Hard News: Unreasonable people vote
407 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 17 Newer→ Last
-
However, one could confuse Dr Strangelove for a documentary..
You're not wrong, Carol.
Scuse me, I couldn't resist:Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Colonel, Colonel, I must know what you think has been going on here.
Col. "Bat" Guano: You wanna know what I think?
Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: Yes.
Col. "Bat" Guano: I think you're some kind of deviated prevert. I think general Ripper found out about your prevertion, and you were organizing some kind of mutiny of preverts. -
The Tea Party phenomenon is largely a revival of John Birch Society ideas -- the exotic conspiracy theories especially.
And its rather sad watching the National Review turn into a Tea-Bagger cheer squad, when its founder used its pages (and his considerable rhetorical ninja skills) to argue that American conservatism had no place for paranoid racists and anti-Semites. Sigh...
Of course, how William F. Buckley would be derided as an "establishment Republican" (along with any reality-based picture of Reagan, and moderates like Snowe)... Somehow, I think the GOP is going to have to spend a lot longer resembling an X-rated episode of The Walking Dead...
-
Benazir Bhutto, Golda Meir, Indira Ghandi, Angela Merkel, Aung San Suu Kyi - where do they fit in that theory?
Aung San Suu Kyi has spent most of the last 20 years locked up by a bunch of (military) men?
-
Do you have a library of them by any chance?
No, Jacqui. I just read things that remind me of other things I've seen or heard elsewhere, and so go looking for them.
The Spooky Men's Chorale, fr'instance, was first heard on National Radio this past Sunday afternoon (they did a feature on them). When Jeremy said he needed masculine role models and declared that he was a man, my mind went straight to them.
But should I ever find goodies that are great, yet don't fit with the convo here at all, I'll make a point to email you the link. :)
Ok, back to Kool Aid Tea Parties and the United Statesly loss of sanity... -
...the National Review turn into a Tea-Bagger cheer squad, when its founder used its pages (and his considerable rhetorical ninja skills) to argue that American conservatism had no place for paranoid racists and anti-Semites. Sigh...
Whereas it was totally A-OK with segregation.
That editorial wasn't signed, but many people think Buckley wrote it. Perhaps the man who wrote "The South does not want to deprive the Negro of a vote for the sake of depriving him of the vote" was not a paranoid racist, but I can't think of any more positive description.
-
It's tempting to reduce all this down to the bare bones: people were angry because a black man was elected president, but knew they couldn't say as much. I think it's much more complicated than that, but that was certainly the motivation for a significant minority of those involved.
More likely their motivation is: the economy is shit so please get off your lazy, good for nothing, over paid, worthless, golf playing, self serving collective arse and do something worthwhile.
How this fury expresses itself may vary, but I was more referring to the fact that they are at opposite ends of what they are angry about.
In Europe same applies, they are angry about the economy.
-
Whereas it was totally A-OK with segregation.
And Buckley also wrote a rather... sticky mash note to Joe McCarthy. I'm not putting the man up for a posthumous NAACP Image Award, but I think it's only fair to note it took a lot of nerve for Buckley to take on the Birchers. (IIRC, this was a period when he ran up a form letter reading in its entirety "Cancel you own Goddamn subscription." A rather risky position to take with a small-circulation political magazine barely out of its christening robes.)
Then again, Buckley edited a magazine with some intellectual and policy rigour -- and not afraid to save its sharpest stilettos for the GOP -- instead of what it is now: Teen Beat for nut-bags.
-
I think it's a matter of degrees though, Stephen. Sure the conservatives of Christmas Past were both wrong and often maliciously dishonest on a regular basis, but they were neither as wrong nor as maliciously dishonest as the current crop of conservatives.
It's an interesting question as to how responsible "mainstream" conservatives are for the current excesses we're seeing. The constant buy-in of estalishment Republicans into Tea Party activities in recent months suggests there's more collusion there than they'd like to admit, but at the same time there's a sense that they're following the trends to win elections, rather than actively shaping them.
-
More likely their motivation is: the economy is shit so please get off your lazy, good for nothing, over paid, worthless, golf playing, self serving collective arse and do something worthwhile.
"Do something"? You mean like the TARP bailout, which actually did do a hell of a lot for the economy? Or the tax cuts Obama instituted (see that same article.)
The "Politicians aren't doing enough to fix the economy!" trope is trotted out every single election when Democratic candidates are incumbents, and it is almost always a lie manufactured by conservative strategists because it plays well with the uninformed.
-
Much like the broadcast-without-questioning lies locally that Labour left our economy in a terrible state by paying down public debt rather than coughing up inflationary personal tax cuts (because only double dip Bill can be a sound financial manager, of course - and that's double dip recession I'm talking, not rorting of expenses). English regularly gets away with spouting false figures in Parliament and media.
-
The "Politicians aren't doing enough to fix the economy!" trope is trotted out every single election when Democratic candidates are incumbents, and it is almost always a lie manufactured by conservative strategists because it plays well with the uninformed.
As James Carville said: "Its the economy, stupid."
"Do something"? You mean like the TARP bailout, which actually did do a hell of a lot for the economy? Or the tax cuts Obama instituted (see that same article.)
Do something worthwhile, change something, don't behave like a continuation of George W Bush (y'know the guy who the Dems blame for getting into the mess).
TARP was created by Bush - so yes I mean exactly like that. And Obama introduced tax cuts, wow, how new and dynamic and completely different from anything Bush would have done - not. Next you'll be saying he should be congratulated for keeping up the war spending on track for a Bush timetabled withdrawl from Iraq. Or how he instituted a surge in Afghanistan, exactly like the surge Bush used in Iraq. Or how he hasn't closed Gitmo.
Continuation of Bush style politics is not the change and hope independents saw in 2008 Democrats. And whatever you might think of the Tea Party movement craziness it is change from business as usual politics.
-
More likely their motivation is: the economy is shit so please get off your lazy, good for nothing, over paid, worthless, golf playing, self serving collective arse and do something worthwhile.
Alan Bollard's book gives a glimpse of what Obama and his advisors had to do even as he was preparing to take office. They had to take incredibly difficult decisions, very quickly.
TARP was created by Bush - so yes I mean exactly like that. And Obama introduced tax cuts, wow, how new and dynamic and completely different from anything Bush would have done - not.
Actually, the Republicans' complaint was that there weren't enough tax cuts in the stimulus.
But I do readily acknowledge your point. Successive US governments have handed out so many gimmick tax cuts that their revenue base is completely twisted out of shape. It just doesn't work any more.
-
Next you'll be saying he should be congratulated for keeping up the war spending on track for a Bush timetabled withdrawl from Iraq. Or how he instituted a surge in Afghanistan, exactly like the surge Bush used in Iraq. Or how he hasn't closed Gitmo.
I don't seem to remember Tea Partiers protesting against any of that. Or conservatives generally. Liberal blogs have been hitting Obama on those exact issues, but they haven't exactly been protesting in droves near the Washington Monument.
Do something worthwhile, change something, don't behave like a continuation of George W Bush (y'know the guy who the Dems blame for getting into the mess).
As per the link I posted above, the US economy has been growing throughout Obama's term. TARP was a Bush initiative, but was quickly tapped as "Obama's bank bailout" and has had a positive effect on the economy. (McCain has retroactively declared he would have reversed TARP, but again, that's a case of a Republican trying to exploit Tea Party rhetoric for electoral gain.)
There have been plenty of significant changes in Obama's term so far, the health care bill only being the biggest.
And whatever you might think of the Tea Party movement craziness it is change from business as usual politics.
In delivery perhaps, but not in purpose. Have a read of this article on the "Tea Party Manifesto". Small government, reducing federal entitlements, lower taxes, no universal health care, etc It's the Republican Party platform of the last twenty years liberally sprinkled with phrases like "grass roots", "decentralization", "independent", "not politics as usual", etc
Which is not surprising given that one of the writers is the unfortunately named Dick Armey, who was leader of the Republican Majority in the House fom 1995-2003, and that it's published in the Wall Street Journal. You'll note that Armey's article, as a free market proponent, deliberately downplays the anti-immigration tenor of many Tea Party protests, but is otherwise spot on as to the later Tea Party's goals.
-
Successive US governments have handed out so many gimmick tax cuts that their revenue base is completely twisted out of shape.
Pork distorts
-
Glad to see Jon Stewart receive the Autotune the News treatment. Check out this Wikileaks rap featuring Julian Assange
-
Speaking of Buckley...
"now listen you queer, stop calling me a crypto-nazi, or i'll sock you in the goddamn face and you'll stay plastered."
Good times, good times.
Kind regards,
Your ever loving YouTube slut. :) -
Successive US governments have handed out so many gimmick tax cuts that their revenue base is completely twisted out of shape. It just doesn't work any more.
No doubt 'not working' won't be an impediment to more of it however.
-
Rachel Maddow - she rocks. I would turn gay for her.
It truly boggles the mind that the fringe element of the Republican Party has reached such powerful heights. Obviously there's just not enough flouride in the water over there.
-
I love Keith Obermann and Rachel. They just get it, that people are in trouble now, there's poverty right now and you can see it bothers them, as it fucking should.
Craig and Megan seem to have cheerlead themselves to a froth. What's the point.
The successes of Maggie Thacher wont convince me of a new dawn of gender equality ,she ruined a country, her pathway through the u.k conservatives may have been tough beacuse lets face it, they're a horrible party.Is Michael Steele chairing the republicans a big step for african-americans or just himself?
-
Rachel Maddow - she rocks. I would turn gay for her.
I was just thinking this morning that if I were a chick, I'd totally want Rachel Maddow to do me.
-
I was just thinking this morning that if I were a chick, I'd totally want Rachel Maddow to do me.
It might be easier to ask her to turn straight for you. Or, y'know, pretend or something.
-
She is pretty but Fox News has the Miss Worlds, wow, turn the sound down, sit back and enjoy.
Yes, Jeremy: women can be grumpy right-wingers, too! Whatever will they do next?
Yeh it's a free world in roughly 40% of the planet, so absolutely, but at least give me the sanity of calling idiots, idiots and when they constantly reference and criticise their own gender,(and especially abusive to young woman) some of whom are my friends, I can't help thinking, "what the fuck are rightwing ladies about?".
but, yes, you can be grumpy and rightwing and there is nothing i can do about it apart from laugh and point the occasional fact your way when you're happy.
-
I was just thinking this morning that if I were a chick, I'd totally want Rachel Maddow to do me.
Just after I watched that Rachel Maddow clip, I went to Twitter and it suggested I follow her. And I thought, that's not so much following as stalking. Because yes. Omnomnomnom.
Not wanting to turn the sound down being part of the attraction, of course.
-
She is pretty but Fox News has the Miss Worlds, wow, turn the sound down, sit back and enjoy.
Whoa there, Mr Unreconstructed.
-
In other news, the Defence White Paper has been released and there. I'm a little worried about this report in the Herald[ (http://dft.ba/-3yD) - "To "civilianise a significant number of posts currently filled by uniformed personnel not required to deploy operationally", enabling it to shift uniformed personnel to the front of the organisation."
For one thing this sounds like we're going to open ourselves up to contractors for another, the military can't engage in industrial action (that would be mutiny), but these vital "civilianised" positions could - generally when negotiating a collective agreement, but also over issues of safety. Servicemen could die if civilian medical personnel refused to go into a combat zone - as they'd have a right to do, for example.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.