I just want to reiterate that if O’Donnell beats Castle tomorrow, loses in Nov., & GOP ends up with 49 or 50 seats, I will laugh my ass off.
I just want to reiterate that if O’Donnell beats Castle tomorrow, loses in Nov., & GOP ends up with 49 or 50 seats, I will laugh my ass off.
*shrug* Laugh all you want, 49 seats still takes the ME contingent and Scott Brown off the table. Think anyone else is crossing the aisle after what has happened to GOP incumbents in primaries lately? Two more opportunities for the Dems to get “bipartisanship” on legislation sure doesn’t seem like a better idea to me, but then again we’ve already established you and I have fundamentally different views on politics.
To put it another way, if your scenario comes to pass the GOP still has the filibuster yet is not responsible for any stupidity that gets passed by a Democrat controlled Senate. In short, remember that the term “Pyhrric Victory” exists for a reason, and it’s not just because someone was looking for a P to the V.
Even worse, if the GOP takes the House that means the Dems no longer get to pass anything yet will still have a lot of sh*t hung around their next for the next two years. How’s that going to look for 2012? I’d dare say the GOP could nominate someone from crazy town and possibly _still_ win in that scenario.
Absolute _worst_ case scenario, however, is taking the House and Senate this year. Because from a purely political standpoint, the GOP would be best served if their utter and complete lack of a plan wasn’t exposed quite so quick. (See Jim Boehner this previous weekend for an example of why the Great Pumpkin is not ready for prime time.)
Don’t get me wrong–personally, I think we as a nation are like a hot chick passed out on roofies at a frat house (i.e., about to be utterly and irrevocably f_____d) regardless of whose in charge come next January. However, I can’t see why you think that the GOP ending up with a couple of Collins/Snowe clones is better than ending up with 49/50 seats and no responsibility.
Regarding Pyhrric victories, as I’ve written before, I believe the worst-case scenario for the Dems and (especially Obama), politically, is precisely the one where the Dems hold onto a slim majority in both houses. Indeed, as I just tweeted, “Since I think a GOP majority = good for Obama, I guess I should be rooting for Castle & Ayotte. Double-super-secret electability strategery!” You seem to be articulating the same point from a conservative perspective. In other words, we agree about the strategic/tactical implications, even if we disagree about our preferred result.
Even so, I would laugh at the scenario whereby the GOP loses the majority because of O’Donnell, because I assume the GOP actually wants to take back the majority — notwithstanding my personal belief that, long term, they might indeed be better off losing (not because of anything particular to Castle, just because of the way public perception of congressional majorities works). Usually, parties prefer to win elections rather than losing them, yet today the GOP may basically decide to voluntarily give away a Senate seat. I don’t care who you are, that’s funny.
Er, tomorrow.
James, you somehow managed to have the words “hot chick” “roofies” “frat house” and “Collins / Snowe clones” reasonably close together in the same paragraph. I salute you!
Snowe clones was particular entertaining 🙂
Also whats so impressive about hot chick, roofies and frat house. Seems like a natural trio to me.
Not when combined with “[Susan] Collins / [Olympia] Snowe clones”.
I was going to make a remark about “I didn’t even know actual conservatives lived in Delaware” until I remembered their quirky corporate laws. Even then, I still wonder. (Fi-Cons, maybe, So-Cons, no.)
That said, there’s a very strong “the perfect is the enemy of the good” argument to be made here, especially when “the perfect” may or may not be a few courses short of a meal (or, until recently, a bachelor’s degree).
Enh, why is a bachelor’s degree critical to political office? Yeah, I know, irony coming from the grad student on the lawyer’s blog, but I long ago stopped believing college degrees are an indication of being educated / intelligent. One of the smartest men I knew did not hold a degree–some of the stupidest fothermuckers (“Did he just quote Kerli?” “Why yes, yes I did…”) I’ve ever met had Ph.D. after their name. In short, if we’re going to start requiring bachelors’ for candidates to be taken seriously, don’t be surprised if we get a lot of “Well it looked good on paper…” solutions to the nations’ problems.
James Young:
It has already been established on this blog that the Left believes the unwashed masses should shut up and allow the intellectual class to tell them what is good for them.
No. Nothing of the sort has been established on this blog. I just can’t understand where you are coming from, gahrie.
B. Minich:
Really….no one has called Palin or the tea baggers ignorant, anti-intellectual and dangerous?
No one has made the case that people like Joe the plumber is unqualified to run for office because he is “uneducated”?
All of those things have been said, gahrie, but it is by no means self-evident that such statements translate to a belief that “the unwashed masses should shut up and allow the intellectual class to tell them what is good for them.” Really, surely you have enough self-awareness to understand that that’s your own personal interpretation of the referenced statements about Palin, the Tea Partiers, Joe the Plumber, etc., and not a self-evident conclusion that any rational person would automatically reach from the referenced statements?
P.S. I don’t always speak in nuanced terms, but with regard to this particular issue (the interrelationship of the elites, the masses, the common man, etc., and what role that whole dichotomy plays in our current national crisis/malaise/what-have-you), a topic which I’ve explored at length on a few occasions lately, I think I’ve been pretty nuanced and detailed in explaining exactly what I think, both in blog posts and in comment discussions with you specifically. It’s frustrating that you insist on condensing those beliefs to a one-line caricature, and that you apparently believe this condensed version is so obviously a fair characterization of my opinion that it really requires no elaboration or defense.
Just as idiot pastors and “patriots” have every right to burn holy books in a wholly un-Christian and frankly un-American manner, you obviously have every right to blatantly distort my opinions in this manner — and I’m sure I myself have been guilty, in the heat of the moment, of such distortion at times, too, with regard to other people’s opinions, though I hope not too frequently — but it doesn’t reflect well on you, or on your ability/willingness to engage in reasoned discourse about this. It’s one thing to have strong opinions on this issue that sharply differ from mine, which you clearly do, and I respect. It’s another thing to repeatedly fail to address the substance of my points, caricature that substance into a ridiculous sound bite, and then treat my argument (as mischaracterized like you) like it’s self-refuting.
As Brendan said, saying that Palin is ignorant, anti-intellectual, and dangerous is not saying that the left is telling normal people to shut up. It is saying that Palin is dangerous. A position with which I agree.
I’m with Brendan and B. Minich, calling out Palin for being a terrible “leader” with terrible ideas and dangerous policies is not telling the common people to shut up unless you erroneously believe that Palin speaks for and represents all the common people. Then again you do seem to have a habit of equating the behavior of a small group to that of a larger group despite all evidence to the contrary.
Joe the Plumber is an imbecile, Steve Jobs is not. Neither of them are in possession of a college degree (so far as I know). Sara Palin has a B.S. and is completely full of B.S. Bill Gates does not and, generally speaking, is not. (Sorry those were the first two instances of smart people that don’t have degrees that I could think of off the top of my head that most everyone here would know, I don’t mean to be tech centric in this conversation).
To wit, a college degree does not a smart person make. It’s a forehead stamp that the business world looks for, but it’s really basically meaningless.
The point is a degree certainly doesn’t make you smart or stupid.
However, stupid people are not fit for political office really does not seem like to much of a rational stretch to me. So what I am is anti-anti-interlctual. Which is why I don’t like Sara, the Demagogue, Palin.
The problem is not whether or not someone has a degree, its what their having one or not indicates. Do they not have a degree because they pursued a path that didn’t require one or do they not have a degree because they were a terrible student. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, to use dcl’s example, don’t have degrees because they were succesful without them. Sarah Palin has a degree, but only by the skin of her teeth and through some very academically lean locations. What have they done since then? Gates and Jobs have succesfully built billion dollar companies and shaped industry. Palin couldn’t even get through a full term as the Governor of the easiest state in the nation.
“Just as idiot pastors and “patriots” have every right to burn holy books in a wholly un-Christian and frankly un-American manner, you obviously have every right to blatantly distort “
“It’s frustrating that you insist on condensing those beliefs to a one-line caricature”
Pot – meet melanin-advantaged kettle !
Alasdair, in what way, exactly, is my characterization of the Koran burners’ actions a “caricature”? I think it’s pretty accurate. Obviously I’m expressing my opinion by calling it “un-Christian” and “un-American” to burn a holy book, but — well — do you disagree? Pray tell.
P.S. Moreover, even if you disagree with my opinion that it’s “un-Christian” and “un-American” to do what they’re doing, that’s still not a “caricature” of their position, it’s simply me stating MY position. A caricature of their position would be, “These pastors think Muslims are all evil people who should be exterminated.” See, there I’m asserting (incorrectly) what I claim they believe to be true, as opposed to simply stating what I believe to be true about them. Big difference. Stating my opinion, even if it’s a strong opinion, is far different from what gahrie was doing to me, which was setting up a straw-man version of my opinion (i.e., that I “believe[] the unwashed masses should shut up and allow the intellectual class to tell them what is good for them” — something I do not, in fact, believe).
In sum, your point is completely invalid. Next.
So ‘idiot pastors‘ is a dispassionate strictly factual description ?
And ‘ “patriots” ‘ is in scare quotes because you are again being factually sincere ?
Hey – I’m all in favour of literary flourishes – I just don’t pretend to be unbiased …
You also appear to be projecting the intentions on *your* *own* *side* on gahrie – he simply said that “the Left” on this blog believes that – and then *you* chose to take it as a definitively personal attack upon you … (grin) … as the mythically ornithological aphorism states – “If the Foo defecates …” …
In sum, I trow, methinks thou dost protest entirely too much, sweet sirrah !
Proximo ?
Brendan:
Do you or do you not think Sarah Palin is qualified to be president?
Do you or do you not characterize those Americans who support Palin as ignorant and unqualified to make decisions about the leadership of this country?
Do you or do you not support the domination of our government by Ivy League grads and the liberal elite?
Do you or do you not believe that the American people are being duped by Palin and the Tea Party?
So if I set up a strawman, and I have so wronged you….let us say for the sake of argument that this November a tidal wave hits and the Republicans win both the House and the Senate (as I believe will happen) with a sizable number of tea party candidates winning.
Will you respect the choice of the American people? Or will you blame the win on dirty tricks, and the ability of the Republicans to trick enough people into voting for them?
And even if you will, ….will dcl, Sandy and David?
“Do you or do you not think Sarah Palin is qualified to be president?”
Qualified in the sense that she meets the objective criteria of over the age of 35, American born, no felonies, etc.? Seems so (although I haven’t seen her birth certificate :D)
Qualified in terms of ability to do the job? No.
“Do you or do you not characterize those Americans who support Palin as ignorant and unqualified to make decisions about the leadership of this country?”
I think they are making a stupid decision and may have other problems, but unqualified to make decisions? No, I think they have every right to participate in the system as I do.
“Do you or do you not support the domination of our government by Ivy League grads and the liberal elite?”
Whats the point of this question but to further your own skewed perspective. I don’t care where they went to school so long as they are good leaders. When I don’t think they are a good leader I will criticize them and vote against them regardless of being a Yale alum.
“Do you or do you not believe that the American people are being duped by Palin and the Tea Party?”
I think that the Tea Party movement is largely wrong headed, based on fear and ignorance, and the wrong direction for America to take. I don’t believe they are being “duped” other than they are being fed bad information that they are buying into. I feel Fox News, in particular Glenn Beck does this on a daily basis.
“So if I set up a strawman, and I have so wronged you….let us say for the sake of argument that this November a tidal wave hits and the Republicans win both the House and the Senate (as I believe will happen) with a sizable number of tea party candidates winning.
Will you respect the choice of the American people? Or will you blame the win on dirty tricks, and the ability of the Republicans to trick enough people into voting for them?”
Assuming I have no evidence to believe that dirty tricks were used I’ll chalk it up to a sufficient number of Americans being stupid and/or voting for poor candidates (regarding the Tea Party candidates) or holding different priorities and evaluations of candidates than i do (non-Tea Party candidates) but such is the nature of our government. Sometimes you get a politician in office you don’t like. Hopefully its not for long.
I’ll chalk it up to a sufficient number of Americans being stupid and/or voting for poor candidates (regarding the Tea Party candidates)
Q.E.D.
By the way..have you closely followed the campaigns of all the Tea Party candidates or are you labeling them “poor candidates” simply because they identify with the Tea Party movement?
So I’m not allowed to think people are stupid for doing things that I think are stupid? That doesn’t prove your point at all. I’m not saying “they are stupid therefore they shouldn’t vote”.
Seriously gahrie you are proving Brendan’s point. Instead of cherry picking the parts of my response that when taken out of context MIGHT support your claim and look at the whole thing, which does not.
I think any candidate who affiliates with the Tea Party movement is a bad candidate because they are necessarilly extremist and engaged in supporting a hypocritical movement that is based on fear, hate, and lies.
Given that I know for a fact that at least one tea bag candidate is cynically using the movement for the purpose of his own political gain. And is willfully being duplicitous about his candidacy, I’d say you are utterly full of shit gahrie.
The above, by the way is not in anyway opinion, except for the last clause. Seriously, who says, “I had the opportunity to be in Washington last week…” when what you really mean is, “my day job is as a Washington lobbyist…” Bull freaking shit.
I actually feel kind of bad saying the above and categorically will not say more on this subject. I know the candidate professionally, and while I find his candidacy deeply troubling I do not wish to get involved in anyway in his political ambitions. I’ll only say this much knowing he does not actually read this blog.
I mean seriously, THIS is what your behavior is:
gahrie: Do you think Tea Partiers are stupid and shouldn’t be able to vote??
David K: I think they are stupid, but I think they have the right to vote.
gahrie: “I think they are stupid” HA! You proved my point! You think they should just shut up and let the evil liberal elites run everything!!!
David K: Did you miss the part where I said they have the right to vote and participate in the system?
gahrie: Sorry what was that? I was distracted writing my ode to Glenn Beck.
Did you miss the part where I said they have the right to vote and participate in the system?
except Palin
or members of the Tea Party
as long as they lose
gahrie, you are simply not making any sense what so ever at this point.
See gahrie, I try and respond to your questions honestly but what does it get me? You are so full of crap.
No reasonable person would conclude based on my very clear statements above what you are.
Palin has the right to run, Tea Partiers have the right to support her and I have the right to criticize them for it.
You are apparently one of those idiots who confuses freedom of speech with freedom from criticism.
it is almost funny how you guys project.
Just remember, every time you guys insult Palin on TV, she wins another supporter.
Every time you label the Tea Party as racists, extremists and ignorant, the Tea Party gets stronger.
Every time you write off Tea Party candidates as unelectable, they get stronger.
The American people resent the Left’s elitism almost as much as they oppose the Left’s agenda.
You decry the anti-intellectualism of the right, without realizing that they are responding to decades of scorn, and disrespect from the Left.
The American people believe in limited government, individual rights and opportunities and in American exceptionalism and they are going to send you guys that message in November.
Palin is not going to run for president in 2012. But that doesn’t matter. Whoever the nominee is, we will be told by the Left and the media that they are too stupid, too old, too extreme to be electable. We will be told that the Republicans are using scare tactics, that they are playing on racial fears.
It’s funny how you run away from being called out on your bullshit by posting some Tea Party screed on how great Sarah Palin is. Afraid to confront the fact that, as usual, you were wrong? That you ignore reality and what people actually say to try and support your brain dead claims? Come off it gahrie, you don’t have a clue and its obvious. The Tea Party is going to make it easier for the “evil” left to win, not harder. You think independents and moderates are going to flock to the banner of extremism and know-nothingism that they represent?
Scorn and disrespect? Elitism? Nice buzzwords, but sorry man, they don’t stand up to scrutiny.
Incidentally I thought the Tea Party was non-partisan (your claims) now suddenly they are right wing? What is it? You can’t have it both ways. Oh wait I get it, they are non-partisan when it suits your claims and right wing when it suits your claims. Lies and more lies, just like the B.S. the Tea Party spews with Sarah Palin at the helm.
And should, through some miracle, they win control of the government, you’ll see how wrong you were as the country falls apart around you. I hope for all our sakes they never win for that very reason.
ncidentally I thought the Tea Party was non-partisan (your claims) now suddenly they are right wing
I never said the Tea Party was not rightwing. I said they are not Republican. There is a difference.
I have never said that Palin is great. I simply defend her from your increasingly irrational and emotional attacks.
I’m still waiting for gahrie to acknowledge that he is creating a strawman when he asserts that I and others on the “Left” on this here blog “believe[] the unwashed masses should shut up and allow the intellectual class to tell them what is good for them” … and that none of the specific, actual expressed sentiments he’s correctly attributed to us even BEGIN to establish the truth of that original statement, purporting to summarizing our supposed “beliefs.”
Still… waiting…
Until that happens, this discussion is pointless. Gahrie is simply off in his own world, making assertions and arguments based solely upon his distortion of my and others’ positions. How are we supposed to argue against that? It’s a position comprised entirely of self-sustaining circular bullshit.
(I would say I’m also waiting for Alasdair to acknowledge the difference between a strong expression of one’s own opinion and a strawman caricature of someone else’s opinion… but I think we all know that expecting Alasdair to acknowledge anything averse to his worldview is like expecting Barack Obama to wake up tomorrow and decide to roll back the welfare state and revert to a purely free market system.)
A timely cartoon …
Brendan – the derision and condescension heaped upon Sarah Palin and the Tea Party folk by the Left generally, and by the illiberal liberals in this blog in particular, is regular and projective …
From just this post,
#33 “You think independents and moderates are going to flock to the banner of extremism and know-nothingism that they represent?” …
#26 “I think any candidate who affiliates with the Tea Party movement is a bad candidate because they are necessarilly extremist and engaged in supporting a hypocritical movement that is based on fear, hate, and lies.” …
Al, it’s because they are nuts. Certifiably nuts. And they offer no viable solutions. The Tea Baggers might as well just call themselves that “I want cookies NOW party” for all the responsibility and critical thinking they posses.
Alasdair, has it ever crossed your mind that people criticize the Tea Party because they think the Tea Party has bad ideas? It’s not projection you moron, it’s simple disagreement. Here’s a clue, the more you have to rely on twisted and convoluted explanations to explain the motives of those you disagree with, the more likely it is that YOU are wrong?
The Tea Baggers might as well just call themselves that “I want cookies NOW party”
How about the “I’m tired of paying for everybody else’s free cookies” party?
Given the tea baggers are the ones that get the free cookies not the ones that pay for them, I don’t buy your argument at 39. All you need to do is look at the fed income tax distro and the fed gov. program distro and this is pretty damn obvious given the tea bagger distro.