopes (“I hope, I REALLY hope, that there are similar heavy rains on election day”) will be dashed.
It tells me that about half of them never cared enough in the past to get to the polls.
Turnout is up across demographics, you racist git.
[Gack. I feel filthy responding to the slime. I should follow my own advice.]
November 1st, 2008 at 9:12 am
PT: Turnout is particularly high among blacks and young people. Don’t try to use weasel words to make it look as if turnout is up equally in all demographics. My original conclusion stands.
Hope for McCain: Smarter People More Likely to Vote, Scientists Say
But, this is the hope for Obama: THE DUMBING DOWN OF DEMOCRATS
November 2nd, 2008 at 3:00 pm
“P.S. Black turnout is extraordinarily high in early voting. There’s a strong indication of an impending landslide.”
You’re saying Black people are racist?
November 2nd, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Stopping passing through so much. Make you’re hairy-knuckle dragging bigoted comments together. The constant odor is getting to us.
November 2nd, 2008 at 11:26 pm
My original conclusion stands.
The conclusion that stands is that you’re a racist piece of shit. Actually, that insults shit.
You’re saying Black people are racist?
No, moron.
November 3rd, 2008 at 4:50 am
“P.S. Black turnout is extraordinarily high in early voting. There’s a strong indication of an impending landslide.”
You are saying Black people will vote by race.
November 3rd, 2008 at 11:05 am
You are saying Black people will vote by race.
No, you racist moron. Blacks are voting for Obama just as they always vote for Democrats — because Democrats aren’t assholes, and so they are much better for black interests.
November 3rd, 2008 at 11:08 am
P.S. pg — stop listening to Rush Limbaugh — he’s rotting what little brain you have. Rush yells into his microphone that Powell’s endorsement of Obama “is all about race!” — that is exactly the same as your claim that blacks voting for Obama is all about race, you racist piece of filth.
November 15th, 2010 at 12:04 am
i got pregnant a couple of months ago and right now i am choosing the right kind of maternity clothes that is comfortable ,’`