 |
|
 |
|
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:43:31 -0800 (PST), hpjeannie <...@yahoo.com
Never mind all that. How did Jeffinputnam do??
Jeannie
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 22:19:31 -0500, Boron Elgar <...@hotmail.com
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 03:06:08 +0000 (UTC), nosp...@nospam.com (Paul
It isn't a nice evening in NJ.
Boron
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:52:39 -0600, QueBarbara <...@go-awaygmail.com
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 22:19:31 -0500, Boron Elgar
<...@hotmail.com
Weren't those of you in NJ in a lose-lose situation?
--
QueBarbara
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 06:23:54 -0500, Boron Elgar <...@hotmail.com
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:52:39 -0600, QueBarbara
<...@go-awaygmail.com
Not really. Corzine's problems were not with management, but with
personality.
These days politicians show up on Letterman and The Daily Show and
Corzine didn't go that route. He had the public personality of a fish
out of water. He is not an exciting public speaker, nor was he
ebullient, able to banter or even make people smile.
Divorced, no little kids to show off to the camera, he was either
unwilling to create or did not hire the appropriate publicity people
to "sell" him. Nothing wrong with his politics, actually.
On the other hand, NJ has had quite a few GOP governors, but they
have, in my memory of them, been "Rockefeller Republicans," and decent
for the most part, but Christie is a real conservative and, frankly,
an anti-intellectual, push the paranoia buttons person of the Dubya
sort. Horrifying to me.
Corazine did not take Dylan's politician descriptions about eating
pizza and kissing babies to heart... Christie, OTOH, was hitting every
diner from the NY border to Cape May. His kids and wife were plastered
all over his ads, which carefully framed him from the face up, because
Christie is a really big boy. Corzine just looked like a stand-in from
a Weekend at Bernie's
My county went for Corzine, though, I assure you, my little upscale
GOP enclave of a town, did not.
Boron
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 06:38:34 -0500, "Charles Wm. Dimmick" <...@snet.net
As I read it, the voters were choosing the lesser of two weevils.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 00:11:52 +0000, "Bill Bonde { 'by a commodius vicus of recirculation' )"
<...@yahoo.co.uk
I guess it depends on which party you prefer. But regarding the
loss of the NY house seat, consider that this will likely mean a
more moderate showing from Republicans. This the way Republicans
will pick up seats, so anyone who wants Democrats to win in 2010
should be worried.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:50:42 -0800, David Friedman <...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com
In article <...@yahoo.co.uk "Bill Bonde { 'by a commodius vicus of recirculation' )"
<...@yahoo.co.uk
It isn't clear--so far as I can tell, the result is a double edged sword.
It's a reason for conservative Republicans to support liberal candidates
when liberal Republicans get nominated, for fear that not doing so will
throw the election to the Democrats.
It's also a reason for liberal Republicans to refrain from nominating
liberal candidates, for fear that doing so will result in conservative
Republicans not supporting them, and so throw the election to the
Democrats.
I would expect each of these points to be obvious to about half of those
concerned in the matter.
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of
_Future Imperfect: Technology and Freedom in an Uncertain World_,
Cambridge University Press.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 3 Nov 2009 22:23:01 -0600, M C Hamster <...@nospam.speakeasy.net
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 03:06:08 +0000 (UTC), nosp...@nospam.com (Paul
I think your happiness may be premature... it's only a 4 point lead
now for Owens, with 74% of the votes counted. I think the 'Pub is
going to squeak by.
--
M C Hamster "Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:13:42 -0800, David Friedman <...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com
In article <...@4ax.com M C Hamster <...@nospam.speakeasy.net
What Republican? If I understand the BBC story correctly, Scozzafava,
who was the Republican candidate, dropped out of the election, throwing
her support to Owens. Do you mean Hoffman, who I gather is the candidate
of the Conservative Party? CNN currently describes that as "a tight
race."
I gather, also from the BBC, that the Republicans have won both of the
gubernatorial elections, one by a large margin. In Virginia it's the
first Republican to win for governor in twelve years, in New Jersey the
loser was an incumbent. So it looks like the sort of rebound one would
expect after the previous Republican rout.
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of
_Future Imperfect: Technology and Freedom in an Uncertain World_,
Cambridge University Press.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:12:11 +0000 (UTC), Lars Eighner <...@larseighner.com
In our last episode,
<...@newsfarm.phx.highwinds-media.comand talented David Friedman broadcast on alt.fan.cecil-adams:
Yes. It is regression to the meanies.
--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/ 287 days since Rick Warren prayed over Bush's third term.
Obama: No hope, no change, more of the same. Yes, he can, but no, he won't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 06:54:00 -0800 (PST), "Richard R. Hershberger" <...@acme.com
On Nov 4, 12:13 am, David Friedman <...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.comwrote:
Only if one believes that gubernatorial elections are closely linked
to national politics, and the voter turnout in off-year elections is
representative of that in years with elections for national office.
Both propositions are extremely questionable.
That being said, I will not be at all surprised if the Republicans
pick up congressional seats in 2010. That is, after all, the typical
pattern. But taking much of anything from the two 2009 gubernatorial
elections is merely reading tea leaves.
Richard R. Hershberger
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 19:45:26 -0500, Tom S. <...@cox.net
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:13:42 -0800, David Friedman
<...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com
Virginia has a history of party flip-flips, going back 30 years or so.
In the 70's we had three republican govs; in the 80's three
democrats. Since 1990, we have had two republicans, followed by two
democrats and now a republican.
We do have slightly strange elections for state office though.The
governor is elected to a four year term, with the election in the year
after the presidential election. And the governor cannot succeed
him/herself.
Tom S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Wrote:
In article <...@newsfarm.phx.highwinds-media.comDavid Friedman <...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com
A Republican by any other name smells just as bad.
But in any case, he lost. The way I see it, one of two things may
come of this:
The Republican party may take this loss of the safest Republican seat in
the nation as a lesson, and realize the price they pay for expelling
moderates from their party. (Snort!)
Or the teabaggers will go absolutely apeshit, blame everything on
Scozzafava, and seek other middle-of-the-road Republicans to tear
down.
I am betting on the latter. The Republican intelligensia like
Bachman and Limbaugh appear to have failed to see any possibility
that Scozzafava's actions might be the result of their treatment
of her. The mentality of the Republicans appears to me to be
indistinguishable from that of a typical school bully.
--
Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is
pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice."
Autoreply is disabled |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:42:02 -0800 (PST), "Richard R. Hershberger" <...@acme.com
For some early evidence that you are right, see
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/11/04/in-ny-23-conservatives-win/.
The money shot: "This is a huge win for conservatives." The
reasoning is that the conservative goal was to run out moderate
Republicans. Actually winning elections would be nice, but not really
the point.
This may turn out to be the best of all possible outcomes for the
Democrats.
Richard R. Hershberger
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 5 Nov 2009 04:48:44 GMT, Mark Steese <...@yahoo.com
"Richard R. Hershberger" <...@a21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com:
Sure. Most Dems are already more than halfway towards being pre-1980
Republicans; now they can go the rest of the way without worrying about
losing votes.
--
Mark Steese
=======================================================================
PS: Your second question, you thought I forgot? I didn't. I never found the
banana slug. - William Least Heat-Moon
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:49:10 +0200, Binyamin Dissen <...@dissensoftware.com
:::
Is it required for true (R)s to support someone who follows (D) policies even
if she places (R) after her name? It quite likely does not matter much to
them.
--
Binyamin Dissen <...@dissensoftware.comhttp://www.dissensoftware.com
Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.
I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 16:53:31 +0000 (UTC), danny burstein <...@panix.com
In <...@4ax.com
Hey, Binny. We're still waiting to find out if you've
been to the "Free Yaakov Teitel" rallies.
After all, he sounds like he should be one of your heroes.
Quoting from the story "... included the murder of two Arab
and bombing attacks against a prominent left-wing academic,
a family of messianic Jews [a], a monastery and Israeli
police, whom he accused of begin pro-gay." [b]
[a] I wish people wouldn't use that term...
[b]
http://www.vosizneias.com/41092/2009/11/01/west-bank-shin-bet-arrests-jewish
-american-extremist-accused-of-killing-arabs
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dann...@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:34:18 -0800 (PST), Slow Motion Apocalypse <...@rocketmail.com
On Nov 4, 8:53 am, danny burstein <...@panix.com
Dude, keep your trolling to the appropriate trolling thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:33:55 -0800 (PST), Slow Motion Apocalypse <...@rocketmail.com
On Nov 4, 8:49 am, Binyamin Dissen <...@dissensoftware.comwrote:
Well, it IS New York and she would have to represent the values of her
constituents first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 10:12:59 -0800, Bill Turlock <"Bill Turlock "@sonnnic.invalid
Splorf!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:23:23 +0200, Binyamin Dissen <...@dissensoftware.com
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:33:55 -0800 (PST) Slow Motion Apocalypse
<...@rocketmail.com
::
:
:::
:::
::
That was my point.
If the (R) is merely a label but not a belief, does it really matter if a (D)
who will do about the same is elected?
--
Binyamin Dissen <...@dissensoftware.comhttp://www.dissensoftware.com
Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.
I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Wrote:
In article <...@4ax.comBinyamin Dissen <...@dissensoftware.com
It's NY, not Oklahoma. She sided with the Republican party on most issues,
but not so much on the religious-based stuff like gay marriage. As such,
she was a *better* match for NY Republicans than a by-God-true-Republican
like Sarah Palin. New Yorkers don't go in for that End-Times-War-against-
Gog-and-Magog stuff the way folks from flyover country do. So of course
the "real" Republican party set about tearing her down and backed someone
more to their liking but not so much to the liking of the Republicans in
the 23rd district, whose opinion was the one that actually mattered in
this race. Remember, this district had elected a Republican every term
since the Civil War--untill now. The voters decided that a Democrat was
a better represntative than the Conservative candidate anointed by the
Limbaugh wing of the Republican party.
--
Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is
pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice."
Autoreply is disabled |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 10:37:38 -0800 (PST), Slow Motion Apocalypse <...@rocketmail.com
On Nov 4, 10:23 am, Binyamin Dissen <...@dissensoftware.comwrote:
(R) IS a political party and a label, not a belief. Once upon a time,
right up thru the 1980's, a conservative was just as likely to be a
Democrat from the South as a Republican.
Except the (D) will caucus with other (D)'s and in 2010 cast a vote
for other (D)'s for speaker and other leadership positions. Even if
the tide turns toward the right in the next election, this could have
negative consequences in the case of an evenly divided house. Or
consequences on things that may affect my life like health care and
national defense as opposed to things that don't affect my life at all
like gay marriage, abortion etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:43:32 +0200, Binyamin Dissen <...@dissensoftware.com
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 10:37:38 -0800 (PST) Slow Motion Apocalypse
<...@rocketmail.com
:::
:
::
:
:::
:::
::
:
::
:::
If it is merely a political party and label ....
::
Is that required?
In the New York State mess a few months ago, didn't (D) members vote for an
(R) speaker?
:::
If the (R) labeled candidate has (D) beliefs, he will vote the "wrong" way
anyway.
::::
How does the label affect that?
--
Binyamin Dissen <...@dissensoftware.comhttp://www.dissensoftware.com
Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me,
you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain.
I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems,
especially those from irresponsible companies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 14:26:37 -0800, David Friedman <...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com
In article <...@4ax.com Binyamin Dissen <...@dissensoftware.com
I think the answer is that it is required if the D wants to continue to
be considered a D--that who you vote for in organizing the House or
Senate is what ultimately defines your political affiliation.
But, of course, the D could choose to switch parties, or to become an
independent.
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of
_Future Imperfect: Technology and Freedom in an Uncertain World_,
Cambridge University Press.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 12:37:24 -0800 (PST), Slow Motion Apocalypse <...@rocketmail.com
On Nov 4, 10:43 am, Binyamin Dissen <...@dissensoftware.comwrote:
Not required, but likely.
I don't follow New York state politics.
Why is the (R) an (R) anyway? I really doubt she would be voting with
the (D) 100% of the time.
From what I gather the (R) on the ballot was a supporter of gay
rights. Not really sure what her other beliefs are to be honest since
this only came on the radar for me in the last week but I guess she
had to be a member of (R) for some reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:13:39 -0500, "Charles Wm. Dimmick" <...@snet.net
Up until 21 years ago there was something called a Rockefeller
Republican. They were very common in New York and New England. They are
now a vanishing species. Thirty years ago there were Liberal
Republicans, especially in New York and Massachusetts. Another vanishing
breed. And then there are Log Cabin Republicans, which are not yet dead.
Bottom line is that Republican did not always mean Conservative, and
Democrat did not [and still does not] mean Liberal.
Charles
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:53:41 -0800, David Friedman <...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com
In article <...@news.eternal-september.org "Charles Wm. Dimmick" <...@snet.net
And, of course, "liberal" once meant, on many although not all issues,
what is now labeled "conservative."
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of
_Future Imperfect: Technology and Freedom in an Uncertain World_,
Cambridge University Press.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 4 Nov 2009 08:36:02 -0600, M C Hamster <...@nospam.speakeasy.net
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 11:21:30 +0000 (UTC), nosp...@nospam.com (Paul
Someone interviewed one of these teabaggers about whether their
actions against Scozzafava might harm the Republican Party, and her
answer was something like "I don't care one bit about what happens to
the Republican party". That's just the sort of attitude I like to
see.
--
M C Hamster "Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 06:46:28 -0800 (PST), K_S_ONeill <...@gmail.com
On Nov 4, 8:36 am, M C Hamster <...@nospam.speakeasy.net
Do you worry at all that Obama might become our Tony Blair?
--
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 4 Nov 2009 09:29:01 -0600, M C Hamster <...@nospam.speakeasy.net
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 06:46:28 -0800 (PST), K_S_ONeill
<...@gmail.com
I don't know what you're talking about. (apologies to BB)
I don't know if you're referring to Afghanistan - Iraq comparisons, or
just generally him bringing down his party. I believe Obama's
personal popularity is still pretty good, and I have a lot of faith
that his charisma will serve him and his party well in 2012. Certainly
2010 will bring substantial regains for the Republicans in the house,
though not enough to give them control.
--
M C Hamster "Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 10:35:51 -0500, Dana Carpender <...@kivanospam.net
I'm worried about 2016; I'm convinced Evan Bayh will run. He's
attractive and midwestern -- and a dick. I'm really afraid he may be
the Dem candidate, and I'd have a *really* hard time voting for him.
Dana
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 07:53:16 -0800 (PST), K_S_ONeill <...@gmail.com
On Nov 4, 9:29 am, M C Hamster <...@nospam.speakeasy.net
I'm afraid my model of UK politics is overly simple; I no doubt
understand it less well than Binny does US politics, for example. But
I think of Labor as rather like the Dems, and the Conservatives rather
like the Republicans, and Blair rather like a centrist Dem. But as he
moved more and more to the "center", which Labor voters rather thought
looked like the right, the Conservatives got more and more pushed out,
Labor took over in a large majority, which sounds good but which
actually had him so far to the center/right that he was Labor in name
only, and the actual left was pretty unhappy with him.
An actual Brit can correct me, but anyway that's the worry I had with
Clinton, and it's rather the worry I have with Obama; that he'll move
to the middle to govern, will soundly beat the Republicans, who look
increasingly mean and dated, but will in the process become not really
a Democrat any more, just a black guy with (D) after his name, doing
stuff I'd be mildly pissed at a (R) for trying.
--
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 14:28:52 -0800, David Friedman <...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com
In article
<...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com K_S_ONeill <...@gmail.com
Sort of like Bush in the other direction?
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of
_Future Imperfect: Technology and Freedom in an Uncertain World_,
Cambridge University Press.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:40:20 -0800 (PST), "Richard R. Hershberger" <...@acme.com
On Nov 4, 10:53 am, K_S_ONeill <...@gmail.com
I think this analysis is based on the false premise that Obama would
have to move to be in the middle. The Overton window is so far to the
right in the US that even otherwise informed persons can mistake the
middle for the left, but that doesn't make it so.
Richard R. Hershberger
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 10:14:09 -0800, Bill Turlock <"Bill Turlock "@sonnnic.invalid
Ahhh, but politics is _all_ about appearances!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 19:42:20 -0800 (PST), K_S_ONeill <...@gmail.com
On Nov 4, 11:40 am, "Richard R. Hershberger" <...@acme.com
I, uh... If he's in the middle, he's there because he's
"triangulating", in the language of the beltway. The Rs espouse
whacko stuff to push the window right, the Dems "triangulate" and the
center moves right. Right?
So, that's what I said. Right?
--
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 08:37:19 -0800 (PST), "Richard R. Hershberger" <...@acme.com
On Nov 4, 10:42 pm, K_S_ONeill <...@gmail.com
No, that's not my point at all. Imagine the furthest right government
you can: Rush Limbaugh as President, Glenn Beck as V.P., Michelle
Bachman as Secretary of Homeland Security, Ann Coulter as Secretary of
State, and so forth. Compare this with actual administrations within
living memory. The Limbaugh/Beck government is further to the right
than anything we have actually seen, but it would be within shouting
distance of the real thing. Now imagine the furthest left government
you can. It is hard to come up with names to fill the slots, because
real leftists are largely absent from present-day American political
discourse. Noam Chomsky and Ralph Nader perhaps, though we don't hear
much from them nowadays. But the imaginary left government I am
positing would be nationalizing the means of production, collectiving
farms, outlawing the ownership of private property, and so forth. Now
compare this with the real thing, or even anything plausible in
present-day American political discourse. It is far removed. So my
point is that when you see someone who looks, in the parochial context
of present-day American discourse, to be pretty far left, he will
almost certainly turn out to be pretty centrist, in the broader
context. This is the Overton window in action.
Even beyond that, however, Obama's actual positions have not been
especially far left, even in the parochial context. Yes, Fox News and
its ilk loudly proclaimed Obama the furthest left Senator, but had
Clinton been nominated Fox News would have said that about her. That
is just noise. But if you listen to the noise, then when Obama turns
out not to be a bomb-throwing anarchist but actually pretty
mainstream, this seems like triangulating. This is about the noise,
not about reality.
Richard R. Hershberger
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 11:16:03 -0800, David Friedman <...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com
In article
<...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com "Richard R. Hershberger" <...@acme.com
The problem with this is suggested by your "it is hard to come up with
names" point. You are defining far right by visible figures on the
right, not, as with the left, by positions that implement the extreme
version of beliefs.
The equivalent of your version of far left would be someone who wanted
to abolish the public school systemthe largest chunk of socialism in
our economy, I think. Also minimum wage laws, laws against recreational
drugs (my version of the right--there are others), FDA restrictions on
selling medical drugs they hadn't approved of, professional licensing,
foreign "aid," the farm program ... .
That's just as politically unbelievable as your left wing version.
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of
_Future Imperfect: Technology and Freedom in an Uncertain World_,
Cambridge University Press.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:32:41 +0000, Peter Boulding <...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 07:53:16 -0800 (PST), K_S_ONeill <...@gmail.comwrote in
<...@m16g2000yqc.googlegroups.com
I'd say he was more like Joe Lieberman in short trousers.
Blair started out centre-right--undertaking, even before he was elected, to
stick to the Tories' spending plans (in other words, savage cuts in public
expenditure)--and moved further and further to the right as his popularity
(post-invasion-of-Iraq) caused his personal popularity rating to dip below
recoverable levels. And no, that's not a Labour supporter's view; polls
showed Blair to be viewed as sitting to the right of centre-right, even
though the Beeb and other MSM organisations continued to describe him as
centre-left.
IMO he started out that way. He's carrying on where Bush left off--or at
least with different rhetoric but very little real policy change--as regards
Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, warrantless wiretapping, extraordinary rendition,
"executive privilege", bailout & bailout secrecy ... he's not even really
pushing on the public option, despite the strong level of public support.
Still, at least he doesn't yet seem to be a fully-fledged neocon.
--
Regards, Peter Boulding
pjbn...@UNSPAMpboulding.co.uk (to e-mail, remove "UNSPAM")
Fractal Music and Images: http://www.pboulding.co.uk/ and
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=794240&content=music
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 14:24:37 -0800, David Friedman <...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com
...
Alternatively, liberal Republicans may take this loss of a seat as
evidence of the cost of alienating conservatives in their own party by
nominating a liberal candidate in a conservative district.
The outcome, as in many cases, was the result of decisions by both
sides--in this case, both sides within the Republican party. Since it
was an outcome they didn't wantelecting a Democrateach can and will
blame it on the other.
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of
_Future Imperfect: Technology and Freedom in an Uncertain World_,
Cambridge University Press.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Wrote:
In article <...@newsfarm.phx.highwinds-media.comDavid Friedman <...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com
The outcome of this election was determined by the voters in the 23rd
district. A candidate should be thinking about what the voters in
their district think more than what a political party thinks. Hint:
This election was for a seat in a body called the House of
*REPRESENTATIVES*.
When Jim Jeffords decided that he could no longer be a member of the
Republican party and still properly represent the people of Vermont
in the US senate, the Republicans tried to punish Vermont with some
legislation affecting the dairy industry, and tried to convice the
people of Vermont that Jeffords had betrayed them. The response of
most Vermonters was pretty much, "Jeffords didn't betray us, the
Republicans did." Jeffords did not choose to run for re-election,
but the voters of Vermont chose another independent to replace him.
--
Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is
pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice."
Autoreply is disabled |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:53:11 -0800, Xho Jingleheimerschmidt <...@gmail.com
Was the ballot blank?
Xho
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 14:21:37 -0800, David Friedman <...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com
Would you say the same thing about Democrats who, in various elections,
voted for Nader or other third party candidates? What about the people
in the Connecticut Democratic party who succeeded in denying the
senatorial nomination to the incumbent because they didn't like his
policies--with the result that he was elected as an independent?
How do you get from "we don't like the candidate's views so will vote
for someone else" to "school bully?"
--
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/ http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/
Author of
_Future Imperfect: Technology and Freedom in an Uncertain World_,
Cambridge University Press.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Wrote:
In article <...@newsfarm.phx.highwinds-media.comDavid Friedman <...@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com
Please re-read what I wrote. I was specifically refering to the right
wing's inability to see any connection between what they did to Scozzafava
and what Scozzafava did in response as being typical of any school
bully. Other examples of behavior that fits the school bully model
is when right wing republicans pick on brain damaged children or
people with Parkinson's disease.
--
Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is
pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice."
Autoreply is disabled |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 03:00:55 +0000 (UTC), Mark Steese <...@yahoo.com
nosp...@nospam.com (Paul Ciszek) wrote in
news...@reader1.panix.com:
A single right-wing talk-radio shitheel (Michael Savage) insulting
autistic children is a far cry from "right wing republicans pick[ing] on
brain damaged children" (and autism is *not* caused by brain damage).
Similarly, it's a bit of a leap to go from a different right-wing talk-
radio shitheel (Rush Limbaugh) insulting one person with Parkinson's
(Michael J. Fox) to right wing republicans picking on people with
Parkinson's.
Savage's anti-autism rant is undeniably scummy -- autistic children are
hardly in a position to defend themselves against the jerkwad -- but
you'd have a hard time convincing me that Michael J. Fox was being
"picked on." He chose to put himself in the limelight as a celebrity
Parkinson's sufferer -- in that specific instance, he was doing TV ads
for Democratic candidates who supported stem-cell research. ("Vote for
them and I'll be cured!") And, as Fox himself pointed out in a TV Guide
interview, Limbaugh unintentionally did him a favor by publicizing the
issue (http://www.tvguide.com/News/Michael-Fox-Limbaugh-1005845.aspx).
Incidentally, all three of the candidates endorsed by Fox won their
races.
--
Mark Steese
=======================================================================
PS: Your second question, you thought I forgot? I didn't. I never found
the banana slug. - William Least Heat-Moon
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Wrote:
In article <...@188.40.43.213Mark Steese <...@yahoo.com
Actually, I was thinking of a different issue...it was some time ago,
and I can't recall enough names or places to google it, maybe someone
here can help, but it involved a family that was unable, with two jobs,
to keep up with the cost of the special care that one of their kids
needed...I am pretty sure that his brain damage was "aquired" through
accident or injury. The left portrayed the family as cutting corners
and pinching every dime to try and meet the medical costs (and still
support the other kids), while the rhetoric from the right was unkind
not only towards the parents but towards the kids. But thank you for
reminding me of Michael "Autistic kids just need to be slapped and
told to cut it out" Savage. He's another piece of work.
--
Please reply to: | "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is
pciszek at panix dot com | indistinguishable from malice."
Autoreply is disabled |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|