The title of this post may be the Clintons’ epitaph.
Category Archives: Political Commentary
The People Here Are Poor But They’re Not Stupid
The title of this post may be the Clintons’ epitaph.
Old Habits Die Hard
Bill Clinton had a Freudian slip while supposedly campaigning for his wife. “If you elect me…”
No Truth In Labeling
Obama doesn’t want to be called a liberal. Even though his positions seem to be uniformly “liberal” (used here in the modern, statist sense, not the classical sense).
I recall another liberal presidential candidate who didn’t want to be called a “liberal”:
JIM LEHRER: Do you think he successfully painted Dukakis as a liberal?
MS. STEELMAN: Oh, no, the beauty of last night was that he didn’t have to paint at all. Dukakis clearly painted himself as a liberal. His responses were right down the liberal line, every one of them. That was the thing that most of us inside the Bush campaign found most remarkable is that he didn’t even try to move to the center. George Bush, on the other hand, I think has shown himself as a very moderate candidate, a very conservative candidate at the same time, conservative on the issues where the American people believe the Reagan Administration has been successful, interest rates, inflation, economy, and moving forward on other issues where the American people clearly believe we need to have some answers like child care and others. And we think it was a very good debate because we didn’t paint anything. There was no image making. Dukakis is a liberal and it showed. Bush is very much in the mainstream of American values and American opinion. And that showed.
It didn’t work out very well for him.
Did He Call Him A Son Of A Bitch?
In the overzealous law enforcement department, a man was arrested for animal cruelty after yelling at a police dog.
Are Americans Stupid?
Phil Bowermaster has some thoughts:
See how deftly it’s done? Stupid religious Americans, clever “heathen” Europeans. Unfortunately, in the context, this doesn’t make a heck of a lot of sense. Americans are opposed to stem cell research because we’re ignorant religious bigots. Okay, sure. But we’re opposed to nanotechnology for the same reasons? And GM foods?
GM foods? Now wait a second…a lot of Europeans are opposed to GM foods. I bet they would even say it’s on moral grounds! Yet somehow, they manage to pull that off without being either 1) religious or — more importantly — 2) stupid. Personally, I think being morally opposed to GM foods is kind of stupid, and being “morally” opposed to nanotechnology is idiotic. However, I don’t see how American stupidity is dumber than European stupidity; one may be informed by religious belief, the other by a paranoid superstitious dread of scientific progress. Advantage: Europe? If you say so.
I just hope that Americans aren’t stupid enough to fall for Obama, as the Democrats currently seem to be.
Fascism In America
As for the NRA logo, it’s a reminder of the happy days of FDR’s attempts to revive the economy by pouring a bowl of alphabet soup over its face. The NRA, among other things, was intended to prevent the depredations of competition, and “allowed industry heads to collectively set minimum prices,” as this rather scant wikipedia entry notes. (The same page relates the story of the tailor who was arrested for charging 35 cents to press a suit; the NRA rules specified the price at 40 cents. So he was arrested. Consider that the next time someone complains that liberty and civil rights have been eliminated in the last 7 years.)
The Women In His Life
Spengler says that Obama hates America.
I don’t know whether he does or not, but his wife’s attitude is very troubling, and I don’t think that he’s going to be the next president. I think that the first (true) black (and woman) president is much more likely to be a Republican.
[Update a few minutes later]
Isn’t it interesting that the American press doesn’t seem interested in stories like this one? I guess that it’s just another example of foreigners doing the jobs that Americans won’t do.
This would be a gift to the Clinton campaign, if they were in a position to criticize people over land deals. You can bet that the McCain campaign will use it in the general, if Obama gets the nod.
They Should
Dan Walters writes that the Dems fear train-wreck scenarios.
And I’ll keep the corn popping.
Creating An Appearance Of An Appearance
Michael Kinsley has the best take so far on McCain and the New York Times:
I have come under some criticism for my criticism of the New York Times for its criticism of Sen. John McCain. Many readers of last week’s New York Times article about McCain, including me, read that article as suggesting that McCain may have had an affair with a lobbyist eight years ago. The Times, however, has made clear that its story was not about an affair with a lobbyist. Its story was about the possibility that eight years ago, aides to McCain had held meetings with McCain to warn him about the appearance that he might be having an affair with the lobbyist. This is obviously a much more important question. To be absolutely clear: The Times itself was not suggesting that there had been an affair or even that there had been the appearance of an affair. The Times was reporting that there was a time eight years ago when some people felt there might be the appearance of an affair, although others, apparently including McCain himself, apparently felt that there was no such appearance.
Read all.