It’s been twenty five years now, and the AP has a story of the anniversary of the Love Canal debacle. It was the event that created the insane Superfund for environmental cleanup, most of the money for which is siphoned off into lawyer’s wallets.
And of course, what the AP doesn’t mention is that it wasn’t Hooker Chemical’s fault–they just ended up being the fall guy for stupid bureaucrats.
OK, I know that the Dems have gone off the deep end, and you know that the Dems have gone off the deep end, but when the Washington Post says that the Dems have gone off the deep end, you know they have to be in real trouble.
It certainly would be fair now to argue that the logic was wrong. There was a cogent case to be made against the war, and even those who supported it might now say that the absence of any uncovered weapons of mass destruction, or the continuing violence against Americans, gives them, in hindsight, a different view. There’s plenty to criticize in the administration’s postwar effort too. What isn’t persuasive, or even very smart politically, is to pretend to have been fooled by what Mr. Gore breathlessly calls the Bush “systematic effort to manipulate facts in service to a totalistic ideology.”
I’m surprised that no one else picked up on this quote from Gore, which had me scratching my head when I heard him say it (it doesn’t appear in his submitted text for the speech).
What in the world is a “totalistic ideology”? When I plug the word into dictionary.com, I get:
adj : of or relating to the principles of totalitarianism according to which the state regulates every realm of life; “totalitarian theory and practice”; “operating in a totalistic fashion” [syn: totalitarian]
Is it a verbal gaffe (in which case, a la Bush, of course we can expect the media to be all over it, right?). Or is it a way of calling Mr. Bush a totalitarian while retaining “plausible deniability,” which is either Clintonian or Nixonian, depending on your political predilections?
Either way, why hasn’t this aspect of Gore’s little rant gotten more attention?
The best take yet on Ahnuld, by (who else?) Mark Steyn.
My favorite (though it’s all great):
…Arnold’s not a Nazi. He was born in the Austrian town of Thal, but not until 1947, and thus was technically unable to join the Nazi Party no matter how much he may have wanted to. But he certainly has family ties to the Nazis. His wife’s grandfather, Joe Kennedy, was one of America’s most prominent Nazi sympathisers.
Oh, wait. That’s not the Nazi family ties the Dems had in mind?…
The best take yet on Ahnuld, by (who else?) Mark Steyn.
My favorite (though it’s all great):
…Arnold’s not a Nazi. He was born in the Austrian town of Thal, but not until 1947, and thus was technically unable to join the Nazi Party no matter how much he may have wanted to. But he certainly has family ties to the Nazis. His wife’s grandfather, Joe Kennedy, was one of America’s most prominent Nazi sympathisers.
Oh, wait. That’s not the Nazi family ties the Dems had in mind?…
The best take yet on Ahnuld, by (who else?) Mark Steyn.
My favorite (though it’s all great):
…Arnold’s not a Nazi. He was born in the Austrian town of Thal, but not until 1947, and thus was technically unable to join the Nazi Party no matter how much he may have wanted to. But he certainly has family ties to the Nazis. His wife’s grandfather, Joe Kennedy, was one of America’s most prominent Nazi sympathisers.
Oh, wait. That’s not the Nazi family ties the Dems had in mind?…
Well, well, the Dems managed to muster up more party discipline than I gave them credit for. They managed to persuade Garamendi to drop out of the race. That means that the Republican vote will be split between (at least) Arnold, Bill Simon and Tom McClintock. This might mean that the Donkeys keep control of the governorship.
I’m not necessarily unhappy about that, because if that happens, it will continue to be clearly their mess, and it will bode ill for them next year.
Here’s an interesting article from the National Post, that says the SCO lawsuit may be a blessing in disguise for the open source movement.
Here’s an interesting article from the National Post, that says the SCO lawsuit may be a blessing in disguise for the open source movement.
Here’s an interesting article from the National Post, that says the SCO lawsuit may be a blessing in disguise for the open source movement.
Eric Raymond says that Thomas Kuhn’s theories about the structure of scientific revolution are wrong.
I’ve always bought into them, but never examined them deeply. Now I guess I’ll have to.