July 9, 2008
POLITICS: Presidential Election Quick Links 7/9/08
Heckuva job, Barack. A pictorial illustration of the value of Obama's friendship. And a Judicial Watch complaint on more favors Obama received.
Here's the writeup on that Obama ad I saw in Florida, and how it departs from the truth. Hint: when you can only come up with three accomplishments to list and two of them are this shaky, you don't have much of a record to run on (and note that the "tax cuts" he trumpets are EITC programs, which give money to people who have not paid taxes - not exactly a cut in taxes paid by anyone).
This is the John McCain we all know. Frankly, McCain will be more successful on the trail if he gives himself permission to say things like this. Dole in 1996 suffered from reining himself in too much. Let McCain be McCain, and people will understand when he says this sort of thing.
*Your Obama moment of the day:
Geraghty on the trials of trying to get information about Obama's Illinois years. I tell you, this guy has put a huge amount of his life and career down the memory hole. It's as if he sprung fully formed on the national stage in July 2004.
*I still cannot believe that
the Democrats are ripping McCain for associating with America's most decorated living veteran, who also happens to be a guy McCain credits for saving his life in prison. But sometimes, they really are that tone-deaf.
Obama, the felons' candidate.
Obama, the soldiers' candidate...that is, only the soldiers they show on TV. The other 90% for McCain (in this example) don't count.
Interesting backgrounder on how McCain's crusade against pork-barrel spending got started in the first place.
Bush is unpopular. But he's still three times as popular as the Pelosi-Reid-run Congress, as well as more popular than the Supreme Court. You gotta work really hard to get your approval ratings into single digits in a year and a half running Congress, but the Democrats are up to the task.
Wow. The Wing Nuts are really afraid of Obama.
Wow. The Wing Nuts are really afraid of Obama. Another reason to vote for him.
If this is the best you've got, it is going to be a long 8 years. I've no sympathy, though. We've endured an ignoramace and his sidekick, who thinks he is above the law, all laws.
Do you guys get a volume discount on that line or something?
No. We just enjoy the reaction too much.
Magrooder: You greatly diminish the weight of your insult of someone's intelligence when you badly misspell the insult. The word is spelled ignoramus.
Sorry wd, but that is the sort of pedantry expected from the right wing.
Either 1) you missed my point; 2) you don't know the proper usage of pedantry; or 3) both. My point was that it is funny when someone accuses someone else of being unintelligent in a manner that makes the accuser look unintelligent.
"The other 90% for McCain (in this example) don't count."
Sheesh, nothing like an entirely unsubstantiated email in order to confirm your narrative, without actually looking into it.
Remember all - those nice Nigerians don't actually have millions. Well, maybe one of them does.
"You gotta work really hard to get your approval ratings into single digits in a year and a half "
Leaving alone comparing an individual with a branch (let's poll based on Bush+IRS+TSA!) - no you don't - it was at 20% in Dec 2006, 30% (honeymoon) in Jan 07. Losing the representative sample of 20mil voters, in the face of skyrocketing energy prices and a weak economy? Color me meh.
The real interesting part is that solid 30%, always in approval of president Bush. By now, he could be lighting kittens on fire in the Rose Garden and still not drop below it. These people scare me as much as the 9% who think Congress is doing a good job.
Snark aside - you should also keep in mind that you're not comparing two equal numbers. The President questions included "strongly approve" and "somewhat approve", and 2 on the disapprove side.
The Congress had "excellent" and "good" - but also a response for "fair". Using fair, you get 45%.
How much would Bush go up if you included "fair"?
So the group, which just today rubber-stamped Bush's law-breaking, has low approval ratings.
No biggie. Those low ratings are from citizens of the United States, not Congress' constituents (i.e. corporations and the rich).
Nothing to see. move right along.
Seriously, Crank, the comparison of Bush's approval rating to a body of Congress or the Supreme Court is beneath you. As you know, "Congress" isn't accountable to voters; the President of the United States is. Try looking at individual members of Congress and comparing it to Bush -- I think you'll find a consistent trend (higher than Bush's rating and, in general, lower among Republicans).
It's going to be a long eight years.
Wd, I know both the usage and, what you meant, the definition of pedantry. Keep correcting typos, though, looks like a promising career path for you.
When will we be getting a post on Phil Gramm? Oh, that's right, deep down you agree with him, but are smart enough not to say it out loud.
I'm not likely to have time for a post on that particular silly kerfuffle. From what I have seen of his comments he was partly correct: the U.S. economy
is structurally still in a very strong long-term position, and media hysteria has overstated some of the problems in the economy.
It's impolitic for him to say that because the Dems make it sound like he thinks nobody's having a hard time, and so McCain has to distance himself from that message. But only in campaign silly season is it a crime to point out that the situation is nothing like 1936 or even 1979.
Magrooder: Thanks for career advice. And please keep giving us those snide posts with the egregious typos, misused words -- you didn't use pedantry correctly -- and butchered sentences. Their (sic) quiet (sic) bemusing (sic).
I misspelled ignoramus (sorry, I am a hunt and peck typist and a captive of spell-check). I did not, however, misuse pedantry. Usage is "the way in which words or phrases are actually used, spoken, or written in a speech community." Pedantry is "a narrow, often tiresome focus on or display of learning and especially its trivial aspects."
You were being pedantic.
Typo, my eye. You didn't know how to spell it and you didn't bother to look it up. You don't get "ignoramace" instead of "ignoramus" due to poor typing skills. Which I concede isn't really a big deal, but it becomes somewhat funny when you are insulting someone else's intelligence. That was my point, not to "display learning and especially its trivial aspects." My later posts were probably pedantic, and now, I confess, I have crossed that line and am just being a jackass. But I am a lawyer, so it is an occupational hazard. My apologies. I only meant to point out something humorous and it got more contentious that I intended.
You're right. I thought the word looked wrong as I typed it and did not bother to check. Spolied by spell-check. Hope we can continue to do battle throughout the fall without rancor.
You're right. I thought the word looked wrong as I typed it and did not bother to check. Spoiled by spell-check. Hope we can continue to do battle throughout the fall without rancor.
Gramm was "partly correct".
Their are a lot of people whining about the economy. They come from the "oh so efficient" private sector. The whiners are on the Board of Directors of Bear Stearns, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, etc. If the economy is as structurally sound as you think it is, tell these corporate honchos to suck it up and grow themselves out of their problems.