Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, August 01, 2012

OTP- August 2012: The Leader Post: New stadium won’t have same appeal, says Bill ‘Spaceman’ Lee

“Building a new stadium down the street does not work unless (Ron) Lancaster spilled some DNA in the lot where they’re going to build the new stadium,” he added. “You have to refurbish (Mosaic Stadium). You’ve got to can all new ideas you might have and use the sacred ground. Fenway did that and that is why Fenway is loved. The new Yankee Stadium isn’t the same as it used to be.”

The former Boston Red Sox and Montreal Expos pitcher will not be running for the vacant mayor’s position in Regina later this year. With his opinion on the new stadium, he wasn’t sure he would garner many votes anyway. But that is nothing new to the former member of the Rhinoceros Party. Lee ran on the Rhino ticket in 1988 for president of the United States. Not surprisingly, he didn’t make the ballot in a single state. He said one of the high-ranking members within the party gave him a six-pack of Molson Canadian and asked him to run for president.

“I adhered to their funny philosophy,” Lee said. “My campaign slogan was ‘No guns, no butter. They’ll both kill you.’ And I only campaigned in federal prisons where I knew they couldn’t vote, and I only accepted a quarter in campaign contributions.”

With it being an election year in the U.S., Lee said he is all in for the re-election of Barack Obama.

“The only time (Mitt) Romney opens his mouth is when he needs to change feet,” Lee said of the Republican nominee. “If Obama does lose this, which I can’t see happening, then it’s because of a lady in Florida who works for Jeb Bush and Diebold, the voting-machine company. If Obama even comes close to losing this election, it’ll be fraud.”

Guess what, its the new OT politics thread!

Tripon Posted: August 01, 2012 at 12:04 AM | 5975 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: boston, politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 24 of 60 pages ‹ First  < 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 >  Last ›
   2301. Lassus Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:26 PM (#4209806)
Ray, did you have an answer to #2243?
   2302. zonk Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:28 PM (#4209808)

He treats the 4th Amendment like toilet paper, or have you not heard of the TSA and their VIPR checkpoints, warrantless wiretapping, murder by drone of "terrorists" on suspicion alone, etc.. These are all well-known, widespread activities, but if you're just hearing about them let me know and I'll find some sources.

He and his Secretary of Defense claim that Congress need not authorize war - hence the assault of Libya under no congressional authority.

Free speeach zones - need I say more on the First Amendment

Strongarm federal crackdowns on marijuana dispensaries legal under California law - there goes the 10th Amendment


The denial Obama supporters are in is sickening.


All of these things have happened before and all of these things will happen again...

There's one little word in that rantlist that ensures it -- "Obama"... If we had this same conversation 5 years ago, there would have been one little different word that ensures it -- "Bush"... 15 years ago - the word would have been "Clinton"... 30 years ago -- "Reagan"...

Since there seems to be such unanimity amongst people on the left AND right about many of these items, it would probably be a lot more productive towards the ends if opponents of them would just get in the habit of dropping that one little word that changes every 4 to 8 years and focusing on the items themselves.
   2303. Shredder Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:30 PM (#4209810)
his home state of Illinois wasn't crazy about housing these miscreants.
Liar.
Veteran Virginia Republican Rep. Frank Wolf’s rejection of the Justice Department’s latest bid to purchase the unused Thomson prison in western Illinois has drawn the ire of two leading Illinois Democratswho accused the congressman of sacrificing jobs over politics.
...
Durbin and Gov. Pat Quinn each wrote to Wolf earlier on Friday, urging him to sign off on the purchase. Quinn had told Wolf, “I cannot see any reason for objecting to this sale.”

After Wolf rejected the purchase, Quinn’s office said that while the benefits of the sale are “crystal clear to everybody… the only person who has continually ignored the facts is a single congressman who has probably never set foot in Thomson.”
...
Ironically, Wolf’s decision politically probably hurts one of his Republican colleagues the most. Freshman Rep. Bobby Schilling of Colona has Thomson in his district and a federal purchase of the prison and creation of new jobs would help him in his bid for re-election against Cheri Bustos, a former East Moline alderwoman whose family has connections to the late Democratic Sen. Paul Simon and former Democratic Sen. Alan Dixon.

Schilling and Rep. Dave Loebsack, D-Iowa, who had written a joint letter Thursday urging Wolf to visit Thomson, issued a joint statement to the Quad City Times. The Times reported the congressmen called Wolf’s rejection a “disappointing setback” and said they would work together to try to resolve the issue.
Illinoisans never had a say. Cowardly Republicans outside of Illinois wouldn't let it get that far.
   2304. Rants Mulliniks Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:32 PM (#4209817)
unless you think unauthorized military excursions, security checkpoints, free speech zones, and supremacy of federal law over state law are all new concepts under Obama that have never existed before.


All out war in another country is a little more brazen than the covert operations of the past, and none of the others had drones at their disposal to make it so appallingly easy to kill people on the other side of the world. Not until Obama did it become customary or acceptable to demand US citizens show "papers" at random checkpoints at bus stations, train stations and road sides around the country.

I was framing my response to the idea that Obama is an alleged Constitutional scholar. If he is or was, it clearly only gave him contempt for it. And yes, the Feds and the President has continually eroded Constitutional protections, but the pace at which this is happening under Obama is dizzying.
   2305. zonk Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:38 PM (#4209822)


All out war in another country is a little more brazen than the covert operations of the past, and none of the others had drones at their disposal to make it so appallingly easy to kill people on the other side of the world. Not until Obama did it become customary or acceptable to demand US citizens show "papers" at random checkpoints at bus stations, train stations and road sides around the country.

I was framing my response to the idea that Obama is an alleged Constitutional scholar. If he is or was, it clearly only gave him contempt for it. And yes, the Feds and the President has continually eroded Constitutional protections, but the pace at which this is happening under Obama is dizzying.


Seriously?

Either you're quite a prodigy - only 3 years old, but already to use the internet and type in complete sentences, or you slept through 2001 through 2009.

But hey - clearly, making it a nakedly partisan problem to lay at the feet of the guy in office worked out well for progressives so I'm sure you'll have the same success.
   2306. Shredder Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:39 PM (#4209823)
How many "all out wars" has the U.S. engaged in with absolutely no combat troops on the ground?
Not until Obama did it become customary or acceptable to demand US citizens show "papers" at random checkpoints at bus stations, train stations and road sides around the country.
What the hell are you even talking about? We're getting into serious tinfoil hat territory here.
   2307. Dan The Mediocre Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:39 PM (#4209824)
Not until Obama did it become customary or acceptable to demand US citizens show "papers" at random checkpoints at bus stations, train stations and road sides around the country.


I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about here.
   2308. Rants Mulliniks Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:40 PM (#4209826)
Since there seems to be such unanimity amongst people on the left AND right about many of these items, it would probably be a lot more productive towards the ends if opponents of them would just get in the habit of dropping that one little word that changes every 4 to 8 years and focusing on the items themselves.


I've pointed out the fact that the Dems and Repubs are equally adept at ruining the country, but that gets me shouted down too.
   2309. Joe Kehoskie Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:42 PM (#4209833)
Liar. ...

Illinoisans never had a say. Cowardly Republicans outside of Illinois wouldn't let it get that far.

You don't know what you're talking about. Politicians wanted the DOJ to buy the prison because it would create jobs, but they adamantly OPPOSED using it for Gitmo detainees:

Durbin wants the federal government to buy the prison to ease overcrowding and spur the local economy. He said the sale would create more than 1,100 jobs and “inject at least $1 billion into the region’s economy.”

Durbin said that Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) joined him last year in making clear that support in Illinois for the prison purchase hinged on the guarantee that no Guantanamo Bay prisoners be shipped to the facility.

A controversial proposal from the Obama administration in November 2009 would have transferred suspected terrorists from Guantanamo Bay to the Illinois facility, but it was quickly shot down amid complaints it would become “Gitmo North.”
   2310. Lassus Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:43 PM (#4209834)
Not until Obama did it become customary or acceptable to demand US citizens show "papers" at random checkpoints at bus stations, train stations and road sides around the country.

Er, what? Thirded.

Also, they were doing the first two after 9/11 with regularity in NYC. Perhaps elsewhere? Dunno, I was mostly in the city. Kinda before "Not until Obama".
   2311. Shredder Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:43 PM (#4209835)
I've pointed out the fact that the Dems and Repubs are equally adept at ruining the country, but that gets me shouted down too.
I wouldn't shout you down for that. I'd probably ignore you as a crank, but I wouldn't shout you down. I'd have a lot more respect for a run of the mill crank than an obviously partisan crank.
   2312. Dan The Mediocre Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:43 PM (#4209836)
You don't know what the hell you're talking about. Politicians wanted the DOJ to buy the prison because it would create jobs, but they adamantly OPPOSED using it for Gitmo detainees:


So they wanted the DOJ to buy the land but not use it?
   2313. Rants Mulliniks Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:44 PM (#4209837)
Not until Obama did it become customary or acceptable to demand US citizens show "papers" at random checkpoints at bus stations, train stations and road sides around the country.


I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about here.


That's because the MSM stays silent on it. If you can handle getting some information from the odd "conspiracy" website, Google "VIPR checkpoints" and you'll find a lot more examples than this.

Apparently the only MSM story on VIPR
   2314. Rants Mulliniks Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:46 PM (#4209838)
   2315. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:49 PM (#4209841)
I missed the choice of Ryan as Romney's "next president". . . . I wonder what the rationale for that pick was, from a strictly strategic standpoint.

Most folks concede Ryan's expertise on budget issues, and that he is an articulate advocate for his views. He doesn't need a teleprompter or even notes to be persuasive, even with non-GOP voters. The contrast to Joe Biden could be quite striking. Biden graduated near the bottom of his class at Syracuse University Law School, then and now a rather middling law school, and he's lucky to have graduated at all, having once plagiarized 6 pages of a law review article. Biden ran for President twice without generating any traction, and many found his performance during various S. Ct. confirmation hearings less than impressive. Ryan has the potential to make headway in the VP debate, put Wisconsin in play, and have some spillover effect in other Midwestern states. Most importantly, Romney was going to be attacked over the House GOP budget plan anyway, why not have its most articulate advocate in position to help defend it?
   2316. Joe Kehoskie Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:49 PM (#4209842)
So they wanted the DOJ to buy the land but not use it?

No, they wanted the DOJ to use it as a prison — but NOT for terror suspects.
   2317. Shredder Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:51 PM (#4209846)
You don't know what the hell you're talking about.
While that article discusses the recent purchase, both Senators and the governor supported the purchase of the prison to house detainees in 2009.
Durbin and Quinn are expected on Sunday to discuss details about the ongoing evaluations by the Justice and Defense teams. They will be joined at press conferences at the Quad City International Airport, Midway Airport and Rockford International Airport by Michael Randle, Department of Corrections director and Jonathon Monken, Illinois State police director.

Unlike other locations where the housing of terrorist suspects touched off a political storm, Obama's home state of Illinois may provide a friendlier reception. Durbin is on board and Sen. Roland Burris (D-Ill.) is open bringing detainees to Illinois.

The mayor of the small (population 550) agricultural community has raised no objection to the potential use of Thomson to house Guantanamo detainees--which has been an open possibility for months. A maximum security federal prison in Downstate Marion houses Ali al-Marri, a convicted al-Qaida conspirator without controversy.

The Quad City Times, which covers northwestern Illinois, reported on Friday that the federal government may buy Thomson. Quinn, during a campaign stop on Thursday night in the Quad Cities said he would have an announcement about the sale of the eight-year-old facility "within the next few days," the paper reported.

The paper said Thomson Mayor Jerry Hebeler has not objected to suspected terrorists being imprisoned in his town--far away from any target rich population center.
So again, you're contention that those of us who actually live in Illinois were opposed to this is simply false. Even your own link doesn't contend that Durbin opposes housing prisoners at Thomson. He just wants it sold.
   2318. zonk Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:52 PM (#4209850)
I've pointed out the fact that the Dems and Repubs are equally adept at ruining the country, but that gets me shouted down too.


Ahhh... so instead of one flawed word, why not go with two to ensure partisans from both sides shout you down?

The Civil Rights movement is rather instructive here, I think... Undoubtedly, the Democratic party up until the 1950s/60s was home to the loudest proponents of segregation. It took a Republican President (Ike after Brown v. Board of Education), a couple of Democratic Presidents, and a coalition of northern Democrats and Republicans willing to set aside concerns about 'economic liberty' to pass most of the era's legislation.

The sad fact is that, just like the civil rights champions of 50 years ago, there simply wasn't a critical mass of the populace opposed to a policy to do anything about it... and aligning with one party over the other in hopes of that had gotten them nowhere.

The Civil Rights movement succeeded because it WASN'T made into a partisan issue that would force one party in our two-party system to 'turtle up' into a defensive crouch, but rather -- put the issue itself on the forefront, and forced both parties into addressing it.

   2319. Shredder Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:53 PM (#4209851)
No, they wanted the DOJ to use it as a prison — but NOT for terror suspects.
This again isn't true. It ascribes motives to the DOJ and Durbin that clearly don't exist. They just want the DOJ to purchase it. And they know that because of cowardly politicians on both sides, they can't sell it if it's going to be used to detain terrorist suspects.
   2320. Dan The Mediocre Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:53 PM (#4209852)
That's because the MSM stays silent on it. If you can handle getting some information from the odd "conspiracy" website, Google "VIPR checkpoints" and you'll find a lot more examples than this.


I see nothing about anyone being forced to "show papers".

   2321. Lassus Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:56 PM (#4209855)
From the link in #2314:
Three federal air marshals in bulletproof vests and two officers trained to spot suspicious behavior watched closely as Seiko, a German shepherd, nosed Vetter's trousers for chemical traces of a bomb. Radiation detectors carried by the marshals scanned the 57-year-old lawyer for concealed nuclear materials. When Seiko indicated a scent, his handler, Julian Swaringen, asked Vetter whether he had pets at home in Garner, N.C. Two mutts, Vetter replied. "You can go ahead," Swaringen said.

That was one scary demand for papers and identification. Coke to Dan.

It's concerning and not how I want to live, granted. But, again, in response to your OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA, this crap has been happening since 2001, not 2008

   2322. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:57 PM (#4209856)
That's because the MSM stays silent on it. If you can handle getting some information from the odd "conspiracy" website, Google "VIPR checkpoints" and you'll find a lot more examples than this.

Apparently the only MSM story on VIPR


In that story I see random inspections, and inspections based on tips that drivers are encouraged to make, but not anything about "show me your papers."

(Not that the critique of the AZ law from the left was truthful, either.)
   2323. zonk Posted: August 16, 2012 at 03:58 PM (#4209859)

You don't know what you're talking about. Politicians wanted the DOJ to buy the prison because it would create jobs, but they adamantly OPPOSED using it for Gitmo detainees:


Of course - the town with the prison didn't feel that way (WSJ: Guantanamo Detainees Welcome Here and Many in Illinois town hope locating Gitmo detainees there helps business).

Thomson was always a George Ryan construction project sop -- they never even bothered to budget staffing and other costs to actually open and operate the prison. It was a $150 million boondoggle.

As Shredder notes - the timeline here is important - your article is from 2012, when the plan to close Gitmo was a hulking, smoking debacle of a dead deal... Quinn, Durbin, and plenty of others had no such compunction when the plan was first floated.
   2324. Joe Kehoskie Posted: August 16, 2012 at 04:00 PM (#4209863)
While that article discusses the recent purchase, both Senators and the governor supported the purchase of the prison to house detainees in 2009.

That's odd, since your link specifically says this with regards to the governor:

Quinn's statement side-stepped the matter of if Guantanamo detainees would be housed there, making no mention in the statement. The state could realize at least $200 million from a deal.


So again, you're contention that those of us who actually live in Illinois were opposed to this is simply false. Even your own link doesn't contend that Durbin opposes housing prisoners at Thomson. He just wants it sold.

I guess you missed the part in bold. Here it is again:

Durbin said that Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) joined him last year in making clear that support in Illinois for the prison purchase hinged on the guarantee that no Guantanamo Bay prisoners be shipped to the facility.

The Thomson prison deal is and always was a money grab.
   2325. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 16, 2012 at 04:00 PM (#4209864)
Another mainstream article on VIPR


In this article I see checkpoints, searches, and screenings - but no "show me your papers."
   2326. Shredder Posted: August 16, 2012 at 04:06 PM (#4209872)
I guess you missed the part in bold. Here it is again:
Do you honestly think Durbin changed his stance on housing detainees at Thomson in the last three years? As an Illinois Senator, his first priority with regard to Thomson is to get the place operational. If that means agreeing to the cowardly demand that suspected terrorists not be housed there because some diptick congressman in Virginia wets his bed every night worrying about how the brown people might get him, then that's what it takes. But it in no way follows that he's personally opposed to using Thomson to house detainees if it were politically feasible. You have a disturbingly weak grasp on logic.
   2327. Joe Kehoskie Posted: August 16, 2012 at 04:11 PM (#4209879)
Do you honestly think Durbin changed his stance on housing detainees at Thomson in the last three years? As an Illinois Senator, his first priority with regard to Thomson is to get the place operational. If that means agreeing to the cowardly demand that suspected terrorists not be housed there because some diptick congressman in Virginia wets his bed every night worrying about how the brown people might get him, then that's what it takes. But it in no way follows that he's personally opposed to using Thomson to house detainees if it were politically feasible. You have a disturbingly weak grasp on logic.

You apparently have a disturbingly weak grasp on English comprehension. The Tribune report says what it says. Why would Durbin have Holder swear under oath not to house Gitmo detainees in Thomson if Durbin wasn't opposed and/or if moving detainees to Thomson was truly the end game?
   2328. Famous Original Joe C Posted: August 16, 2012 at 04:12 PM (#4209880)
You guys figure it out yet?
   2329. Shredder Posted: August 16, 2012 at 04:15 PM (#4209885)
Why would Durbin have Holder swear under oath not to house Gitmo detainees in Thomson if Durbin wasn't opposed and/or moving detainees to Thomson was truly the end game?
Good lord you are dense. The end game is putting the prison to work, whatever it may take to get that done. They swore that under oath BECAUSE IT WAS THE ONLY WAY TO GET THE PLACE SOLD, NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE OPPOSED TO HOUSING DETAINEES! They're giving in to the bed-wetters that you support, not agreeing with them on policy. If you can't understand the difference, well, that's really just pathetic.
   2330. Joe Kehoskie Posted: August 16, 2012 at 04:35 PM (#4209898)
Good lord you are dense. The end game is putting the prison to work, whatever it may take to get that done. They swore that under oath BECAUSE IT WAS THE ONLY WAY TO GET THE PLACE SOLD, NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE OPPOSED TO HOUSING DETAINEES! They're giving in to the bed-wetters that you support, not agreeing with them on policy. If you can't understand the difference, well, that's really just pathetic.

So, basically, you're saying Durbin was lying through his teeth when he "[made] clear that support in Illinois for the prison purchase hinged on the guarantee that no Guantanamo Bay prisoners be shipped to the facility"?

Even by political standards, that would have been a rather brazen form of lying.
   2331. Fred Lynn Nolan Ryan Sweeney Agonistes Posted: August 16, 2012 at 04:49 PM (#4209906)
unless you think unauthorized military excursions, security checkpoints, free speech zones, and supremacy of federal law over state law are all new concepts under Obama that have never existed before.

Bush's abuses in all of these areas were bad. What's unnerving, though, is that I feel like Democrats opposed those abuses when Bush was in office. And then Obama came in, and took all that bad stuff even further, and the Democrats effectively said "Well, I trust my President" and rolled over and went back to sleep. And I feel completely confident that when some non-Democrat becomes President, both professional and civilian Democrats will suddenly wake up and remember that they oppose those abuses.
I won't ever think it's OK to lock people up forever without having to show any evidence to anybody, no matter which political party is in charge at the time.
   2332. Shredder Posted: August 16, 2012 at 04:54 PM (#4209910)
Even by political standards, that would have been a rather brazen form of lying.
So a politician says something publicly to ensure a deal because he knows that publicly placating the bed-wetters is the only way to get the deal done, and you consider this lying? Have you ever paid attention to actual politics?
   2333. Joe Kehoskie Posted: August 16, 2012 at 05:31 PM (#4209933)
Like a lot of things here, I didn't think my original comment would be controversial.

I can't find any stories that say people in Illinois were jumping up and down about housing terror suspects. From Day 1, the whole issue seemed like it was being used by Illinois politicians as a bailout — i.e., a convenient way for Illinois to unload a $200 million prison that they foolishly built but then never used. Other than the small-town mayor who talked about jobs, the other pols mostly seemed interested in having the feds send a $200 million check as soon as possible, not caring if the DOJ ever used the prison at all.
   2334. Guapo Posted: August 16, 2012 at 05:43 PM (#4209945)
Not until Obama did it become customary or acceptable to demand US citizens show "papers" at random checkpoints at bus stations, train stations and road sides around the country.


And voting booths.

Oh wait, that's the Republicans. Never mind.
   2335. CrosbyBird Posted: August 16, 2012 at 05:56 PM (#4209953)
I think it's just as narrow minded to assume that a Mormon/Scientologist/etc can't be smart or sane cuz of their beliefs as it is for an extremely devout theist to assume that an atheist can't be moral or have values because of their lack of religious beliefs. The idea that anyone who's smart/moral/sane must automatically come to the same conclusions that we have seems really arrogant IMO, and even a bit anti-diversity.

That's a particularly poor (and infuriating) analogy.

Certain belief in the extraordinary without extraordinary evidence IS irrational. That doesn't mean that you can't be smart or sane if you have faith. It does mean that in this particular area, such a person has willfully and deliberately decided to ignore the rules of logic that apply to practically every other positive belief that human beings accept as reasonable. (To be clear, I don't think it's necessary to be perfectly rational in order to be smart or sane; otherwise none of us are. I have a problem with being willfully irrational but I have a problem with people who favor the death penalty too; it's just one part of the package.)

Morality is not only distinct from religious belief, but often in opposition to it. The terrorists that flew planes into the WTC did so because of their religious conviction; the people who bomb abortion clinics do so because of their religious conviction; the people who perform female genital mutilation do so because of their religious conviction.

All beliefs are not worthy of the same respect. (I would elect a Scientologist if I agreed with his positions.)
   2336. Dan The Mediocre Posted: August 16, 2012 at 06:19 PM (#4209971)
Bush's abuses in all of these areas were bad. What's unnerving, though, is that I feel like Democrats opposed those abuses when Bush was in office. And then Obama came in, and took all that bad stuff even further, and the Democrats effectively said "Well, I trust my President" and rolled over and went back to sleep. And I feel completely confident that when some non-Democrat becomes President, both professional and civilian Democrats will suddenly wake up and remember that they oppose those abuses.
I won't ever think it's OK to lock people up forever without having to show any evidence to anybody, no matter which political party is in charge at the time.


I have to agree with this. I think Obama has failed pretty miserably in this department.
   2337. Steve Treder Posted: August 16, 2012 at 06:28 PM (#4209976)
I have to agree with this. I think Obama has failed pretty miserably in this department.

Agreed as well. This and the Afghanistan folly have been his major failings.

Well, that and I would kind of like it if Holder could manage to bring a case against just one of the many Wall Street miscreants.
   2338. Tripon Posted: August 16, 2012 at 06:34 PM (#4209979)
It is pretty crazy that Afghanistan has been going on for over 10 years. We really are fighting the eternal war on some land.
   2339. smileyy Posted: August 16, 2012 at 06:42 PM (#4209983)

All of these things have happened before and all of these things will happen again...


And still doesn't mean I should vote for someone who enables...nay...supports and enacts...these policies.

If all of your choices for defensive coordinators like to rape little boys, it doesn't mean you look past it to figure out which one runs the best 4-3 defense.
   2340. Greg K Posted: August 16, 2012 at 06:44 PM (#4209984)
It is pretty crazy that Afghanistan has been going on for over 10 years. We really are fighting the eternal war on some land.

I just started reading the Flashman series this year (odd in that I've known of the series for years and known it would be right up my alley, but didn't start until now). The first book takes place in Afghanistan in the 1840s and it's just mind-blowing thinking of the armies that have wandered around that place, not accomplishing a great deal since then.
   2341. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 16, 2012 at 06:54 PM (#4209991)
I have to agree with this. I think Obama has failed pretty miserably in this department.


Agreed as well.


I thought Obama solved this problem. My evidence is that the media no longer complains about it.
   2342. Lassus Posted: August 16, 2012 at 07:13 PM (#4209997)
Ray is one of those people that somehow even when agreed with manages to be a shrill pick.
   2343. zonk Posted: August 16, 2012 at 07:13 PM (#4209998)
And still doesn't mean I should vote for someone who enables...nay...supports and enacts...these policies.

If all of your choices for defensive coordinators like to rape little boys, it doesn't mean you look past it to figure out which one runs the best 4-3 defense.



Ummmm, no, it's really nothing like that.
   2344. robinred Posted: August 16, 2012 at 07:22 PM (#4210005)
Agreed as well. This and the Afghanistan folly have been his major failings.


Yep. I also don't like some of the stuff that Obama and Duncan have done with education, but that is to be expected. I am not surprised, though. I still like Obama, but he really has been pretty much what I expected across the board--including Guantanamo.
   2345. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 16, 2012 at 07:27 PM (#4210007)
I would kind of like it if Holder could manage to bring a case against just one of the many Wall Street miscreants.

Jon Corzine?
   2346. smileyy Posted: August 16, 2012 at 08:12 PM (#4210039)
[2343] A President shredding the Constitution and bankrupting the country with war is that unconscionable to me.
   2347. zenbitz Posted: August 16, 2012 at 08:44 PM (#4210052)
Obamas record on civil rights is horrific (with a nod to gay marraige) and his foreign policy has been almost Bushesque. Clinton wasnt much better.

I have zero confidence that any D/R/I candidate over the last 30 years is any better.
Luckily i live in california so my vote doesnt count.

The situation is so bad it makes me want to get into politics.


   2348. Jay Z Posted: August 16, 2012 at 08:50 PM (#4210058)
Most folks concede Ryan's expertise on budget issues, and that he is an articulate advocate for his views. He doesn't need a teleprompter or even notes to be persuasive, even with non-GOP voters. The contrast to Joe Biden could be quite striking. Biden graduated near the bottom of his class at Syracuse University Law School, then and now a rather middling law school, and he's lucky to have graduated at all, having once plagiarized 6 pages of a law review article. Biden ran for President twice without generating any traction, and many found his performance during various S. Ct. confirmation hearings less than impressive. Ryan has the potential to make headway in the VP debate, put Wisconsin in play, and have some spillover effect in other Midwestern states. Most importantly, Romney was going to be attacked over the House GOP budget plan anyway, why not have its most articulate advocate in position to help defend it?


Ooh, a teleprompter burn. And Biden's college days!

Ryan wants to take away Medicare so he can cut Mitt Romney's taxes to 0%, and he still blows a hole in the budget. Being articulate is Ryan's problem, not his solution.

Ryan's budgets are the budgets that any Republican would come up with in 2012. Taxes cut sharply for the rich, military budget up, entitlements aren't cut today but "in the future", Laffernomics to raise revenue despite the tax cuts, discretionary spending somehow at $0 at some point in the future. He served his masters well in that regard. Believe me, if you want the election to be about RyanCare, the Dems will take that with open arms.
   2349. steagles Posted: August 16, 2012 at 08:56 PM (#4210061)
[2343] A President shredding the Constitution and bankrupting the country with war is that unconscionable to me.
are we still talking about obama here?
Obamas record on civil rights is horrific (with a nod to gay marraige)
in what way? considering the history of this country, horrific is a pretty high bar.
   2350. asdf1234 Posted: August 16, 2012 at 08:57 PM (#4210062)
Ryan wants to take away Medicare so he can cut Mitt Romney's taxes to 0%, and he still blows a hole in the budget.


Wow.
   2351. smileyy Posted: August 16, 2012 at 09:25 PM (#4210084)
[2349] I'm talking about the last 11 years of Presidents.
   2352. Tripon Posted: August 16, 2012 at 09:34 PM (#4210090)
A former Texas high school English teacher and mother of three is on trial, accused of having sex with five male students.
The evidence against Brittni Colleps, 28, includes cell phone video that allegedly shows group sex between her and four students at her home. Prosecutors say it happened while her children and husband, who is an Army specialist stationed out-of-state, were away. The graphic video was shown to the jury this week.
"She [Colleps] said that she craved, that I had something that she wanted," one of the students involved testified.


Posted without comment.
   2353. Lassus Posted: August 16, 2012 at 09:37 PM (#4210092)
I'd have preferred a comment. I'm not sure what it's relevant to.
   2354. steagles Posted: August 16, 2012 at 09:39 PM (#4210094)
   2355. CrosbyBird Posted: August 16, 2012 at 09:54 PM (#4210108)
Believe it or not, I don't have any problem with the "use of drones" as a generic concept. I mean, if we're talking about attacking legitimate targets -- I see no reasons, indeed, great benefit to using a drone rather than lobbing cruise missiles from a frigate or risking Air Force/Navy pilots and their more expensive equipment.

That's my position as well. Once it's a legitimate use of force, there's no reason to use less discriminating weapons that might hit other targets or to risk the lives of our soldiers. If a live sniper or commando raid would be okay, then a drone is just fine.

The hard part is establishing that it's a legitimate use of force.
   2356. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 16, 2012 at 09:56 PM (#4210110)
Posted without comment.

Apparently, all the students were over 18, so she's not charged with statutory rape, but is facing five counts of having an improper relationship between an educator and a student. Didn't know they had closed that loophole.
   2357. CrosbyBird Posted: August 16, 2012 at 10:11 PM (#4210121)
Fantastic lawsuit.

My favorite line from the article: "The suit alleges that Cowboys Stadium posted no warning signs alerting fans that the benches could be hot."
   2358. bobm Posted: August 16, 2012 at 10:14 PM (#4210125)
[2348]
Biden graduated near the bottom of his class at Syracuse University Law School, then and now a rather middling law school, and he's lucky to have graduated at all, having once plagiarized 6 pages of a law review article.


Did Paul Ryan ever plagiarize Neil Kinnock?
   2359. Tripon Posted: August 16, 2012 at 10:38 PM (#4210144)
For being influenced by Ayn Rand. If a guy like Alan Greenspan wasn't demonized for having positive views about Rand, I can't see why Ryan has to disavow Rand.

I mean, I obviously disagree with what Rand advocated. (I personally think a lot of what she wrote is bunk), but the 'test' has already been applied and Rand followers have already passed so to speak.
   2360. Jay Z Posted: August 16, 2012 at 11:35 PM (#4210152)
For being influenced by Ayn Rand. If a guy like Alan Greenspan wasn't demonized for having positive views about Rand, I can't see why Ryan has to disavow Rand.

I mean, I obviously disagree with what Rand advocated. (I personally think a lot of what she wrote is bunk), but the 'test' has already been applied and Rand followers have already passed so to speak.


Most of the public has no idea who Rand is.
   2361. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: August 16, 2012 at 11:53 PM (#4210159)
Most of the public has no idea who Rand is.


Was she ever photographed with Saul Alinsky? Because that might get some media coverage.
   2362. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 17, 2012 at 12:05 AM (#4210163)
For being influenced by Ayn Rand. If a guy like Alan Greenspan wasn't demonized for having positive views about Rand, I can't see why Ryan has to disavow Rand.


No reason that Ryan should "have to" disavow Ayn Rand, or anyone else. Whom he chooses to worship is his own business. But I do want Ryan to be thoroughly grilled in public at least once about her "philosophy" (which he's said repeatedly that he admires) by someone who's well acquainted with it, and let him try to explain what it is about her views that he finds so compelling. It should make for a most interesting set of exchanges.

Most of the public has no idea who Rand is.

And that's exactly why I want to see that above exchange, preferably in the vice presidential debate. It would be a complete sellout of seriousness on the part of the media if they didn't dig into Ryan's association with this loopy woman's writings. If it had been just an adolescent passing phase on his part, it'd be one thing, but from everything he's said to date, the only thing that bothers Ryan about Ayn Rand is her atheism. There's nothing else in her "philosophy" that he seems to object to. It's certainly a far more important topic to pursue than Romney's Mormonism, since clearly Rand's ideas have influenced Ryan's secular worldview much more than the tenets of the Book of Mormon have shaped Romney's political philosophy.
   2363. PreservedFish Posted: August 17, 2012 at 12:58 AM (#4210187)
I really loved The Fountainhead when I was 16. I wasn't so much into the greed stuff, I was more into the belief in the primacy of man, the triumph of individuality, that jazz. Also the atheism, the veneration of reason. I had a Rand quote on my yearbook page, something about the skyline of Manhattan and "what other religion do we need?" There is an optimistic and life-affirming message somewhere in there. I suppose Ryan and I took nearly opposite lessons from her.

I haven't read a scrap of her writing since I was that age.
   2364. Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim Posted: August 17, 2012 at 01:25 AM (#4210200)
Everyone I know who was thought either The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged was great read it in high school. I don't know anyone who read it for the first time as an adult out of school who thought they were anything but a steaming load.

I've mentioned this here before, but I tried reading Atlas Shrugged in high school. It was the second worst literary experience of my life, coming in behind Oliver Twist. Nothing's worse than Oliver Twist.
   2365. SteveF Posted: August 17, 2012 at 01:28 AM (#4210203)
I read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead when I was in college. It took a great amount of force of will to finish them. Talk about Mary Sues, but I guess that was the point. I remember thinking her entire philosophy seemed like a misreading of Nietzsche.
   2366. Tripon Posted: August 17, 2012 at 01:33 AM (#4210206)
I guess that's a good way to describe. You read Rand because you can't handle Nietzsche.
   2367. CrosbyBird Posted: August 17, 2012 at 01:41 AM (#4210209)
This quote?

“I would give the greatest sunset in the world for one sight of New York's skyline. Particularly when one can't see the details. Just the shapes. The shapes and the thought that made them. The sky over New York and the will of man made visible. What other religion do we need? And then people tell me about pilgrimages to some dank pesthole in a jungle where they go to do homage to a crumbling temple, to a leering stone monster with a pot belly, created by some leprous savage. Is it beauty and genius they want to see? Do they seek a sense of the sublime? Let them come to New York, stand on the shore of the Hudson, look and kneel. When I see the city from my window - no, I don't feel how small I am - but I feel that if a war came to threaten this, I would throw myself into space, over the city, and protect these buildings with my body.”
   2368. PreservedFish Posted: August 17, 2012 at 02:21 AM (#4210218)
Yes, it was a couple lines from that, from the beginning. I still like parts of the quote. Not all of it.
   2369. Greg K Posted: August 17, 2012 at 03:57 AM (#4210225)
Oddly enough my mom (who is leftish even by Canadian standards) likes Ayn Rand. Not for her politics obviously, but because she's probably the most selfless person in the world, so Rand's message of just worrying about #1 being ok is one she finds it helpful to remind herself of every now and then.
   2370. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 17, 2012 at 07:24 AM (#4210238)
One of these things is not like the others:

I really loved The Fountainhead when I was 16. I wasn't so much into the greed stuff, I was more into the belief in the primacy of man, the triumph of individuality, that jazz. Also the atheism, the veneration of reason. I had a Rand quote on my yearbook page, something about the skyline of Manhattan and "what other religion do we need?" There is an optimistic and life-affirming message somewhere in there. I suppose Ryan and I took nearly opposite lessons from her.

I haven't read a scrap of her writing since I was that age.


Everyone I know who was thought either The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged was great read it in high school. I don't know anyone who read it for the first time as an adult out of school who thought they were anything but a steaming load.


I guess that's a good way to describe. You read Rand because you can't handle Nietzsche.


I grew up reading Ayn Rand and it taught me quite a bit about who I am and what my value systems are, and what my beliefs are. It’s inspired me so much that it’s required reading in my office for all my interns and my staff. We start with Atlas Shrugged. People tell me I need to start with The Fountainhead then go to Atlas Shrugged [laughter]. There’s a big debate about that. We go to Fountainhead, but then we move on, and we require Mises and Hayek as well....

But the reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand. And the fight we are in here, make no mistake about it, is a fight of individualism versus collectivism....

And so when you take a look at where we are today, ah, some would say we’re on offense, some would say we’re on defense, I’d say it’s a little bit of both. And when you look at the twentieth-century experiment with collectivism—that Ayn Rand, more than anybody else, did such a good job of articulating the pitfalls of statism and collectivism—you can’t find another thinker or writer who did a better job of describing and laying out the moral case for capitalism than Ayn Rand....

----Paul Ryan's speech to The Atlas Society, 2005


From all accounts, Paul Ryan is an eloquent spokesman for his belief system. Given that the writings of Ayn Rand have played such an important role in establishing that belief system, it seems kind of elementary for us to dig a lot deeper into the nature of that (intellectual) relationship, and what it says about Ryan's worldview today.

It's the farthest thing in the world from "gotcha", because in my scenario Ryan would be given more than adequate opportunity to answer these questions as fully as he likes. But it's not as if he's exactly running for dogcatcher. We deserve this sort of a dialogue from someone who's running for the second highest office in the land.
   2371. booond Posted: August 17, 2012 at 07:37 AM (#4210241)
Katie Couric will interview him and ask him about newspapers he's read.
   2372. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 17, 2012 at 08:56 AM (#4210257)
It's the farthest thing in the world from "gotcha", because in my scenario Ryan would be given more than adequate opportunity to answer these questions as fully as he likes. But it's not as if he's exactly running for dogcatcher. We deserve this sort of a dialogue from someone who's running for the second highest office in the land.


In post 2370 you just posted his answers to your gotcha questions. Did you not read what you posted?
   2373. zonk Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:01 AM (#4210258)
I've always thought Rand was a bit like L Ron Hubbard... a pulp writer with uneven output who somehow managed to spawn a pseudo-religion amongst dedicated readers.

I've mentioned this here before, but I tried reading Atlas Shrugged in high school. It was the second worst literary experience of my life, coming in behind Oliver Twist. Nothing's worse than Oliver Twist.


What's wrong with Oliver Twist? I mean - you can tell the nature of a character the minute you read his or her name and there's inevitably going to be a long-lost rich relative to save the day, but that's pretty much par for most of Dickens' works.
   2374. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:07 AM (#4210259)
I'm also not seeing any difference, Andy, between asking Ryan if he was influenced by Rand's views and asking Obama if he was influenced by Wright's views -- which is what you howled at the moon about.
   2375. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:11 AM (#4210261)
It's the farthest thing in the world from "gotcha", because in my scenario Ryan would be given more than adequate opportunity to answer these questions as fully as he likes. But it's not as if he's exactly running for dogcatcher. We deserve this sort of a dialogue from someone who's running for the second highest office in the land.

In post 2370 you just posted his answers to your gotcha questions. Did you not read what you posted?


Of course I read what he said, and perhaps even you have. But I think those remarks of Ryan's deserve a much wider, prime time audience, which would include an opportunity for him to elaborate on what he finds so admirable about Ayn Rand. And then let the chips fall as they may. I would think that he would welcome such an opportunity.
   2376. Lassus Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:14 AM (#4210264)
I'm also not seeing any difference, Andy, between asking Ryan if he was influenced by Rand's views and asking Obama if he was influenced by Wright's views -- which is what you howled at the moon about.

I was against the DEFEND RAND idea myself, but this comparison is plain stupid. Rand, no matter what one thinks personally of her OR her veiws, started a philosophy embraced internationally by millions of people and debated by many millions more. Wright is a local nobody preacher (almost) nobody cares about, and who would have been even less known without the whole Obama kerfuffle. Don't be so damned dense.
   2377. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:17 AM (#4210265)
What's the over-under on percentage of Americans who've both heard of Ayn Rand and have even a superficial understanding of her philosphy?

One?

The intellectual "influence" on candidates for Pres/VP hasn't been a matter of mass concern for decades, if ever. (Excepting of course the influence of Jesus, bringing to mind the 2000 debate question trying to probe people the candidates had found most influential. Bush -- surprise!! -- answered, "Jesus.")
   2378. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:21 AM (#4210268)
I'm also not seeing any difference, Andy, between asking Ryan if he was influenced by Rand's views and asking Obama if he was influenced by Wright's views -- which is what you howled at the moon about.

Elementary Differences 101, presented for your benefit:

-----There was, and is, absolutely no evidence that Barack Obama's political views were shaped by Jeremiah Wright in any shape, manner or form. All there was there was innuendo and unverifiable inferences.

-----By contrast, Paul Ryan has openly stated that his worldview was greatly formed by the writings of Ayn Rand. You don't need to rely on innuendo or unverifiable inferences to make this claim. He makes it himself.

Now I realize that this distinction makes no difference to you. And I can understand your motiviation in pretending that there's no difference. But spare us the phony innocence.
   2379. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:23 AM (#4210270)
I was against the DEFEND RAND idea myself, but this comparison is plain stupid. Rand, no matter what one thinks personally of her OR her veiws, started a philosophy embraced internationally by millions of people and debated by many millions more. Wright is a local nobody preacher (almost) nobody cares about, and who would have been even less known without the whole Obama kerfuffle. Don't be so damned dense.


WTF difference does it make how well known the person was? Why would the inquiry hinge on that?

(But it's kind of hilarious that yesterday someone - I think Zonk - was trying to make the case of how *well* known Wright was - he was on tv regularly, he was a routine guest, etc - and here you're trying to claim that practically nobody knew who Wright was at all.)
   2380. zonk Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:26 AM (#4210274)
It appears that Paul Ryan will fit right in on the Romney etch-a-sketch ticket...

Presented with Letters, Ryan admits requesting stimulus cash...

"I never asked for stimulus," Ryan said. "I don't recall… so I really can't comment on it. I opposed the stimulus because it doesn't work, it didn't work."

Two years ago, during an interview on WBZ's NewsRadio he was asked by a caller if he "accepted any money" into his district. Ryan said he did not.

"I'm not one [of those] people who votes for something then writes to the government to ask them to send us money. I did not request any stimulus money," the congressman answered.


Someone's awfully good at forging Ryan's signature...

My favorite is the last one where he expresses how pleased he is with the 7600 jobs the project he supports proposes to create or save with the stimulus grant.

   2381. bobm Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:28 AM (#4210276)
[2364]

I've mentioned this here before, but I tried reading Atlas Shrugged in high school. It was the second worst literary experience of my life, coming in behind Oliver Twist. Nothing's worse than Oliver Twist.

Pride and Prejudice? Great Expectations? Catcher in the Rye? All far, far worse IMO.

ISTM Catcher, like above descriptions of Rand, is most relevant to sixteen year olds.
   2382. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:29 AM (#4210277)
What's the over-under on percentage of Americans who've both heard of Ayn Rand and have even a superficial understanding of her philosphy?

One?


That's probably correct, but given that Paul Ryan is among that 1%, and given the office he's running for, I'm not sure what relevance there is in that statistic.

The intellectual "influence" on candidates for Pres/VP hasn't been a matter of mass concern for decades, if ever.

That's largely because few of them have been so markedly (and admittedly) influenced by a single writer who was so far removed from the mainstream as Ayn Rand.

And yes, I realize that in one sense Rand was a steppingstone for Ryan to go on to Hayek, Von Mises and Friedman. All of that is something that he should also be given the full opportunity to explain. Again, this isn't an attempt at "gotcha", only an attempt to get to the root of his political and economic beliefs. If Ryan is as serious a thinker as he's made out to be by his supporters, he should welcome an opportunity like this.
   2383. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:30 AM (#4210279)
They ALL get money for their own districts, that's part of the reason we have huge deficits.

The Ryan budget is never, ever, ever, ever, ever going to get passed. It's highly, highly, highly unlikely to ever even be proposed.

The Republicans had a mandate for cutting government in 1980 and 1994 -- and in 1994 a True Believer had real power -- and nothing of the sort came close to happening.
   2384. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:32 AM (#4210280)
Again, this isn't an attempt at "gotcha", only an attempt to get to the root of his political and economic beliefs.

You already have. He's been influenced by The Usual Suspects of right-wing autodidacts.
   2385. Lassus Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:36 AM (#4210283)
WTF difference does it make how well known the person was? Why would the inquiry hinge on that?

Because no one cares how much Paul Ryan was influenced by Bob Ryan. Or Frank Ryan from the local deli.


(But it's kind of hilarious that yesterday someone - I think Zonk - was trying to make the case of how *well* known Wright was - he was on tv regularly, he was a routine guest, etc - and here you're trying to claim that practically nobody knew who Wright was at all.)

What's hilarious is your constant accusations of intellectual dishonesty when you take "in comparison to Ayn Rand and her work" to mean "practically nobody at all". You are practically vicious in your frank duplicity. You've moved straight into "brazen" with your OH REALLY I CAN'T IMAGINE LOOK IT'S THE SAME garbage lately.

And note: I continue to completely disagree with Andy's take on Ryan and Rand. And I still think you're ridiculous.
   2386. zonk Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:38 AM (#4210284)
The Ryan budget is never, ever, ever, ever, ever going to get passed. It's highly, highly, highly unlikely to ever even be proposed.


Actually - it was proposed and did pass the House... You must live in a Dem-held district because the DCCC is hanging that vote on every incumbent Republican as best they can.
   2387. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:42 AM (#4210289)
Actually - it was proposed and did pass the House... You must live in a Dem-held district because the DCCC is hanging that vote on every incumbent Republican as best they can.

All for show. Passing the House doesn't make it law and knowing it isn't going to become law makes it easier to pass the House.
   2388. zonk Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:43 AM (#4210290)

(But it's kind of hilarious that yesterday someone - I think Zonk - was trying to make the case of how *well* known Wright was - he was on tv regularly, he was a routine guest, etc - and here you're trying to claim that practically nobody knew who Wright was at all.)


I think you missed my point -

Wright is relatively well-known here in Chicago and my point was that there is a tremendous amount of material that the man has said publicly and readily available to be read -- and as such, using the 60 seconds worth of clip during an inflammatory sermon to define his... "philosophy" was being willfully obtuse.

Do you understand my point now, or do I need to explain it with smaller words?
   2389. zonk Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:46 AM (#4210294)
Actually - it was proposed and did pass the House... You must live in a Dem-held district because the DCCC is hanging that vote on every incumbent Republican as best they can.


All for show. Passing the House doesn't make it law and knowing it isn't going to become law makes it easier to pass the House.


Perhaps with a D Senate (and a certain Obama veto, with a lack of numbers to override in the House)... but Romney is on record as saying that he'd have signed the budget into law.

If the Republicans flip the Senate, hang onto the House, and Romney wins the WH -- do you really think it would just be cast aside?
   2390. Lassus Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:51 AM (#4210302)
Do you understand my point know, or do I need to explain it with smaller words?

He understands. He's just dishonest about it.
   2391. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 17, 2012 at 09:52 AM (#4210305)
If the Republicans flip the Senate, hang onto the House, and Romney wins the WH -- do you really think it would just be cast aside?

Yes. You can win an election with 50.1% support; you need a lot more than that to pass a budget like Ryan's.

The examples of 1980 and 1994 also lead to this unescapable conclusion.

The Republicans are not going to cut domestic spending to the bone like Ryan proposes. It simply is not going to happen.
   2392. steagles Posted: August 17, 2012 at 10:04 AM (#4210311)
Yes. You can win an election with 50.1% support; you need a lot more than that to pass a budget like Ryan's.
no, you really don't. if you have the majority of the senate, a majority of the house, and the presidency, you basically have free will to do whatever you want with the budget. there's no filibustering there.


The examples of 1980 and 1994 also lead to this unescapable conclusion.
in 1980, democrats controlled the house. in 1994, democrats controlled the presidency.

in 2012, if romney wins, neither of that is likely to be the case.


when someone tells you they're going to kill you, it's kind of in your best interest to take them at their word. and when the republicans tell you they're going to pass the ryan budget, again, it's in your best interest to take them at their word.
   2393. Weekly Journalist_ Posted: August 17, 2012 at 10:11 AM (#4210314)
Who the #### doesn't like Pride and Prejudice? Do you like sex? Pizza? I can't think of anything easier to like unless you're a complete retard.
   2394. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 17, 2012 at 10:13 AM (#4210316)
And note: I continue to completely disagree with Andy's take on Ryan and Rand.

Is that because you think that Rand's influence on Ryan is unimportant? Or is it because you think that influence is a thing of the past that's he's "gotten over"? Or is it because you think there's enough rope to hang Ryan with without needing to get into deeper questions of his fundamental worldview?

If (say) Joe Biden had given speeches to a leading Marxist group, proclaiming that Karl Marx has explained the moral case for socialism better than any other writer, and that he (Biden) had been profoundly influenced by Marx's writings, do you think that would be of no interest or concern to the 99% of the population who's never read Karl Marx? I'd find that hard to believe, and yet in the case of Ryan and Rand, we're not talking about a hypothetical scenario, we're talking about a link that Ryan has openly proclaimed with a fair amount of pride. Why the reluctance to probe any deeper?
   2395. Randy Jones Posted: August 17, 2012 at 10:13 AM (#4210317)
Who the #### doesn't like Pride and Prejudice?


People with good taste in literature.
   2396. Lassus Posted: August 17, 2012 at 10:16 AM (#4210319)
I understand the arguments against Dickens. I'm just pretty sure they are all wrong.


Is that because you think that Rand's influence on Ryan is unimportant? Or is it because you think that influence is a thing of the past that's he's "gotten over"? Or is it because you think there's enough rope to hang Ryan with without needing to get into deeper questions of his fundamental worldview?

I somehow think that making him specifically defend or justify it is weird. And probably pointless. I think it's more than apparent in enough of his public speaking, actions, and policy that it's not necessary or fruitful to try and sledgehammer RAND RAND RAND over him.

That is probably more of an opinion than a rights or policy or election imperative issue.

(And inasmuch as Wright is not Rand, Rand is not Marx.)

   2397. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 17, 2012 at 10:23 AM (#4210324)
no, you really don't. if you have the majority of the senate, a majority of the house, and the presidency, you basically have free will to do whatever you want with the budget. there's no filibustering there

You really do -- if the House and Senate are 50.1% Republican, the Ryan budget has zero chance of passage.
   2398. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 17, 2012 at 10:24 AM (#4210325)
Side Note: After less than a week of the Ryan bump, Rassmussen's tracking number has gone from Romney +4 to Obama +1. No great significance to that number other than to note that VP announcements generally send those tracking polls in the opposite direction.

If Ryan doesn't want the Democrats to define him in a cement block to be thrown off Pier 16, he's going to have to begin going beyond platitudes about "reform", and begin addressing the question of what those fixed dollar vouchers are going to mean for those whose medical insurance expenses far outstrip those allocated amounts. He's going to have to explain why he wants to transfer those costs to those least able to afford them. He's got a lot of explaining to do to those not in the comfort zone of the "anyone but Obama" base.
   2399. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 17, 2012 at 10:32 AM (#4210328)
I somehow think that making him specifically defend or justify it is weird. And probably pointless. I think it's more than apparent in enough of his public speaking, actions, and policy that it's not necessary or fruitful to try and sledgehammer RAND RAND RAND over him.

Just to be clear, I'm not talking about anything beyond one long Q&A session with someone who's knowledgeable about Rand's writings, a session where Ryan will be given the full opportunity to contextualize his past statements. I'm not talking about some ####### cable show shouting match.

(And inasmuch as Wright is not Rand, Rand is not Marx.)

But that's only because unlike Marx's disciples, the disciples of Rand have never controlled armies and governments. Certainly Ayn Rand's vision of a perfect society is every bit as horrifying as anything Karl Marx ever had it mind, though when you get to that sort of comparison, it's kind of like asking whether you'd rather be fried or boiled.
   2400. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: August 17, 2012 at 10:34 AM (#4210329)
I somehow think that making him specifically defend or justify it is weird. And probably pointless. I think it's more than apparent in enough of his public speaking, actions, and policy that it's not necessary or fruitful to try and sledgehammer RAND RAND RAND over him.


Ayn Rand : Paul Ryan : Liberals :: Saul Alinsky : Obama : GOP/TPs.
Page 24 of 60 pages ‹ First  < 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Vegas Watch
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogCurt Schilling Reveals He Was Diagnosed With Mouth Cancer in February, Believes Chewing Tobacco Was the Cause
(40 - 1:58am, Aug 22)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogJapan Today: Fanatic fans oblivious to sleazy side of Koshien high school baseball
(7 - 1:48am, Aug 22)
Last: Yellow Tango

Newsblog10 episodes of ‘The Simpsons’ every sports fan needs to watch
(23 - 1:37am, Aug 22)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogDowney: Let Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame already
(27 - 1:28am, Aug 22)
Last: CrosbyBird

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - August 2014
(285 - 1:24am, Aug 22)
Last: robinred

NewsblogOT August 2014:  Wrassle Mania I
(58 - 1:04am, Aug 22)
Last: Dock Ellis on Acid

NewsblogPosnanski: The Royals might actually know what they are doing
(82 - 12:45am, Aug 22)
Last: Shibal

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 8-21-2014
(59 - 12:40am, Aug 22)
Last: Joyful Calculus Instructor

NewsblogESPN’s Jayson Stark: Phillies shake-up coming, Ruben Amaro not safe
(1 - 12:23am, Aug 22)
Last: Cargo Cultist

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread August, 2014
(484 - 12:23am, Aug 22)
Last: nick swisher hygiene

NewsblogMegdal: Humble shortstop Marty Marion should be in Hall contention
(52 - 12:09am, Aug 22)
Last: bjhanke

NewsblogOT: Politics, August 2014: DNC criticizes Christie’s economic record with baseball video
(4805 - 11:47pm, Aug 21)
Last: Ray (RDP)

NewsblogAngels Acquire Gordon Beckham
(17 - 11:44pm, Aug 21)
Last: The Kentucky Gentleman, Mark Edward

NewsblogGrantland: The Top Prospect Progress Poll.
(4 - 11:41pm, Aug 21)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogCubs place struggling Edwin Jackson on the disabled list
(46 - 10:32pm, Aug 21)
Last: Brian C

Page rendered in 1.1510 seconds
52 querie(s) executed