yes
― iatee, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 19:52 (twelve years ago) link
appalling actually
― Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:01 (twelve years ago) link
You can get away with his interjections when your office is the constitutionally useless vice presidency, not as SOS.
basically if the gop has an embarrassing primary season, romney wins but struggles and comes out looking pretty weak - why take any risk? even if this polls well, it'd be a risk on some level.
but if romney has (more or less) a clean victory / a GOP mandate, comes out w/ a lot of momentum, obama's a few points behind...why not pull the type of stunt that the media totally eats up? clinton makes it 'obama 2.0' and gives the campaign a fresh media narrative. gives a lot of people a reason to start paying attention again. would kill in the debates and could go full force attack dog.
― iatee, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:07 (twelve years ago) link
(i really don't like this kind of fantasy-team speculation but) that kind of personnel move look like a huge admission of weakness, esp if there is no immediate health- or scandal-related reason to get rid of biden. plus i wonder if obama and hrc still personally don't like each other at all. if it is true that obama is not close to many people and trusts very few it seems unlikely that a relationship like that would be sacrificed.
― slandblox goole, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:10 (twelve years ago) link
clinton makes it 'obama 2.0' and gives the campaign a fresh media narrative.
ok now you sound like gabbneb
― Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:16 (twelve years ago) link
I remember in '08, with a month or two to go--around the time McCain had pulled even--Limbaugh or Hannity or someone started speculating furiously that plans were underway for Biden to intentionally self-destruct so they'd have an excuse to put Hillary in. In the context of Biden's gift for unintentional gaffes, it was fun trying to imagine how spectacular an intentional one would be.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:27 (twelve years ago) link
http://rortybomb.wordpress.com/2011/12/28/the-era-of-the-ron-paul-newsletters-isnt-even-past/
What I find interesting is how much the discussion is focused on the past-ness of these newsletters. The newsletters stopped with their racist, bigoted and survivalist themes by the mid-1990s, and people are now debating how much they should reflect on both Ron Paul and libertarianism. Whatever the results of that debate, they represent an era now over – Dave Weigel and Julian Sanchez argued that “the best refutation of the old approach is not the absence of race-baiting rhetoric from its progenitors, but the success of the 2008 Ron Paul phenomenon.” But if you strip away the ugliness and just focus on the underlying political strategy and the coalition it hoped to bring into existence, the newsletters have not only survived but they form the core of the Tea Party movement.
What Ron Paul actually thinks of these newsletters is a bit of a mysterious, as he often dodges hard questions about them. It is clear that Ron Paul has, to use Dara Lind’s phrase, a “Libertarianism for White Dudes” problem. The ability to discriminate against a minority at one’s lunch counter is the core of freedom, but a woman’s ability to have some autonomy over what is going on in her uterus is incidental to liberty (Ron Paul has declared Right-to-Life is “the most important issue of our age”).
But I want to abstract away from both Ron Paul and the ugly tone and language in the newsletters. What was their political strategy? As Dave Weigel and Julian Sanchez dug up, there was a very clear path. According to Rothbard in 1992, they could gather disaffected working and middle class people by exposing an ”unholy alliance of ‘corporate liberal’ Big Business and media elites, who, through big government, have privileged and caused to rise up a parasitic Underclass, who, among them all, are looting and oppressing the bulk of the middle and working classes in America.”
Take white middle-class people and explain to them how the safety net is ok for them because they are part of the virtuous hardworking backbone of the country, but it’s a dangerous creation because people elite liberals will use it to create a mass, dangerous Other that don’t deserve to be part of it.
― slandblox goole, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:30 (twelve years ago) link
we don't have an NRO thread so i'll just put this here
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/286726/front-page-voyeurism-heather-mac-donald
i mean holy shit
― slandblox goole, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:43 (twelve years ago) link
[Approved commenter] Jenna: 12/28/11 15:30
If American society has reached the point that a newspaper article about bad sex between two teenagers with autism is considered a human interest story and we feel compelled to defend the insensitive and disgusting journalist who wrote it, it doesn't matter how bad the politicians in Washington are because we have far more serious problems.
― Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:46 (twelve years ago) link
I'm very fond of Jenna -- she comments often and just as wittily.
The “Aspergians have sex” story
― t. silaviver, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:46 (twelve years ago) link
ehh I'm not arguing it would change anything about obama, I'm arguing the media eats gimmicky shit up
― iatee, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:48 (twelve years ago) link
I was Gabbnebbed last night on a different thread. It's a ferocious accusation.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:53 (twelve years ago) link
it's really just the flipside of being morbzed
― Mordy, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:54 (twelve years ago) link
One of these days I plan to Clemenza somebody. I'm just not sure yet what that might entail.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 20:57 (twelve years ago) link
You replaced him when he was banned. To be fair, though, he "crunches data" and such.
― Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:00 (twelve years ago) link
as opposed to making a reference to a 1876 election
― iatee, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:01 (twelve years ago) link
wild gossipy political horserace fiend
― Mordy, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:02 (twelve years ago) link
= enjoys politics...Guilty as charged, as I've said many times.
― clemenza, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:03 (twelve years ago) link
― iatee, Wednesday, December 28, 2011 4:01 PM
I don't understand your problem with Rutherfraud Hayes.
― Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:04 (twelve years ago) link
u act like you're ashamed of it. embrace ur inner clemenza. enjoy politics w/ pride xp
― Mordy, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:05 (twelve years ago) link
― Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, December 28, 2011 4:00 PM (1 minute ago)
he blends it actually
― k3vin k., Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:07 (twelve years ago) link
lol that took me a second
― slandblox goole, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:07 (twelve years ago) link
Here I am during a march last year we held in honour of Mark Halperin:
http://www.pridemarch.com.au/images/lead%20banner%202011.JPG
― clemenza, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:09 (twelve years ago) link
lol
― Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:12 (twelve years ago) link
well this is touching
― k3vin k., Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:12 (twelve years ago) link
how is perry transformed
― slandblox goole, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:13 (twelve years ago) link
“I really started giving some thought about the issue of rape and incest,” Mr. Perry told a local pastor who had questioned whether he had changed his position on the issue. “Some powerful stories in that DVD.”
― Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:22 (twelve years ago) link
that kind of personnel move look like a huge admission of weakness, esp if there is no immediate health- or scandal-related reason to get rid of biden
Correct. Won't happen absent the latter.
I like this clemenza fellow and his support for my boyfriend, Mark Halperin.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:23 (twelve years ago) link
ha my friend went to a fire safety training day & the guy concluded by intoning "I've seen some powerful fires ...... on video".
― Never translate German (schlump), Wednesday, 28 December 2011 21:31 (twelve years ago) link
I think it will still be a very close race, because enthusiasm for Obama among liberals is rather tepid also.
Sure, but that's relative to whether it's support for him against Romney or against one of the more monstrous candidates, right? Romney's current attempts to slap on some monster make-up aside.
― Andrew Farrell, Thursday, 29 December 2011 12:38 (twelve years ago) link
actually i was surprised by the comments under this breathtakingly hateful NRO post. most were aghast at the poster's condescending attitude toward aspies - or in heather mcd's awful neologism "syndroids." reliably a couple trolls like jenna let rip, another d-bag compared the autism epidemic to global warming lol/smh.
the corner has become totally dominated by trolling and appears to be un-moderated or edited these days.
― higgs boson (the deli llama), Thursday, 29 December 2011 12:53 (twelve years ago) link
i mean, jesus, even for a right-wing website that post was just monstrously insensitive. you'd think a bunch of professional christians like the nro editors would exercise a little uh empathy for people struggling w/autism.
― higgs boson (the deli llama), Thursday, 29 December 2011 13:01 (twelve years ago) link
For relaxing times...make it Santorum time.
― clemenza, Thursday, 29 December 2011 13:28 (twelve years ago) link
Not on the couch, dammit!
― M. White, Thursday, 29 December 2011 16:06 (twelve years ago) link
RT @CNNExpress: @OccupyCaucus vowed to obstruct Paul's Iowa office until RP promises to not close the EPA. #OccupyCaucus #RonPaul #iowacaucus
― HOOS aka driver of steen, Thursday, 29 December 2011 16:26 (twelve years ago) link
RP genocidal killer of Americans in the name of 'liberty'
― M. White, Thursday, 29 December 2011 16:35 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=V4matEbGCBg
― HOOS aka driver of steen, Thursday, 29 December 2011 17:32 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=V4matEbGCBg
f it
― not great at breathing (henrietta lacks), Thursday, 29 December 2011 19:08 (twelve years ago) link
is this shit even legal? http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2011/dec/29/tdmain01-va-gop-will-require-loyalty-oath-in-presi-ar-1573870
― undervalued aerosmith tchotchkes sold in bulk, Thursday, 29 December 2011 19:29 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.fangraphs.com/not/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/1245036228_41fab64009_o-229x300.jpghttp://www.fangraphs.com/not/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/RonPaulAstros-228x300.jpg
― polyphonic, Thursday, 29 December 2011 20:06 (twelve years ago) link
What a goofnugget.
― Nicole, Thursday, 29 December 2011 20:12 (twelve years ago) link
is this shit even legal?
Primary elections for nominations within political parties are considered to be an internal affair of the party, so they have a much lower legal threshhold for pulling stupid shit like that. Think of the VA republicans as a bunch of shriners or masons and it becomes clearer just how idiotic their party rules can get without breaking any laws.
― Aimless, Thursday, 29 December 2011 20:16 (twelve years ago) link
i keep seeing things like 'iowa is a caucus not a primary, so anything is possible". can someone explain to me what is different about a caucus (compared to what, a regular primary?) that makes this so?
― caek, Thursday, 29 December 2011 20:19 (twelve years ago) link
In a primary election, the results are compiled statewide, so statistically speaking the local variations are smoothed out. As I understand it, with caucuses, each local caucus is a statistical unit, so local quirks and variations are preserved.
Another weirdness of caucuses is that attending a caucus requires a greater commitment of time and energy than going to a polling place, voting, and then going home. You have to come, then stay to the bitter end if you want to be sure of the outcome.
― Aimless, Thursday, 29 December 2011 20:27 (twelve years ago) link
Don't people also advocate for candidates at caucuses before the vote takes place?
― clemenza, Thursday, 29 December 2011 20:28 (twelve years ago) link
I'm from a primary-holding state, so I'm sort of vague on all the odd bits about how to caucus.
― Aimless, Thursday, 29 December 2011 20:29 (twelve years ago) link