Recent WaPo posts - the good with the bad.

Comment on: McCain Embraces Regulation After Many Years of Opposition at 9/17/2008 11:23 AM EDT
"A decade ago, Sen. John McCain embraced legislation to broadly deregulate the banking and insurance industries..." NOW he is for "reform"?

Clearly his growing penchant for flip-flopping is indicative of one suffering from 'schizophrenic policy syndrome' (SPS) - the man needs to find a couch and an analyst to help him overcome this terrible affliction.

Godspeed Mr. McCain, may you get the help you need.


Comment on: Obama's Panic at 9/17/2008 1:15 AM EDT
mavisdarling wrote: "Can't you be a little more creative and critical in your thinking, Gerson? You are pulling rabbits out of your hat now!"

With respects, I believe you are mistaken. i believe he is pulling his thoughts out of a completely different orifice. Not only does it show - it smells!


Comment on: Obama's Panic at 9/17/2008 1:08 AM EDT
Gerson, rather than wasting your time trying to deconstruct Obama's decsions... which are measured ... why don't you deconstruct why you even bother getting up each day.

Is it for the express purpose of polluting our atmosphere with even more unnecessary gases?

Do us all a favour, stay in bed until November 5th - - your tripe is tiring. You have nothing to offer - - stay mute - - don't pollute!

Comment on: The Ugly New McCain at 9/16/2008 5:13 AM EDT

Well said.

Now if only McCain could look into a mirror and say it to himself.

Won't hold my breathe on this though. All the GOP's mirrors seem to have been assigned to Gov. Palin who keeps staring at them (unblinking) and chanting "Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the most unqualified of us all?"

Problem is, poor girl can't figure out why the mirror keeps given her the wrong answer: "You Sarah, you Sarah, are the most unqualified of them all!"



Comment on: Running on a Lie at 9/16/2008 4:11 AM EDT

Re: Palin's Lying Eyes - look no further than the Eagles to explain the pathology - they captured it perfectly in 1975 and it is apt still:

"My, oh my, you sure know how to arrange things.
You set it up so well, so carefully
Ain't it funny how your new life didn't change things
You're still the same old girl you used to be

You can't hide your lyin eyes
And your smile is a thin disguise
I thought by now you'd realize
There ain't no way to hide your lyin' eyes
There ain't no way to hide your lyin' eyes
Honey, you can't hide your lyin' eyes"

Maybe at Palin's next choreographed appearance it can be used as the entrance theme?



Comment on: Standing Up to Angler at 9/16/2008 3:55 AM EDT
Is the evidence Gellman presents not enough for a prima facie case to be brought against Vice-President Cheney for violating his oath.

Upon taking office did Cheney not take an oath that read, in part, that he would "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;" Clearly, he has violated this oath.

Abuse of power? Absolutely.
Jail time?
Absolutely.

Anything less would illustrate that America's time honoured democratic principles are no more protected than those in a garden variety Banana Republic.


Comment on: Whose Elitism Problem Now? at 9/16/2008 3:30 AM EDT

Nothing focuses the mind like a crisis. That it should befall the US economy at this juncture is both unfortunate and fortuitous.

Unfortunate because some innocent, well-meaning investors are going to suffer.

Fortuitous because it will give lie to McCain's craven position on tax cuts for the rich. The policies of the aging would-be emperor are being stripped of their adornments and one and all can see it with the naked eye. Hollow and vague pledges 'to reform' will follow.
Believe them not, for the McPalin Ticket 'speaks with forked tongue'.

None of this makes Mr. Obama's task and easy one - but it gives him an opportunity to demonstrate he can lead the way in policy formulation, that he can speak to the real issues, that he can show all that what he is offers (unlike the Republicans)is "Change We Need"!


Comment on: Advantages for Ms. Palin to Share? at 9/15/2008 1:28 AM EDT
Q: "...what will she do for working women who do not have the advantages she has?"

A: Precious little!

Comment on: Yes for an Answer at 9/14/2008 4:16 EDT
Does anyone else, other than myself, see the sadness?

The paucity of posts expressing real concern about this story only proves the current election campaign is undercutting a good solution that is in the best interest of America's long-term success.


Comment on: In Chicago, Discipline That Builds Dreams at 9/14/2008 3:51 EDT
cat111719. GREAT POST! (see: 9/14/2008 2:54:14 PM).

Unfortunately, because you actually bothered used a factual cite as the basis for you argument it will necessarily stir the dung out of those ideological right-wing cultists who routinely disparage the use of facts.

Expect no constructive feedback to a salient posting borne of critical analysis. Usually, the right`s posting pathology exhibits a predictable path.

a) In the face of a well researched articulated point that lays to waste the honesty of one of their own: George Will - - they will either display collective mute impudence and not respond -OR-
b) they will respond with an invective buttressed by insecurity, anger, and an holistic ignorance that overlooks your point and, instead, invokes labels such as: lefty, liberal, Obama-bot, commie, Demigot, elitist, educated, urban, cosmopolitan, Obamaian, etc.,

However, you may take solace in the paucity of quality in their attacks as it usually helps one prove one`s point.



Comment on: In Chicago, Discipline That Builds Dreams at 9/14/2008 2:15 EDT
theduke89 wrote: "The ad is true. Obama supports an intrusive, comprehensive, parents-be-damned concept of sex education."

Of course, he was trying to defend the indefensible - the McCain ad from earlier this week.

By using the divisive words "intrusive","parents-be-damned" he shows his negativism and hyper-partisan colours.

Yet, he does so despite the fact there is no evidence Obama was endorsing a 'parents-be-damned' approach. Rather, he was embracing an 'ignorance-be-damned' approach. Favouring 'an age appropriate' curriculum to provide the innocent with the knowledge and tools to protect themselves from those who would do them harm can hardly be deemed 'intrusive'.

Intimating that Mr. Obabma's position on the issue is part of a larger plot to bring "doctrinaire liberalism" to American politics simply belies his clinging myopic worldview. One that is often accompanied by adherence to the "abstinence approach" to sex education.

Of course, one need only look at that poor pregnant 17-year old child who became her mother's convenient convention victimization media prop to see how well one's reactionary and ignorant support for 'abstinence' really works?

In this, and many other cases, a little 'age appropriate' sex education might have gone a long way? But you don't see Obama making this point in his ads? No, instead what we see is a concerted GOP effort to depict him as a debased interventionist more interested in transmitting Sexual knowledge than literacy? Absurd and untrue.

Of course, I am responding to a poster who said in another thread today: "sex ed... [is more] a symbolic issue, one that represents the worse kind of liberal meddling in family life." He will not understand that unplanned teenage pregnancies that lead to marriage at age 17 and the introduction of another beautiful innocent into the world are more than 'symbolic' developments -they are real outcomes that need to be addressed. They involve children and teens in need of a good education - sex and all.

In the end, my post here is a pointless exercise, for as our reactionary 'duke' once wrote (see: What's Fair Game With Sarah Palin? at 9/7/2008 12:50 PM EDT): "Resentments on the left toward Repblicans have a fascist intensity to them." Undoubtedly, that is how he will characterize my post- unaware that it is not resentment I am expressing; but it is pity for yet another myopic thinking, paranoid and emotionally fragile voter.


Comment on: In Chicago, Discipline That Builds Dreams at 9/14/2008 11:41 AM EDT
Georgie Boy,

Just caught your weekly disingenuous parroting session on This Week.

By aping Mr. Krautcrazy and expressing support for McCain's false ads surrounding Obama's stance on Sex Ed for school children you came across as both partisan puppet and a liar.

You kiss your wife with that mouth?



Comment on: In Chicago, Discipline That Builds Dreams at 9/14/2008 6:37 AM EDT
Georgie Boy,

You hit the nail on the head.

Without doubt, your fully realized sentence: "People, communities and countries often make costly mistakes because they don't know what it is that they don't know." - is, perhaps, the most honest thing you have ever written.

It explains so much about America.

It explains how Bush could be elected not once, but twice; it explains how the WMD argument gained populist purchase; and, it explains why some look upon Gov. Palin as a qualified candidate for Veep.

Undoubtedly, McCain is truly hoping that America continues 'not knowing what it is they don't know' until it is too late come November.

p.s. can you tell us when your one on one interview with Palin is scheduled for - will it be before or after the Apocalypse?



Comment on: Gov. Palin's Interview at 9/14/2008 5:59 AM EDT
"Frustrating"?

Well, I guess that one way of looking at it. But it does not capture the essence of the problem.

What insight did we really gain from the Palin interviews? Not much.

I think any of the following terms could be also be applied to the how the objective viewer saw the interview: as disturbing, disquieting, unnerving, faux, simple, - or - sickening.

With a population of over 300 million is this really the second most qualified American that McCain could find to sit one erratic heartbeat away from the Oval Office? Me thinks not.

It is not so much that she can't perform in an interview, admittedly she passed with a grade of C+ - But is a C+ good enough for this job?

Hardly!

By itself, the ability to regurgitate 'talking points' does not qualify one to hold the highest office in the land. There has to be more. Doesn't there?

Please be-to-Buddha, tell me there's more to it than that?



Comment on: As Mayor of Wasilla, Palin Cut Own Duties, Left Trail of Bad Blood at 9/14/2008 5:17 AM EDT
Well, there you have it.

The executive experience this story details clearly proves Palin has what it takes to deal with Congress, direct a foreign affairs agenda, and have her finger next to the nuclear button.

Whew!

I am so relieved.



Comment on: Campaign, and Complaints, Heat Up at 9/13/2008 3:10 AM EDT
Dear Mrs. Howell,

Firstly, allow me to say I respect your views both in text and on the tube. Also please know that I do truly try to keep my posts 'on point' so to speak.

But, but.... I'm sorry...maybe I'm overtired? ... But I cannot stop laughing!

(Maybe its Krauthammer's fault as I just finished reading his delirious fantasy column.)

Wait, no that's not it... I still can't stop laughing ... really I'm sorry, and the fault is all my own, must be my shortcomings but, .... seriously, do you have any idea how your lead in to today's column reads?

I mean, ... sorry I am still laughing (not cravenly mind you)... but: "frenzy is at full pitch; incoming partisan fire was smoking in my inbox" is just too rich to pass up!

The double-entendre imagery this lead-in evokes is just too funny to ignore.

Trusting you didn't mean to make me laugh, I apologize ... but don't you see the (albeit juvenile) potential play on words here? I mean, c'mon - "frenzy", "full pitch", "smoking", "my inbox". Sorry, but I am still laughing... enjoyed the column ... please have a good and wonderful weekend.

Sincerely,

Comment on: Yes for an Answer at 9/13/2008 2:46 AM EDT
Time for the Democrats in Congress to step up to the plate.

Politics aside (ha,ha,ha,...), it sure would be nice to hear Obama come out in favour of this agreement and pressure Congress to facilitate its passage forthwith?



Comment on: Charlie Gibson's Gaffe at 9/13/2008 1:46 AM EDT
Krautauthor,

You hapless ogre! Just read your article. You spin a nice Fairy Tale.

Your pitiable attempt to query Gibson's understanding of the true meaning of the phrase "Bush Doctrine" is not just petty - it is wrong.
Again, ignorant arrogance at its best.

True, in June 2001, you undeniably did scribble the phrase 'Bush Doctrine'.

But your characterization neither contributed to the foundation of its true 'construct' nor its subsequent manifestation.

As M.G. Manthro pointed out in "The Bush Doctrine: Origins, Evolutions, Alternatives" (April 2004) there indeed exists a global and common understanding of what constitutes the "Bush Doctrine".

Although referenced once in the piece, it's clear you were/are relatively insignificant to its evolution. Really nothing but part of a chattering class holding regular cluster orgies of like-minded neo-con individuals. To wit, see pp.4 of essay wherein it is recognized there is an "assortment of ultra-conservative columnists and authors such as Charles Krauthammer, William Safire and Ann Coulter. Rounding out the side are Fox News anchor Brit Hume and radio talkmeisters Laura Ingraham, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh, to name but three" who served as the blowhard boosters for Bush's policies.

Nice company you keep?

In your mirror, please be clear: admit you were never instrumental in either the formulation of the doctrine or its accepted connotative definition.

You did not give wings to the concept of a Bush Doctrine - its nascent roots had been established long before you stumbled across the terminology. At best your role was (as usual) that of a minor scribbler among the inks of greater pens.

Moreover, it must be said that we non-Americans are keenly aware of "what" constitutes the Bush Doctrine. How could Palin not be?

Make no mistake, none of us, be we Arab, be we Mexican, or like myself, be we Canadian - none of us ever erroneously ascribe to the 'Bush Dictrine' four different nuanced visages. We know it for what it is - President G.W. Bush's foreign policy operating principle of unilateralism married to the concept of military preemption.

As a global citizen I dismiss your article as 'inside-baseball' of the worst kind - petty and irrelevant - only intended to further misplace the doctrine in its historical context.

Which of your baby words did you try to apply to Gibson? Ah, yes, "snobbery", "condescension", "chattering classes".

Well, Monsieur Krautauthor, I view your drivel, your partisan snobbery, condescension, and chattering-blathering as further evidence that you are a liar. The whole world knows what is meant by the Bush Doctrine. Don't try to tell us otherwise...

Mr. Gibson's attempt to get Gov. Palin to recognize its importance and pronounce her views on it should have elicited an immediate understanding of what was being asked. Here in Canada, we have no oillusions [oops! slip-of-the-text; meant illusions] about its import. The fact you now try to obsfucate its true meaning for strictly partisan purposes just perpetuates the false myth of the "Ugly American".

Given so many of your fellow citizens (yes, even some Republicans)are trying to conduct themselves with dignity this season in an effort to debate the 'real issues' would it be too much if I asked you to put down your florid-yet-foul crayons?

Maybe it is time you picked up a pen and tried to write like a man. You know, with honesty?
Failing that, your disquieting adolescent insecurity will remain on display: forever disturbing to one and all.

p.s. Fellow Posters, while I could include a 12 pg. bib on the evolution and meaning of the Bush Doctrine - I'll spare you. BUT for those interested in the Mantho essay please see: http://www.comw.org/pda/fulltext/0404mantho.pdf


Comment on: Obama's Altitude Sickness at 9/12/2008 8:06 AM EDT
July_4th_1776 wrote (in part): "not a bad try at using the race card, but ... copy and paste anything in my post that is untrue. We won't see you do that, as everything I posted is truth..."

You must be kidding, do you have any idea how long it would take to itemize all your falsehoods and 1/2 truths? I gotta job I have to go to. Furthermore, we here in the Canadian bush have a saying: "Leave the rabid dog alone."

I stand by my first post- you are a repressed and diseased individual. As to my "using the race card"; my lily white derrier wouldn't know what to do with it.

Your decision to re-post all your drivel only demonstrates that indeed you 'doth protest too much'.

Living with so much insecurity must be a horrible burden. I'm sure I am not the only one to pity you.

Get help you neo-Orwellian construct.


Comment on: Obama's Altitude Sickness at 9/12/2008 6:50 AM EDT
July_4th_1776 wrote to disparage vance1's support for Obama and then said: "I have always lived by this simple tenet, you can judge a person by the friends the hang out with and their associates."

Well I too have a guiding 'tenet' to pass along to July_4_1776: the shriller the attack the weaker the man.

His efforts to try to label Obama as a "racist who says whitey are greedy" is just poor form. Continuing the tirade by attributing to him the use of the "pejorative Whitey" is not just wrong - it belies a deeper darkness.

Is July_4_1776 not really just opining for a era when no slave could be 'uppity' without suffering the consequences of the whip?

I believe this poster is the true 'racist' - I believe this poster is the one who has accomplished "nothing" in his life. I believe this poster knows no shame, lives in perpetual fear, and rues the passing of the days of "Ozzie and Harriet" and the introduction of the Civil Rights Act. I believe this poster has no "friends or associates".

In short, I believe this poster is sick and diseased with hate.