Via Counterpunch, a case that Sarah is the wrong Palin to send to Washington.
http://redstaterebels.org/2008/09/michael-palin-for-president/
All posts in category Campaign 2008
The wrong Palin!
Posted by acilius on September 12, 2008
https://losthunderlads.com/2008/09/12/the-wrong-palin/
Barack Obama Practices Looking-Off-Into-the-Future Pose
From the 28 May edition of The Onion. Like everything that appears in The Onion, this article couldn’t possibly be as funny as its headline. But it is pretty funny.
CHICAGO—As the 2008 presidential election draws closer, Democrat Barack Obama has reportedly been working tirelessly with his top political strategists to perfect his looking-off-into-the-future pose, which many believe is vital to the success of the Illinois senator’s campaign.
When performed correctly, the pose involves Obama standing upright with his back arched and his chest thrust out, his shoulders positioned 1.3 feet apart and opened slightly at a 14-degree angle, and his eyes transfixed on a predetermined point between 500 and 600 yards away. Advisers say this creates the illusion that Obama is looking forward to a bright future, while the downturned corners of his lips indicate that he acknowledges the problems of the present.
Interactive Graphic
The Science of Inspirational Poses
Obama’s advisers have created a computer model to simulate the optimal looking-off-into-the-future pose.
“The senator spends six hours a day gazing resolutely off into the distance,” said chief political strategist David Axelrod, who regularly analyzes video of the pose with Obama, pinpoints areas that need improvement, and makes necessary tweaks.
“It is critical to get every detail right,” Axelrod continued. “If he looks up an inch too high, he appears aloof or confused. If he looks down too low, it appears that he is distracted by something in the back of the auditorium. If the curvature of his upper lip is not at the exact 0.87-centimeter radius, it reads that he does not care about preserving the environment for future generations.”
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/obama_practices_looking_off_into
Posted by acilius on September 12, 2008
https://losthunderlads.com/2008/09/12/barack-obama-practices-looking-off-into-the-future-pose/
Deja Vu
From Politico.com, a view of the Republican ticket as they appeared in 2004.
Also, I keep waiting for somebody to pick up on Palin’s source for her “pit bull with lipstick” line. It’s been up on another candidate’s blog for a year or so. A female presidential candidate, with a female running mate, who has more than a little bit in common with the pair above…
http://www.theamericanparty.org/electtemplinandmoorein20041/
Oh, and here’s the same candidate making the same joke in 2004. http://www.bestofneworleans.com/dispatch/2004-01-20/news_feat.html
Posted by acilius on September 5, 2008
https://losthunderlads.com/2008/09/05/deja-vu/
Juxtaposed newspaper articles
Here’s a funny picture from Wonkette.
Posted by acilius on September 4, 2008
https://losthunderlads.com/2008/09/04/juxtaposed-newspaper-articles/
McMoney
Thanks to P the non-Thunderlad for calling this McCain thing to my attention.
Posted by acilius on August 29, 2008
https://losthunderlads.com/2008/08/29/mcmoney/
The Atlantic Monthly, June 2008
A lively, pleasant read this month.
Some articles about Barack Obama. Joshua Green’s “The Amazing Money Machine” leads to the idea that no two successful presidential candidates use the same fundraising model. Marc Ambinder’s “HisSPACE”, about Obama’s ideas on using the Internet to make government operations more visible, contains this sentence:
Communication and transparency are virtues only up to a point; as students of bureaucracy know, both eventually become an enemy to efficiency.
But of course it is precisely at the point where transparency becomes an enemy to efficiency that it becomes a virtue. The last thing we want is a really efficient bureaucracy. An inefficient bureaucracy is a nuisance, a waste, a headache. A truly efficient bureaucracy can make life so easy for its clients that it leaves them no opportunity to achieve or create anything.
Transparency is like all other institutions of democracy: worth everything in the fighting for, worth nothing once achieved. Even a moderately efficient bureaucratic system can absorb the formalities of democracy and domesticate them thoroughly. Nietzsche wrote about this several times. In Twilight of the Idols, he issues his customary harsh dismissal of the institutions of liberalism (“reduction to the herd animal!”,) but does then qualify his contempt:
As long as they are still being fought for, these same institutions produce quite different effects; they then in fact promote freedom mightily. Viewed more closely, it is war which produces these effects, war for liberal institutions which as war permits the illiberal instincts to endure. And war is a training in freedom. For what is freedom? That one has the will to self-responsibility. That one preserves the distance which divides us. That one has become more indifferent to hardship, toil, privation, even to life. That one is ready to sacrifice men to one’s cause, oneself not excepted. Freedom means that the manly instincts that delight in war and victory have gained mastery over the other instincts- for example, over the instinct for “happiness”… How is freedom measured, in individuals as in nations? By the resistance which has to be overcome, by the effort it costs to stay aloft. (from section 38, as translated by R. J. Hollingdale in the Penguin Classics version)
Needless to say I would not endorse any of this without reservation. But I do believe that the proper growth of the human person requires freedom; that “the will to self-responsibility” is a major part of freedom; that freedom can exist only where all power has definite limits; and that the only thing capable of limiting power is conflict with an opposing power. Conflict itself, not documents or other formalized procedures resulting from conflict, is what ensures freedom.
Gregg Easterbrook’s “The Sky is Falling” looks at the possibility of a disastrous meteor strike, analyzing as an example of inefficient bureaucracy NASA’s failure to live up to Congress’ mandates to map the inner solar system. Locked into a metric which calculates success as a function of the number of astronauts deployed, the space agency wastes billions pointlessly repeating its Nixon-era triumphs, leaving undone work that might, quite literally, save the world.
“In the Basement of the Ivory Tower” gives “Professor X” the opportunity to speak the unspeakable- some of the students he teaches in two-year colleges are wasting their time taking classes when they would be better off working. Not that it’s their fault; jobs which never involve a bit of research or sustained sequential reasoning now routinely require four-year degrees.
Posted by acilius on May 13, 2008
https://losthunderlads.com/2008/05/13/the-atlantic-monthly-june-2008/
The American Conservative, 24 March 2008
A remarkable story on the cover. John Derbyshire writes that US foreign aid to Africa has produced enthusiastic crowds to greet George W. Bush on his recent visit to the continent and high approval ratings for America and Americans in polls of African opinion. However, he expresses doubts as to the real value of such aid. Citing Peter Bauer’s 1970’s-vintage definition of foreign aid as “transfer of wealth from poor people in rich countries to rich people on poor countries” and economic studies by Bauer and other supporting that characterization, Derbyshire argues that changes in foreign aid programs in recent years have been at best cosmetic and that aid continues to make matters worse for the countries that receive it. Going beyond narrowly economic arguments, Derbyshire points out that foreign aid, like big oil reserves, free a government from the need to finance itself by taxing its people, and thus from the need to win that people’s support or respect. Thus aid, however nobly intended, undermines democracy. Quoting Africans who resent the rich world’s gifts to their countries and prefer the more straightforward exchanges businesses from China make in Africa, Derbyshire speculates that the short-term popularity aid may buy donors will come at the cost of an overall loss of influence. Derbyshire mars this very interesting and tightly-argued article with some paragraphs near the end wherein, for no apparent reason, he brings up James Watson and the question of race and IQ. A well-known exponent of the nativist hypothesis, Derbyshire evidently could not write anything at all about Africa without indulging himself in this rather unseemly preoccupation of his. Still, the article as a whole makes a powerful case against the rich world’s patronage of the poor.
A review of recent books on the history of the American right points to an historical cleavage of considerable importance. Before the mid 60’s, the most prominent right-wing intellectuals in the USA were men whose education had been primarily in philosophy, history, and literature, and whose chief goal was to give true answers to the main questions of the day. The following generations were men (and a few women) whose education had been primarily in the social sciences and whose chief goal was to formulate policies that right-wing politicians could implement. The two groups could not understand each other- the older group were mystified as to what the younger ones really wanted, and the younger group thought the older ones were foolish to care so much about being right. This is a story that The American Conservative should tell often, since the word “neoconservative” is so easy to spin as an anti-semitic slur. By exploring this history, the magazine could enrich the word and avoid veiled bigotry.
Eric Margolis contrasts the Iranian president’s recent highly publicized, multi-day, triumphal procession through thecities of Iraq with the brief, unannounced visits American leaders pay to US military bases and to highly guarded sites in the quietest corners of the country. This contrast suggests to him that the US has already lost any hope of competing with Iran for influence in the future Iraq.
Elsewhere in the issue, Andrew Bacevich tries to talk himself and other disillusioned conservatives into voting for Barack Obama; Leon Hadar speculates on how Obama and McCain would handle crises stemming from Kosovo’s recent declaration of “independence”; and William S. Lind explains how past Balkan crises led to World War One, and finds inexcusable hubris in western governments’ failure to see a renewed disaster brewing in the region.
Posted by acilius on March 23, 2008
https://losthunderlads.com/2008/03/23/the-american-conservative-24-march-2008/
The American Conservative (three issues)
The Republican primaries are as much a focus of attention here as are the Democratic primaries in The Nation (see below.)
11 Feb: A terrific cover shows a cartoon of John McCain with a large globe, apparently about to eat it. The text: “Invade the World, Invite the World” (ostensibly a summary of McCain’s hawkish foreign policy and liberal immigration policy.) An editorial endorses Ron Paul for president (wonder how that worked out?); an article by antiwar.com’s Justin Raimondo documents McCain’s warlike intentions towards not only Iraq and Iran, but Russia and China as well; and Thomas Woods reviews Paul Gottfried’s Conservatism in America, praising Gottfried for debunking earlier writers’ attempts to gloss over the eccentric and sometimes alarming character of the older American right by claiming to find links between American conservatism and European conservatism.
25 Feb: A cover depicts Barack Obama as Christ, but wearing ammo belts and a machine gun; an article by Brendan O’Neill documents Obama’s history of support for US military intervention everywhere but Iraq; and Nicholas von Hoffman investigates Bill Clinton’s post-presidential moneymaking activities.
10 Mar: Another arresting cover, this one with text: “Fuel imported into Iraq- 3 million gallons/ day Cost to the US- $929 million/ week.” Steve Sailer (your favorite blogger!) analyzes Hispanic voting patterns; Scott McConnell is slightly encouraged by Barack Obama’s apparent reluctance to grovel before the most extreme elements of American Zionism; Leon Hadar dismisses the foreign policy terms “realist” and “idealist” as empty, appealing to Walter Russell Mead typology of Jeffersonian, Hamiltonian, Jacksonian, and Wilsonian as somewhat more capable of carrying meaning; Eamonn Fingleton critiques the view, widespread among America’s elite, that a prosperous China will naturally become democratic (though strangely he neglects to mention James Mann, whose recent book provided a powerful argument exploding that view); Daniel Larison sounds the alarm about Kosovo’s “independence”; Neil Clark finds that refusal to join the European Union has strengthened the economies and preserved the liberties of Switzerland, Norway, Iceland, and (get ready) Belarus; Jesse Walker praises The Kinks; and Doug Bandow looks at Christian Zionism and sees a collection of crazies.
Posted by acilius on March 16, 2008
https://losthunderlads.com/2008/03/16/the-american-conservative-three-issues/
The Nation (five issues)
The Democratic primaries dominate the issues of 25 February, 3 March, 10 March, 17 March, and 24 March. Interesting bits do slip in, though. What are these bits?
25 February: A long review of a biography of Joschka Fischer and Stuart Klawans’ review of the Romanian illegal-abortion drama 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days.
3 March: Alexander Cockburn declares that diverting Social Security taxes to Wall Street “was never a job for the Republicans, any more than was welfare ‘reform.’ Eradication of the social safety net is a job for the Democratic Party,” a job Bill Clinton would have completed had God not sent Monica Lewinsky to rescue us. Kathryn Joyce writes on the New Natalists, right-leaning types who worry that too few white babies are being born. Joyce identifies historian Allen Carlson as the intellectual godfather of this group. I’ve read some of Carlson’s books and can attest that he is at once an excellent historian whose works anyone can benefit from reading and a far-right crackpot whose triumph in the realm of public policy would be catastrophic. Jochen Hellbeck reviews two books on Stalin, tracing the development of Utopian plans into hellish institutions. Ronald Grigor Suny reviews two other books about Bolshevism. And from Charles Bernstein, a nifty little love poem called “All the Whiskey in Heaven,” which ended up in my Valentine’s Day package to Mrs Acilius.
10 March: Tom Hayden revisits Vietnam and is very uncomfortable with what he finds there; Daniel Wilkinson reviews four books on Hugo Chavez’ Venezuela and reaches far less rosy conclusions than have previous issues of The Nation.
17 March: Jeremy Scahill reports on Barack Obama’s stated willingness to continue using mercenary firms like Blackwater; and Daniel Lazare reviews two books on religious conflicts in early Modern Europe, arguing that secularism is older than the Enlightenment and defending it as the one tried-and-true means of overcoming religious conflict.
24 March: Mark Mazower wrings his hands about the implications of the Kosovo’s “independence”; Neve Gordon reviews work on Palestinians who collaborate with Zionism; and Stuart Klawans reviews Chop Shop, a film which he identifies as part of “a small but fascinating group of Iranian-flavored movies made in New York City.”
Posted by acilius on March 16, 2008
https://losthunderlads.com/2008/03/16/the-nation-five-issues/
Extreme Decision 2008 – Primaries
So what about the candidates?
Not an attempt to persuade, rather an unhelpful blathering of dropped from a helicopter on a snowboard-, restauranteur pioneer of Pripyat, Ukraine-style observations of their current standing. In other words, more of what you see on TV, only bloggy-style:
- Obama: Speaks very well, in line with values of many, yet enough folks are still too prejudiced and others are secretly afraid he won’t stand up against a Republican monster.
- Biden: Oh, please! This is where I put the expression “jacking your dick” because it belongs somewhere.
- Edwards: Doesn’t inspire enough passion. He articulates many things people want done but no one believes he can get them done.
- Richardson: Seems like he’d be a solid cabinet member once Clinton wins.
- Kucinich: Another place, another time…
- Clinton: Tremendous lead among mainstream and corporate interests. Not offensive enough to drive off everyone else who’s pissed and demands change.
- Paul: Attacked viciously because he loudly proclaims the popular will on major issues. Can’t have that! Very good chance he’ll be a 3rd party spoiler and screw everything up for the Democrats.
- Giuliani: Charisma and bald confidence will get you a lot of places (see Bush Jr.) but there’s plenty more mud headed his way. Not acceptable to the loud minorities of Republicans, too vulnerable on too much.
- Romney: 3-way furball between these last. Slip-ups will dog Romney and prejudice will play a role here, probably wrongly. (There are a lot of bizarre Christians who are decent people in their private lives and who insist on screwing up the private lives of others, he doesn’t deserve singling out for those qualities)
- Huckabee: The kind of unkind conservative Republicans love. McCain’s biggest competition from the values voters. Could make it.
- McCain: Momentum will build when the media realizes all that hugging with Bush means “Old Freaky” has plenty of support where he needs it. The aroma of a “comeback” story will be intoxicating. A survivor, a veteran, and a dirk-carrying operator with the best chance.
Posted by vthunderlad on December 24, 2007
https://losthunderlads.com/2007/12/24/extreme-decision-2008-primaries/
Who writes this?
acilius
believer1
lefalcon
losthunderlads
vthunderlad
Panther Red 