The Unrevealed Future of Journalism — Revealed
I’m heading out to New Orleans Friday and will be off duty for a handful of days. So try to survive without me.
Meanwhile, I couldn’t help but hiccup over this little dandy item: The publisher of the local, second-rate, third-tier newspaper has issued a dress code edict, talking to his already demoralized and historically underpaid staff as if they were a bunch of mohwaked, adolescent slackers:
* Managers and professional employees should dress for business daily; never jeans or tennis shoes. If unsure, recall how you dressed when you interviewed for your position.
* Casual Friday is an option. Business casual always presents a good appearance, never jeans, running shoes, T-shirts, flip-flops or beachwear.
* Business casual is a good choice for evening work in all departments outside of production.
* Clothing should be clean, unwrinkled and in good repair.
* Denim including designer jeans is never appropriate for the workplace.
Maybe this explains the ongoing collapse of newspapers. Too many reporters in jeans and tennis shoes!
Or, alternately, too many newspaper execs with their heads firmly inserted in … well, you know the rest. In the current newspaper atmosphere, if you’ve got nothing to worry about except how your reporters dress, I think you sorta deserve to go out of business, no?
(By the way — this newspaper’s office is in Woodland Hills where I live. It’s the absolute hottest spot in the city of L.A. where temperatures routinely run into triple digits over the summer).
I just finished teaching a 10 week fellowship of graduate M.A. j-students at USC (where it’s usually about 15 degrees cooler) and they did absolutely outstanding work — often dressed in jeans, tennies, flip-flops, and beach dresses (not to mention yours truly who showed up every day in t-shirts). Obviosuly, when they had to go out and do interviews, they changed into something presentable. I hope they never have to work for the narrow-minded type of robot who wrote that dress code memo.
While we’re at it. Please take a moment to look at my students’ work. It’s just been posted on this rather spectacular website built with the assistance of the USC Viterbi School of Engineering.
Ceeya next week. And no tennies!
July 31st, 2008 at 9:31 pm
That last link doesn’t seem to work…
July 31st, 2008 at 9:32 pm
now it does
July 31st, 2008 at 10:54 pm
How can you be second-rate and third-tier? Shouldn’t it be second-rate and second-tier? Are tiers and rates really different? If so – how?
You are right on one score: the Daily News sucks donkey balls.
Woodland Hills is an odd place, I keep expecting the John Birch Society to start up a new chapter there. But, frankly, Woodland Hills is a second-rate third-tier town and has the newspaper it deserves.
August 1st, 2008 at 7:21 am
Denim has a blatant liberal bias and everyone knows it.
August 1st, 2008 at 7:56 am
I thought denim was the fabric of the running dogs? Andropov and Brezhnev were clear about that.
I worked at a community paper after J school for a year or so. We had similarly fascist failed journalists as editors. One asked me to get contact lenses because glasses make me look “unapproachable.”
August 1st, 2008 at 8:01 am
Make the link at news21 stop spininnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnninnnnnnnnnnnnnngg, so I can select a story to read.
August 1st, 2008 at 8:29 am
Marc, watch out for hurricanes and for Bush bombing the levees. We’ll notify FEMA that your coming. Oh, and be sure to dress appropriately.
August 1st, 2008 at 8:32 am
Hey, Marc, I went to the site for your commie students. Here’s the first one that I saw:
One piece of advice, Sonata. Tell these disinfranchised to not commit crimes. They did it to themselves.
August 1st, 2008 at 8:38 am
“I’m heading out to New Orleans Friday and will be off duty for a handful of days. So try to survive without me.”
Don’t worry, we have Woody to entertain us!
August 1st, 2008 at 9:58 am
As a professional journalist, http://www.livingstonenterprise.com/news I concur. This is another permutation of the right wing that attempts to dominates the journalism world. It’s not a legitimate publication, and for good reason.
August 1st, 2008 at 10:08 am
I think this is the first time I’ve heard USC students be refered to as commies.
August 1st, 2008 at 10:12 am
Well it was a rag when it was the Green Sheet and its been nothing but a shill for secession (so the DN could be the REGISTER of the Valley) so who cares. SF Valley – porn capitall of the US. It fits!
August 1st, 2008 at 2:01 pm
I’m really beginning to wonder if any of this really matters.
Case in point. Today Obama told a town meeting in FL of his energy and economic stimulus plans.
On Energy he would offer ewach family a $1000 tax credit to pay for the increased cost of gasoline or heating oil. How paid? By slapping a “Windfall Profits”Tax on the oil companies to capture some of their gains and recycle to consumers.
On Stimulus – a 150 Billion package with half sent to the states to shore up fiscal crises there and the other half accelrated infrastructure spending.
Think the plan has merits but I doubt if anyone heard about it. All the news was of a couple of protestors complaining that Barack was “ignoring” Black issues!
We are amusing ourselves to death and its scary!
August 1st, 2008 at 3:10 pm
On Energy he would offer each family a $1000 tax credit to pay for the increased cost of gasoline or heating oil. How paid? By slapping a “Windfall Profitsâ€Tax on the oil companies to capture some of their gains and recycle to consumers.
That’s the ticket! Buy votes with promises of a $1,000!!!!!!!!! gift and then raise taxes on oil companies, which will take the money back from those stupid people who fell for this vote-buying scheme in the form of in higher prices–or, you can count on some serious shortages.
Do you want to hear a really bad joke how Obama will fix the economy? Just let me know.
August 1st, 2008 at 4:05 pm
“That’s the ticket! Buy votes with promises of a $1,000!!!!!!!!! gift”.
Well, it worked for Bush in 2000 ( only $600, but with inflation and all…).
August 1st, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Oh, and let’s remind reg that his “interpretation” of the liberal Army Times article about the email describing Obama’s snub to our soliders was real and that I didn’t make it up.
Who’s the liar?
- – -
Now, on more journalism issues, why does the L.A. Times refuse to cover what at least one grocery store tabloid isn’t too liberal to cover?
♫ Love child, never meant to be
Love child, (scorned by) society
Love child, always second best
Love child, different from the rest ♫
John Edwards has endorsed Barack Obama.
August 1st, 2008 at 5:54 pm
“Who’s the liar?”
Obviously you, the wingnut website you linked to and the fabricating little shit who sent the damned email in the first place that the army officially termed false. You’re a fucking crackpot, Woody, with no morals and the crazy stuff you link to, like “You Might Be A Commie Pinko” is beyond the pale of decent, rational discourse.
Be a fucking man for a change and admit some rumor you circulated is shit…
August 1st, 2008 at 10:55 pm
So, did Woody “get wood” when he wrote that comment about Edwards? Enquiring minds want to know.
August 1st, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Huh? Woody is a 28%er. Being one of them means never having to say you’re sorry.
August 1st, 2008 at 11:44 pm
Maybe Woody’s having the last laugh.
I used to think his role was to remind liberals of how feeble-minded and innumerate the talkradio/wingnutosphere sect of conservatives are.
Now that I see how utterly immune he his to shame; how he just keeps coming back for more no matter how moronic he is made to look. Maybe he sees some purpose in merely sabotaging the discussion here.
There are issues of strategy, policy and, even, morality that are well worth debate and discussion within and without the liberal community, such as it is. But what purpose, other than the sheer easy fun — kinda like popping a zit — does it serve to obliterate Woody’s nonsense for the 4,547th time?
The Obama campaign is in danger of loosing traction. Say what you will about the accuracy of polls, but I’m uncomfortable with the fact that he is not yet up by double digits. Remember, this is the first time in our lifetime that the Democrat has had anywhere near the financial resources of the Republican. The right is deeply divided and in more disarray than at any time since Watergate.
We shouldn’t just be ahead, we should be way ahead and that fact that we aren’t is something we should be concerned about.
If the polls show us anything it is that the Republicans are not going to defeat themselves, however richly, expansively that fate is earned.
From now on, I shall refer to Woody as The Big Fat White Rhetorical Pimple, The Zit, and vow to refrain from squeezing it.
August 2nd, 2008 at 5:52 am
If you thought journalistic standards were bad, you’re wrong. The truth is they’re even worse than you thought.
The other day the WSJ printed a supremely stupid article on Obama being too skinny to appeal to the electorate. Dumb, right ? It gets worse – turns out that the mendacious slob who wrote the article did her “research” by posting on a Yahoo message board, fishing for people who would respond to the notion Obama was too skinny. She’s scrubbed her posts for obvious reasons…
Here’s the take from “Sadly No” with relevant links:
http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/10322.html
August 2nd, 2008 at 7:17 am
Leave it to reg to attack the messenger and ignore the message. reg, you are so damned predictable. Well, maybe you will believe this source:
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. – Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Saturday described John McCain’s campaign against him as one driven by cynicism but not racism and rejected McCain’s criticism that Obama himself had brought race into their debate. Emphasis Added
So, according to reg, without addressing the information, the speaker of that info must be a rightwing dirtbag.
August 2nd, 2008 at 7:37 am
I think the Edwards story is probably true, and sad and none of us are aware of the complexities of a marriage in which one partner may be leaving this life. His situation is not uncommon.
August 2nd, 2008 at 9:29 am
Roper, you’re an idiot.
August 2nd, 2008 at 10:09 am
jcummings, then I’m sure that you will sympathize with Newt Gingrinch.
August 2nd, 2008 at 10:19 am
reg, the rumor of Obama blowing off the troops was reported in a real email by a real eye-witness who was under no pressure by anyone in reporting his observations. What he said was what he saw and felt. Revisions by military superiors under political pressures does not change that reality. Cleaning up the story just gets them out of hot water.
Like the author of “You Might Be A Commie Pinko†said, “I trust a troop on the ground and what he may have heard and seen, rather than what he was told to correct by his superiors.”
Be a man and admit that what I sent did in fact happen…and, in the interest of decent, rational discourse, don’t try to oppose it with a bad interpretation of an article from your liberal Army and Military Times.
Just like the Clinton’s, Obama and most Democrats “loathe the military.”
August 2nd, 2008 at 10:33 am
Your account is a fabrication. You have no credibilty and, apparently, no morals in circulatiing and persisting in defending this shit. Just because you repeat something over and over – with no evidence – doesn’t make it true. This guy wan’t a witness to shit. His email wasn’t “revised” by military authorities. It was flatly contradicted by the army and by numerous other troops who were eyewitness to the Obama visit. He eventually admitted, without specifics, that his email wasn’t factual.
Keep this shit up Woody because it makes clear how desperate and degenerate you guys are. I’m through with this shit. You’re a total waste of time…really a creepy character.
August 2nd, 2008 at 10:35 am
“Just like the Clinton’s, Obama and most Democrats ‘loathe the military.’” But your the one who claims the army is lying and intimidating this poor soldier who is the only guy on the ground who is telling the truth. What a disgusting crock of shit. Emanating from political pondscum…
August 2nd, 2008 at 10:40 am
Incidentally, your assertion that I’m “opposing this with a bad interpretation from the liberal Army and Military Times” is another lie. I’m opposing it with the statement by the official spokesperson for the Army at Bagram AND accounts by many, many other GI’s who were there, who met Obama and by photographic evidence. Check this one on Snopes, among other accounts.
You Are A Fucking Liar…
August 2nd, 2008 at 10:42 am
Sorry about “I’m throught with this shit” and adding two comments – I know it’s a waste of time to counter this idiotic prick, but when I read his garbage it obviously gets on my nerves. Can’t believe craven assholes like this crawl out from under their rocks with such persistence.
August 2nd, 2008 at 10:57 am
Incidentally, since I’m afraid the other Intellectual & Moral Giant of this blog may be too stupid to understand the distinction, guys like Steve Schmidt – and McCain, when he adds his imprimatur to the shit Schmidt cranks out – aren’t driven by racism and I never said they were. They are driven by cynicism so craven – desperation really, to be “fair” – that it’s not beneath them to exploit inherently racist imagery and juxtapositions, and not terribly subtle ones – while claiming not to. There’s no rational explanation for the juxtaposition they deliberately chose in the White Whores With Obama ad. So I’m going to assume the worst. They clearly don’t deserve the benefit of the doubt in the wake of the cheap crap with which they’ve been cynically wallpapering the internet and, sadly, cable news. It’s not even remotely credible to assert that depicting a black man in tandem with a couple of whorish white girls doesn’t have a racist subtext. Ask Harold Ford…
August 2nd, 2008 at 11:55 am
I really have to drop dead laughing. The “Liberal Army Times”!!! Woody go to any day room on any post (try Ft. Stewart I don’t think its too far) and see all the copies of that “Pinko Rag” around!.
The Army Times is where the troops get their info on promotions, pay scales, transfers, and other items of interest. My guess is that “You might be a lib” fellow is another member of the 101st keyboarders whose closest experience to Army Green was playing with his GI Joe Doll.
August 2nd, 2008 at 12:12 pm
reg: “and I never said they were.”
“depicting a black man in tandem with a couple of whorish white girls doesn’t have a racist subtext. Ask Harold Ford…”
Yeah reg, right! You are so easy reg, I’m surprised they let you out of grade school with your capacity to reason. If it doesn’t agree with you then the blue streaks fly.
Fuck it reg, you just aren’t worth jousting with.
August 2nd, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Re the doom and gloom at our newspapers. Given Dana Milbank’s sneering attitude toward the truth why should I even care!
August 2nd, 2008 at 1:52 pm
As I thought – you’re too fucking stupid, Roper, to understand my comment. No wonder you’ve been selling us bags of ideological and political shit in these threads for years…
August 2nd, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Actually, I doubt that you’ve “sold” anything. Just tried to pass it out with no takers.
August 2nd, 2008 at 2:49 pm
I know he’s going to catch hell from the lefties, but I’m loving Obama’s calling McCain’s bluff on offshore…totally “Presidential” and of course, the drilling isn’t gonna happen anywhere it really matters because the locals won’t stand for it. If Floridians prove themselves so stupid that they let oil companies screw up the coast – or drill in DisneyWorld for that matter – that’s fine by me. This offshore thing is a charade being hyped by morons. But can’t change all of that between now and Nov. – or between now and 2012, for that matter.
So it’s silly to try to argue one’s way out of it rationally – use it as a chip for some serious energy independence alternatives. Personally, I’m willing to put nuclear on the table in a post-9/11 world, if certain standards can be met. If it’s working for the French, etc. etc. (Would like to hear from Michael B on this issue…) BUT tie any compromise on these rather dumb, retro ideas to serious progress on clean, alternative energy and significant increases in CAFE standards. If some additional offshore drilling (NOT in CA because Arnold and Sacto and the general populace won’t let it happen) is the price of killing the SUV culture, so be it.
August 2nd, 2008 at 2:50 pm
One more thing – Jimmy Carter was SO FUCKING RIGHT !!!!!
August 2nd, 2008 at 5:20 pm
When the cat’s away….
August 2nd, 2008 at 6:15 pm
A colleague and I used to theorize that the Daily News was really a “front” put up by the LAT. The idear was that by having a daily rag screaming as regularly and as badly as the DN, the LAT would come off as a beacon of reason and insight. In light of the problems at LAT, well, that theory is probably bunk. But the dress code thingy Marc digs up is quite humorous. The DN staff can all don suits straight from Willie Brown’s tailor tomorrow and I’d doubt there’d be an iota of difference in quality of the paper.
Maybe they should do more of those hyper huge bold headlines: LAUSD SPENDS MONEY ON PENCILS, TAXPAYERS RIPPED OFF AGAIN!!!
August 2nd, 2008 at 7:41 pm
I remember at our New England Town meetings, when our teachers were looking for a raise, they would bring up stuff like not having enough pencils and paper……and even having to buy them using their own money.
For those of us having kids in the school, my first thought was “Well why aren’t you asking for a raise for the kids then?”
These town meeting were extremely interesting and raw American Democracy at work; the roads, the school, and the police budgets and issues, all debated and voted on right there in townhall with a show of hands.
Having so much that effects our lives and our budgets being decided in Washington is a terrible trend. There is just no way to be in touch at this level. Not once did I ever see one of our State Congressmen ever show at one of our town meeting in 15 years. It would have been such an educational experience for them.
August 2nd, 2008 at 8:11 pm
The truth is, Marc was sent home for inappropriate dress.
- – -
I missed this article earlier as I was out checking the pressure in my tires, because Obama told me to.
Jimmy Carter was right? Well, I guess the reg’s of the world want to return us to those happy days of the highest misery index. If you liked Carter, you’ll love Obama.
August 2nd, 2008 at 8:15 pm
The Newspaper Business Model
August 2nd, 2008 at 11:21 pm
Of course, the historical and economic illiteracy – or perhaps it’s pure mendacdity – continues: oil imports as a percentage of U.S. consumption came down more in Jimmy Carter’s presidency than any other in recent history and began to increase sharply under Reagan. Reagan deliberately aborted all attempts begun in the Carter administration toward conservation and alternative energy development. Thus Americans are slave to foreign oil. GOPers like Woody don’t give a shit about this country – or truth – for all of their blather. Debating any empirical evidence against free-market fundamentalism with these wackos is as productive as debating Gus Hall about the “virtues” of communism.
August 2nd, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Also those IDB “statistics” on the particulars of the windfall profits tax of the Carter era can’t be documented. Even conservative scholars on this issue come up arguing a range of possibilities of the tax’s impact that don’t support the crank assertions Woody spits out.
August 2nd, 2008 at 11:51 pm
If anybody’s interested in the CRS analysis and what it actually ESTIMATES regarding the impact of the WPT of 1980-88, here:
http://tinyurl.com/5qtb9a
The “IDB” allegations are, of course, pulled out of some wingnut’s ass.
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:06 am
Woody’s source also fails to mention that the WTP was part of a legislative package that actually ended price controls in the oil sector – so the notion that Carter was simply taxing the companies to death without a quid pro quo is bullshit.
August 3rd, 2008 at 12:46 am
Folks who are starting to get queazy following stuff like the Gallup Daily Tracker should read this in-depth polling analysis”
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/obama-outperforming-kerry-among-nearly.html
August 3rd, 2008 at 5:02 am
Great polling link reg. Where do you find all this stuff?
While I am a bit worried that some of the bloom is off the Obama rose, and that he has made some tactical missteps, I’m still confident of a cool walk across the finish line well in front of Bush Jr. (er, Sr. uh….)
The secret weapon I have always believed, and the polling data mentions, is young voters and black Americans coming out in unprecedented numbers. The young voters are what got Ventura elected–an election night surprise since they were never captured in the tracking polls in true “Dewey Defeats Truman” style.
One things is certainly clear from the polling data: We need to start minting a massive number of PhD.’s!
August 3rd, 2008 at 8:56 am
It’s nice to see that the reggies continue to embrace and want to continue the policies of Jimmy Carter through Barack Obama. After one term of that, Americans wouldn’t vote Democratic again for decades.
August 3rd, 2008 at 9:00 am
reg, it’s funny, noting the time times of the comments, that you spent a full hour doing research and posting comments in a failed rebuttal to the last facts that I presented. Do the Democrats really pay you to do this or are you just stupid?
August 3rd, 2008 at 9:39 am
The Carter and Obama alternative energy plan
August 3rd, 2008 at 9:59 am
“you spent a full hour doing research ”
Don’t flatter yourself – it took a few minutes. But I actually read a detailed report, rather than puke up wingnut “statistics” which don’t fly (again, one wonders if these guys are utterly stupid and can’t manage high-school level research or are simply mendacious liars – like Woody. The figures you asserted throught the wingnut IBD are distorted – even using the source claimed – by a factor of 100%.
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:11 am
Okay, reg, Obama’s plan to buy votes by promising families $1,000 each by taxing the oil companies, regardless of those consequences to the same families, is a great idea. At least wingnuts understand economics, which you and Obama don’t.
Why don’t we split up all the money in the country and give it out evenly? In a few years, most of it will be right back where it started, as the stupid people will lose it and the smart people will earn it back. Then we can start your Marxist plan all over again.
August 3rd, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Andrew Sullivan on the last waltz of “conservatism” as the Great White Hope of “decent conservatives” and conservative-leaning independents reduces his campaign to a caricature (of course, we’re treated to the beer barrel polka version in these threads) :
“For all of McCain’s personal qualities, we’re learning that the machine behind the GOP simply re-makes the campaign in its own Coulterite image. Instead of actually fighting on the core questions – how do we get out of Iraq with the least damage? how do we get past carbon-based energy? how do we tackle al Qaeda’s new base in Pakistan and within the nuclear-armed Pakistani government? how will we reduce the massive debt bequeathed us by the Bush-Rove GOP? how do we restore the Geneva Conventions? – we are debating people’s cultural insecurities…The slow collapse of conservatism as a coherent governing philosophy is not unrelated to this.”
Also worth noting that this morning on “This Week” that the very sober, moderate David Gergen confirmed – as a “son of the South” – that the dog-whistle words and images the McCain campaign is falling back on have a special resonance for white folks within a particular demographic that shall remain nameless.
August 3rd, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Lost a truth teller today. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn has died. Between Solzhenitsyn and Orwell the great lie of the USSR was laid bare.
Rest in peace.
August 3rd, 2008 at 2:56 pm
reg… from your tiny url: “Over the entire 1980-86 period, it is estimated that, depending on the assumed supply curve price elasticity, the WPT reduced domestic oil production from between 320 million barrels (1.2% of domestic production) and 1,268 million barrels (4.8% of domestic production). The effect of reducing domestic oil production was to increase the level of imported oil. ”
The author of your “report” also states that his source in many times are “the authors estimate.” Pulled out of whose ass reg?
I’ll also note that Texas is the nation’s largest producer of Oil and we have been horizontal drilling and doing it safely for so many years, that there are numerous urban wells that are down the block from neighborhoods, schools hospitals etc without a single episode of “danger” Dallas/Fort Worth has huge deposits.
Australia gets the vast majority of its domestic oil off shore and in producing some 3.1 billion barrels of oil, less than 600 barrels have been “spilled.”
August 3rd, 2008 at 2:58 pm
So, now McCain is being accused of racism in a campaign where he has risen above it and Obama is the one who brought up the subject–”not like the other men on those bills.” You guys have a strange way of playing it both ways and then acting surprised when that is pointed out.
It’s not like Obama has put forward solutions to problems. All Obama does is to tell everyone that they should be miserable and that change will help, but he isn’t specific about how he will make that change–because he either doesn’t know or his change is a joke, just like his economic policies. What a rookie.
McCain only has to show American voters that Obama is in over his head and is not qualified and has not shown any accomplishments to prove that he can be a good president. You can call it negative, but I see it as information that needs to be disseminated and discussed.
Obama will lose, because people will eventually see him for the inept radical that he is.
August 3rd, 2008 at 3:00 pm
What A Friend We Have In Barack!
1.What a friend we have in Barack,
All our Hope For Change to bear!
What a privilege to carry
Barack’s water everywhere
O what Change we often forfeit,
O what Wingnuts we must bear,
all because we do not carry,
Barack’s water everywhere.
2. Too High Taxes on the Poor?
And no Health-care anywhere?
We should never be discouraged;
Barack will soon be everywhere!
Can we find a Prez so handsome?
who will all our Taxes share?
Barack knows our every envy;
Barack will help us everywhere.
Amen and Amen!
August 3rd, 2008 at 3:08 pm
GM – You’re a fucking idiot. The “data” Woody proposed was wrong by 100%. They clamied six percent – the guy who wrote the report estimated three over the term of the legislation.
Of course, for you guys being 100% off is the same as being right.
Your song is stupid and boring. Not surprising, given its provenance…
August 3rd, 2008 at 3:17 pm
“The author of your ‘report’ also states that his source in many times are ‘the authors estimate.’ Pulled out of whose ass reg?”
You ignoramus – this is the report for the Congressional Research Sercvice that Woody’s guys at “IBD” are citing. But they inflate the data. I could care less about this report, frankly, but it’s more evidence – as if we need more! – that Woody persists in citiing shit that is sloppy, unreliable, rabidly partisan, overtly disinformational, etc. etc. Any “evidence” cited by Woody isn’t worth the pixels it’s printed on. If you want to rag on me because your buddy constantly cites bogus shit, that’s your choice. But you out yourself as another ignorant, rabidly partisan, utterly unreliable, analytically incomptent asshole.
August 3rd, 2008 at 3:43 pm
ignorant, rabidly partisan, utterly unreliable, analytically incomptent asshole.
Pretty good self discription there reg!
read it again asshole… 6%is not twice 4.8 percent which is the upper limit given… nothing like pulling your own numbers is there reg? Dweeb!
And from my point of view, the song is on target. Of course I wouldn’t expect an obamabot to get the humor – and you didn’t!
August 3rd, 2008 at 4:11 pm
Solzhenitsyn did important work exposing the Gulag, but he has always been an ultra-reactionary, Old Russia Nationalist, Anti-Semite and generally very far right wing. Isaac Deutscher and Georgy Lukacs wrote great respectful critical analyses of the late Solzhenitsyn ….I’m not sure the pieces are online – Lukacs’ probably is at Marxists.Org.
We have a tendency to place opponents of “totalitarian” regimes on a pedestal, case in point the feudal-restorationist Dalai Lama.
August 3rd, 2008 at 4:15 pm
Solzhenitsyn was right about Clinton’s abetting of Croat Nazis in the Balkans though, more than I can say about most liberals.
August 3rd, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Roper – read the report. You’re a total dipshit to be arguing this. Really. If you read table 5 of the report – which gives the comprehensive estimates, the estimate over the life of the legislation is 3%. And this is the Congressional Research Service “cited” by the IDB link that Woody subjected us to. Please don’t persist in showing what a moron you happen to be.
August 3rd, 2008 at 4:22 pm
It’s also inexplicable, if the guys Woody were quoting were relying on the line you pulled, how they come up with “6.”
So take your wanker invective and shove it where it came from.
August 3rd, 2008 at 4:28 pm
It’s also clear, if you read this report in context, that only a moron would argue that the WPT was the key to understanding why domestic oil production fell relative to imports. But I hesitate to delve into complexity with a simpleton.
August 3rd, 2008 at 4:36 pm
What a twit we have in Roper,
All the bullshit we can bear…
August 3rd, 2008 at 5:07 pm
“Solzhenitsyn did important work exposing the Gulag, but he has always been an ultra-reactionary”
But not you cummings…..on all three counts. Pathetic peckerwood.
August 3rd, 2008 at 5:19 pm
A stupid man’s report of what a clever man writes is never accurate because he unconsciously translates what he reads into what he is able to understand.
August 3rd, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Actually reg, that was pretty good.
I notice though that you can’t seem to get your ideas organized enough to get them into a single post… but that has always been your way… or, do you write a post and then see something shiney and that distracts you?
August 3rd, 2008 at 6:14 pm
OK reg, you’ve convinced me… I’m voting democrat!
I’m voting Democrat because:
I am convinced that the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.
I’m voting Democrat because:
Freedom of speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.
I’m voting Democrat because:
When we pull out of Iraq , I trust that the bad guys will stop what they’re doing because they now think we’re ‘good people’.
I’m voting Democrat because:
I believe that people . . . who can’t tell us if it will rain on Friday . . . CAN tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don’t start driving a Prius.
I’m voting Democrat because:
I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest to the government for redistribution as the “Democrats†see fit.
I’m voting Democrat because:
I believe three or four pointy headed elitist liberals need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who could NEVER get their agendas past the voters.
I’m voting Democrat because:
I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I’ve decided to marry my horse.
I’m voting Democrat because:
I believe oil companies’ profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene . . . but the government’s taxing the same gallon of gas at 15% is perfectly fine.
August 3rd, 2008 at 6:26 pm
“I’ve decided to marry my horse.
Is she going to tap her feet twice to say “I do?” Or just nuzzle you when you offer the cube of sugar ? Also, from what I’ve observed as a kid who grew up around “farm animals”, I’m afraid she’ll be disappointed when you drop your pants on the honeymoon.
“I believe that people . . . who can’t tell us if it will rain on Friday . . . CAN tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don’t start driving a Prius.”
I think you’ve got Al Gore confused with Al Roker…
August 3rd, 2008 at 7:37 pm
I’m voting Democrat because I want that $1,000 that Obama is going to take from the evil oil companies–and, they will never figure out how to get it back from me! Hahahahahahahahaha….
August 3rd, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Chickens#!t
“Democratic candidate Barack Obama on Saturday backed away from rival John McCain’s challenge for a series of joint appearances, agreeing only to the standard three debates in the fall.
“In May, when a McCain adviser proposed a series of pre-convention appearances at town hall meetings, Obama said, “I think that’s a great idea.” In summer stumping on the campaign trail, McCain has often noted that Obama had not followed through and joined him in any events.”
August 3rd, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Now, Obama agrees with Clinton….
“Barack Obama has sent a letter to the co-chairs of the Democratic National Convention’s Credentials Committee urging them to pass a resolution allowing the Democratic delegations from Florida and Michigan to be fully represented at the Democratic National Convention.”
How convenient.
August 3rd, 2008 at 8:31 pm
From Woody’s link:
The McCain campaign “rejected Obama’s proposal for two joint town hall meetings.”
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:04 pm
“Your song is stupid and boring. Not surprising, given its provenance…”–Reg
Boring, yet you continue indulging them by responding to both of these morons.
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:06 pm
OK, back to dress codes:
http://www.codethinked.com/post/2007/12/The-Programmer-Dress-Code.aspx
[[reg, parenthetically, you *did* promise about 10 pages ago to stop replying to the one who shall remain nameless]]
August 3rd, 2008 at 11:09 pm
I’m referring to:
“I’m through with this shit. You’re a total waste of time”
Ring a bell?
August 4th, 2008 at 6:11 am
Guilty as charged.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:14 am
From reg’s selection of Woody’s link…with expanded references for truth and clarity….
For more:
You just prove what a liar you can be, reg, by using selected quotes from Obama spokesmen, who evade the truth themselves. Why, how can you even know what they mean with the way Obama changes his mind on issues himself?
You and Obama’s campaign are just dishonest.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:27 am
On media issues and the decline of the papers….
British Writer Claims MSM Silence on Edwards Scandal Reflects Newspaper Decline
Maybe if journalists dressed nicer, I could overlook their liberal bias and failings.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:45 am
I’m a Peckerwood? Jim R never fails to satisfy.
Solzy’s own Wikipedia entry has details on his Anti-Semitism and far right views. It is uncontroversial.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:25 am
What you get from the internet that you can’t get from the liberal press….
href=”http://conservativepulse.com/home/2008/08/obama-flip-flops-his-position-on-space-exploration-and-nasa-funding/”>Obama flip-flops his position on space exploration and NASA funding
Which of these two wildly different positions would actually become policy if he was elected? No one can really know for sure. But this smells like little more than cheap and pathetic pandering for votes.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:27 am
(Hmmmm. Let me try that again.)
What you get from the internet that you can’t get from the liberal press….
Obama flip-flops his position on space exploration and NASA funding
Which of these two wildly different positions would actually become policy if he was elected? No one can really know for sure. But this smells like little more than cheap and pathetic pandering for votes.
(Hope that worked.)
August 4th, 2008 at 8:28 am
Nuts!! Use this.
http://conservativepulse.com/home/2008/08/obama-flip-flops-his-position-on-space-exploration-and-nasa-funding/
August 4th, 2008 at 8:40 am
Finally! Some good journalism from people who dress in a business-like fashion….
WSJ: What Is a ‘Windfall’ Profit?
August 4th, 2008 at 10:33 am
Interesting items about Obama’s plane from a Democratic source:
** It’s name is “O-Force One.” His chair has his name and campaign logo embroidered on the back top — “Obama ‘08†on one line and “President†underneath.
Do I detect pride and arrogance?
** He stripped off the American flag that flew on the tail.
Why fly a flag that he refuses to salute or wear on his lapel?
- – -
In other news….
HillBuzz: McCain Leads Obama 47%-46% for first time in new Rasmussen poll
Also, from HillBuzz: Computer Expert Proves Obama’s Birth Certificate is a Forgery
I guess if the MSM won’t investigate the love child of Obama backer John Edwards, they sure won’t do anything to reveal other problems with Obama.
August 4th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Wow, this thread has been hijacked by Woody again. Marc, some fresh material, please?
August 4th, 2008 at 10:49 am
I consider my offerings as fresh material. Neither Marc nor any of you have brought up those points!
Now, that Obama is agreeing to Hillary’s demand to seat all of the Michigan and Florida delegates, she might have a chance!
BTW, I did like Michael Turmon’s dress code for programmers.
Okay, I have real work to do now, so, like the “Outer Limits” signing off, I now return control of this blog to you.
August 4th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
jc — in re Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s passing, am curious to your (or any reader who’s not quite up to responding to Woody’s inspiring fresh material) take on being a moral writer versus a political writer. My view is that Solzhenitsyn tried very much to separate the two, but in the end this is impossible. Politics will always show up somewhere.
August 4th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
RG-
I couldn’t have said it better myself. As a staunch materialist, I don’t think one can divorce moral from political and vice versa. That said, a writer can be correct politically, on the surface, but wrong morally and vice versa.
August 4th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
A better case in point……one does not need to subscribe to, say, Andrew Bacevich’s Catholic conservatism to appreciate his C. Wright Mills inspired critical analysis.
August 4th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Isn’t it odd, and sad, that Solzhenitsyn ended up admiring Putin? While he was living in exile in Vermont, Solzhenitsyn would often rail against the shallowness of America and our blatant consumerism. When he finally went pack to Russia, it seems he so wanted a to live in a Russia that was respected and important on the world stage that he sided with a Machavellian creature. One wonders at how this transformation occurs.
August 4th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
There was no transformation. He was always an autocrat, and only complained when he was on the recieving end of autocracy. It is not unlike another so-called dissident, the former Soviet and dnow Israeli poltiician Anatole (nathan) Sharansky who now writes about “identity” like the 19th century right wing nationalist that he is. These are all Narodniks!
August 4th, 2008 at 6:48 pm
reg, since you’re carrying your stupid debate with me in mulitiple comments here and across the internet, I’ll re-post my response to you on WLA here.
- – -
reg, you’re a bigger idiot than even I thought. Am I supposed to discount the analysis of a business publication (IBD) whose role is to analyze investments and economic factors just because you don’t understand their data and can’t identify their specific results from the source, you can’t explain your own calculations or specific source results or even their sources, and because you simply say they are wrong??? STUPID! You are just plain stupid!
Further, you ignore multiple links on other items that I provide just to stupidly attack one nit-picky point that you don’t understand and can’t explain yourself and which is not all that critical. What about those others sources you ignore?! I guess that you concede them. You should.
Can you at least understand that Carter’s, and now Obama’s, “windfall profit tax” reduced domestic oil production and increased imports? Some big help for energy independence! Do you want that? Probably so, knowing you.
But, let’s look at the information again.
Jimmy Carter’s windfall profits tax led to a 6% drop in domestic oil output and as much as a 15% surge in oil imports, according to the Congressional Research Service.
Is it possible, just possible, that these numbers are within the acceptable range of the Congressional estimates and that their time frame might not coincide with yours? Yes.
Well, for one thing, your time reference for your data as stated in the summary includes the years 1986-1988, when the tax and its effect were not in place.
From the report: “From 1980 to 1988, the WPT may have reduced domestic oil production anywhere from 1.2% to 8.0% (320 to 1,269 million barrels). Dependence on imported oil grew from between 3% and 13%.
But, to go further: Estimates were prepared for the period 1980-1986. From 1986-1988 there are no output effects because the WPT liability was zero in those years.
If you add years with zeros to a cumulative study, you’re bound to make the results look better. But, that is dishonest and misleading–right up your alley.
In addition, there are other limitations of the available data, which the report discloses but doesn’t quantify.
In summary, from the report: The WPT had the effect of reducing the domestic supply of crude oil below what the supply would have been without the tax. This increased the demand for imported oil and made the United States more dependent upon foreign oil as compared with dependence without a WPT.
Isn’t that what is really important–not your minutia?
I AM NOT GOING TO WASTE MY TIME ANYMORE TRYING TO PROVE INDEPENDENTLY PREPARED DATA FROM REPUTABLE SOURCES JUST BECAUSE YOU AND RANDY ARE TOO DENSE TO UNDERSTAND THE DATA OR EVEN THE SIGNIFICANCE OR LACK OF SIGNIFICANCE OF IT.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
reg, on another site, still argues without understanding. It’s just a copy and paste job with him. He’ll bring it here, too.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
On chart 5 the author of the report your link cited as their “evidence” clearly states the cumulative estimate over the life of the legislation is 3%. I guess you’re smarter than the author of the research, because to make a partisan point you want to subtract the years when the tax was in effect, but didn’t have an impact. If you dId your accounting like this – arbitrarily picking and choosing which numbers make your case and which don’t – you’d end up in jail…
August 4th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
Woody:
Do you think we could have saved this $5 billion from the defense budget along with all of the development costs?
blog.wired.com/defense/2008/08/navys-stealth-d.html
August 4th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
reg, you are incapable of reading the chart correctly, so now you’re trying to twist the numbers to suit an arbitrary and misleading time frame that doen’t match cause and effect–and, without all the facts. You’re an idiot. If you don’t like IBD’s numbers, take it up with them.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
Dan O., I specialize in waste from liberal programs. It offers a lot more opportunities.
August 4th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
Actually, looking at it in more detail, the author doesn’t include the last two years when there was zero impact, but even with that exclusion comes up with a range from 1.2% – 4.8%. There is no basis anywhere in this report for the IDB claim that the figure was 6%. My point is that IDB, rather than present facts is a wingnut rag that cooks and distorts data to fit it’s partisan biases. Sound familiar ?
August 4th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
reg: Actually, looking at it in more detail… My point is (now)…
Other reg: “I’m really out of my league.”
August 4th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
There is NO data in that report that supports the IDB estimate. The fact is that the author offers a range of estimates – not terribly well organized – but NONE support the crap you were slinging. If “out of my league” means I’m not a crap merchant slinging partisan shit relentlessly and calling it “research”, yeah I’m not in your league.
You’ve been proven wrong on this and you’re too much of a chickenshit too admit there’s a problem with the IDB claim that was allegedly based on the research in this report.
Time for you to sit down and shut up. You don’t have an honest bone in your body, nor can you “do the math” and show how the IDB claim adds up. Pretty goddam simple for anyone with a mentality beyond 12.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
I can figure it from the data. You can’t. Take it up with them, loser.
August 4th, 2008 at 8:39 pm
“I can figure it from the data”
Proof you’re mentally challenged…
August 5th, 2008 at 7:51 am
Not since the carbon dating debate has this blog been as compelling…
August 5th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Guess what – this “debate” hasn’t changed any minds. I thought yesterday’s speech by Obama presented a pretty coherent Energy plan. Bujt w’re a nation of attenyion defecit disorder so probably the best advice I can give is to make sure your kids learn Chinese so they communicate with their bosses!
August 5th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
Since this thread is now, more or less, an open one can we talk of anothetr McCain stunt – “Wives Gone Wild! – Sturgis edition.”
McCain was at a biker rally in Sturgis SD. Nothing wrong with that. But one of the “Events” there is “Miss Buffalo Chip” a topless (and sometimes bottomless) contest in which some observers say sex acts go on on stage. Why is McCain involved? He offered up his wife as a contestestant – yeah the same one he called a “cunt” once.
Look Obama people. I know you want to be Bambi and sing “Kumbayah” and all that. And you dis Wes Clark and MoveOn while looking like wimps. But Ignoring this is MALPRACTICE. Does this 71 year old fossil think he’s at a Tailhook Convention?
Family values GOP Style!
(Can’t wait for Woody to explain how this is all Bill Clinton’s fault!)
August 5th, 2008 at 4:55 pm
Obama on the “conservatives” attacking his energy plan:
“These guys take pride in being ignorant.”
(Sound familiar?)
August 5th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
McCain isn’t at a Tailhook Convention – he’s at a Tail Convention. I don’t know that Obama himself should address this, but it’s definitely an aspect of McCain’s “character” that we need to bring forward. McCain has dug himself a series of holes this week. I don’t know what Axelrod has in store for him, but I doubt that it’s a round of Kumbayah.
August 5th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
“Can’t wait for Woody to explain how this is all Bill Clinton’s fault!”
You guys really are masakists.
August 5th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Speaking of the future of journalism, look at what this kook is writing.
Handcuffs for Bushies
By MARC COOPER
While we’re at it, let’s convict liberal judges, appointed by Democrats, for refusing to uphold their oaths and refusing to uphold the Constitution. Then, let’s find out how much of the $100 million paid to the Clinton’s since leaving the White House are actually pay offs rather than payments for services. Oh, and let’s also check the IRS audits that were sicced onto Linda Tripp, Kathleen Willey, and others. Why, with Democrats, the indictments could be unlimited!
BTW, Ronnie Earle left office after abusing his position to attack Republicans. Go after him, too. Tom DeLay isn’t guilty and never was convicted.
August 5th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Oh, heck. I just remembered that Marc linked his article that I referenced in his previous post. Oh, well. DeLay is still innocent.
August 5th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
Maybe we could discuss this book: The Bible And Radiocarbon Dating
August 6th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Maybe we should discuss this from Eric Alterman, in which he quotes a bunch of communists explaining why the rightwing “liberal media” Hoohah is a crock of crap:
The right-wing advantage has grown so enormous in opinion-oriented public discourse that it has become all but impossible to ignore, even by those who benefit most from it. In the past, it was the rare conservative who was willing to admit the depth of the stranglehold. While researching my 2003 book What Liberal Media? I discovered the following admissions.
Rich Bond, former chair of the Republican Party: “There is some strategy to it [bashing the 'liberal' media]. . . . If you watch any great coach, what they try to do is ‘work the refs.’ Maybe the ref will cut you a little slack on the next one.” James Baker, who ran George H. W. Bush’s second presidential campaign, among many other Republican and Bush family projects: “There were days and times and events we might have had some complaints [but] on balance I don’t think we had anything to complain about.” Pat Buchanan, among the most conservative pundits and presidential candidates in the history of the republic, finding that he could not identify any allegedly liberal bias against him during his presidential candidacies: “I’ve gotten balanced coverage, and broad coverage — all we could have asked. For heaven sakes, we kid about the ‘liberal media,’ but every Republican on earth does that.” And even William Kristol, without a doubt the most influential Republican/ neoconservative publicist in America today, has come clean on this issue. “I admit it,” he told a reporter. “The liberal media were never that powerful, and the whole thing was often used as an excuse by conservatives for conservative failures.”
Back then, one had to be an unusually honest, or perhaps perspicacious, conservative to acknowledge that whatever advantage liberals may once have had when issues were debated had evaporated long ago. The evidence is so strong that even the compulsively dishonest Ann Coulter admits, “We have the media now.” Bill O’Reilly, who has proven himself capable of believing almost anything, including, according to one report he did in June 2007, the existence of a “national underground network” of pink-pistol-packing lesbians roaming “all across the country,” raping girls, attacking guys, and forcing ten-year-olds to become gay, warns, “Don’t believe the right-wing ideologues when they tell you the left still controls the media agenda. It does not any longer. It’s a fact.” The conservative analyst Bruce Bartlett admits in National Review Online that “the idea the media now tilt toward liberals is absurd.” The Weekly Standard’s Matt Labash, meanwhile, avers just how much fun it was to play the game while it lasted. “We’ve created this cottage industry in which it pays to be unobjective. It pays to be subjective as much as possible. It’s a great way to have your cake and eat it, too. Criticize other people for not being objective. Be as subjective as you want. It’s a great little racket. I’m glad we found it.”
August 7th, 2008 at 6:38 am
Fair enough reg, but what’s it got to do with the Bible and radiocarbon dating?
August 7th, 2008 at 7:28 am
I thought the thread was about Tom DeLay being innocent.
My bad…
August 8th, 2008 at 7:46 am
>the feudal-restorationist Dalai Lama.
Has he been dragged forward into the 11th century? Actaully, the old regime in Tibet was not nearly in the class of something as progressive as feudalism. It’s kind of funny that it’s mostly new agey liberals with those bumper stickers. It ought to be the Xian right supporting their Buddhist theocratic cousins, the way they support Israel.
March 26th, 2011 at 3:28 am
christian louboutin off