Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
I thought it said Ron Paul, but I didn't go to Harvard.
John McCain identifies himself as a centrist and he is. Why would anyone confuse a big government moderate with a conservative? I thought that Pat Buchannon or Michael Savage would win because of their mean spirited personality.Trey
SteveR: Your mistake is that you read the post Althouse actually linked to. I know - it's confusing.
I never thought I'd say this, but I'm sorry for being critical of Ann's backing Obama. When this country elected Obama, it dodged a huge bullet by not electing McCain. His performance -- especially vis-a-vis the staffers v. Palin mess -- since the election has revealed him to be the piss-poor individual some (but not me) expected.
I fixed the link. Sorry. I'd checked to see what happened the previous year and accidentally copied the wrong URL.
yachira said..."I never thought I'd say this, but I'm sorry for being critical of Ann's backing Obama. When this country elected Obama, it dodged a huge bullet by not electing McCain. His performance -- especially vis-a-vis the staffers v. Palin mess -- since the election has revealed him to be the piss-poor individual some (but not me) expected."Thank you. I'll never get to say I told you so, since the man I voted against lost and will not show us what he would have done. The key now is to watch Obama, criticize him appropriately, and keep up the pressure on him not to screw up too badly.Meanwhile, can the Republicans get their act together and stand for competence, economic expertise and restraint, and individual liberty?
Apology accepted. Whew! For a minute there I was afraid Steve and I had haplessly stumbled into one of those mind-control sites where left is right and floors are ceilings.
The right-wing bloggers clearly represent the far-right extremist/lunatic base of the republican party.
"The key now is to watch Obama, criticize him appropriately, and keep up the pressure on him not to screw up too badly."If one can believe the New York Times, it looks like the pressure is already being brought to bear on Obama to investigate President Bush for war crimes.
Way to go - nominate every sane well respected Republican politican and journalist. How does that make any sense?
Ann Althouse said, "The key now is to watch Obama, criticize him appropriately, and keep up the pressure on him not to screw up too badly."Question for you Ann, if you would be so kind to respond to the peanut gallery:Why the double-standard for Obama vs. Bush? With Bush you assiduously avoiding ANY -- even the most remote -- criticism for the entire duration of your blogging career. Years and years and years have gone by with you almost totally unwilling to even hint or whisper the tiniest criticism of the man. With Obama, it's clear you will hammer him left and right repeatedly.Note: I suppose it's possible you have a post somewhere in the archives where you did criticize Bush, but I've been reading your blog daily for 3 years and I can't recall a single time you've ever criticized him for anything. In fact, it's hard to find any criticism of the Republican Party, either. (This is a large part of the reason people assume you are a conservative, despite your insistence that you are moderate.)
Much to his credit, this is what the President-elect has said: “If crimes have been committed, they should be investigated. I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt, because I think we’ve got too many problems we’ve got to solve.”
Way to go - nominate every sane well respected Republican politican and journalist.It makes no sense at all, which is why it's not the least bit surprising. The right-wing blogs are totally detached from reality. The base of the republican party has totally embraced ideology and rejects reality out of hand. Anyone who asks that they confront reality will be run out of the party.
Very politically astute. Notice what he's telling his more rabid supporters: Be cool and you may get your partisan witch hunt in my second term.
Meanwhile, can the Republicans get their act together and stand for competence, economic expertise and restraint, and individual liberty?No. And I don't know why you think that's ever been a goal of the right.
'least favorite' is pretty weak tea. It makes complete sense for McCain to top the list. He ran a tepid, inept election campaign, utterly failed to communicate the Republican party's core economic messages, and lost. So he should be 'least favorite' for the moment.'Least favorite' makes it a mediocrity contest. I would assume (and hope) that 'Most hated' would produce a different winner.
Jack, your "answer" reveals that your quote is invented.
I don't think I could answer that question in the abstract - the field is just too broad. Are we including anyone who's identified as right of center? In that case, I nominate the inbred retard with the Bush/Cheney '04 bumper sticker who nearly killed me on I-465 last week when he swerved across the carriageway to get an exit he clearly forgot about. Or are we only talking about people in the public eye? Even that vista is too wide - do we include by-and-large non-political entertainers like Jerry Zucker? Even if we constrict it to politics, it's still horribly broad because it says nothing about why we might like them. I like Olympia Snowe personally, but I don't like her politics, and Arlen Specter's a decent sought, but he owes me money. Just kidding, but you get the idea. I don't like Ted Stevens on any level, but I suppose that one could like his politics while still hating that he's - well, not to invite a defamation suit, I'll say still hating that he's the things for which he was convicted. Still, with all these caveats, I think that if Ron Paul isn't high on the list, he ought to be. Throughout the primaries I got very grumpy when Paulistas would tell me that this highly-strung libertarian revolutionary of dubious mental competence was the "real" conservative in the race. I know it's not really fair to blame Paul for his supporters, but still.
McCain was pretty high on the list before he got the nomination. I think he'd have been an okay president, but who knows.Jack, all the blogs I read have been critical of Bush... but you know, there's critical and then there is critical. I'm not uncritical of Bush, but as an example, chances are the things you think are so terrible about him are things I either agree with, or see as a poor choice or poor decision rather than an obvious horror.Even Obama knows very well there is nothing to put Bush up on charges over. Most of the criticisms of Bush have about as much substance as rumors that Palin can't find the country of Africa on a map.
Synova, they're already setting up the groundwork for an investigation, and investigations beget charges. The pressure on Bush to buckle and do the unthinkable - issue a blanket parden - is getting exceedingly strong. He might have to take the bullet for the good of the country and do it, a la Ford's pardon of Nixon.
This isn't news at or or the least bit surprising. McCain was wildly and intensely UNPOPULAR with the "right of center" a/k/a "lunatic," "mean" et al, blogosphere throughout the entire primary season. He has NEVER been popular with the "base," at all. This was going to be yet another "MAYBE I'll hold my nose and vote against Hillary or Obama" moment for an overwhelmingly large chunk of the electorate.Until Palin. Then what I perceive to be a fairly modest chunk of so-called undecideds said "are you out of your mind; gosh I would have voted for McCain if he had only picked Mitt!!! - Gosh now I simply MUST vote for Obama" but an even larger chunk of the electorate decided to enthusiastically cast their vote FOR Palin. I am 100% convinced that if McCain had chosen somebody like Huckabbee or Romney, Obama's margin of victory would have been like Nixon-McGovern. McCain's post-election "oh that just happens" lukewarm defense of the Palin sliming, followed up by his inserting his centrist head up Slow Joe's rear end, is typical McCain simply returning to form; and just reiterates everything the Right has disliked about him for years.Now HERE's an article from a right of center politician which is likely to get the wingnut insane, bigoted, homophobic to the point of possibly even being Morman, racist gun clingers excited:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122637412685416573.html?mod=djemEditorialPage
Big Freaking Surprise!!!How many times do I have to say it.McCain is not and has never been on the "right"> He is not a conservative. McCain is basically a right leaning Democrat.This is why he was not the choice of the party even though he got crammed down our throats by the ever present duplicitous media. He just happenend to be the last man standing after the media had wacked everyone else out of the running by printing false stories, rumour and innuendo.
With McCain getting all the press -- at least as far as being a Republican is concerned -- how can anyone be surprised at these survey results.Quick: Name 3 other Republicans that might qualify.
I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt,...Is making Code Pink ladies wet really worth the down-side to a partisan witch hunt?You know Obama. You've been paying attention, Simon. He's going to make noises that anyone can interpret the way they'd like to interpret them, but he's not going to actually *say* it or do it. He's going to let people make noise and feel like he's supportive, but he's not going to go after Bush or Cheney... heck, he probably won't even close Gitmo... the issue will just fade away while he makes supportive noises until people are distracted by something else. Besides which, he's going to have everyone on his case starting with national mandatory volunteerism (conscripted labor) and going from there. And do you think that other nations, now that they looooovveeee us again, won't notice and exploit Obama's propensity for trying to be on everyone's side simultaneously?
Jack wrote: "The right-wing bloggers clearly represent the far-right extremist/lunatic base of the republican party."Jack, you are not getting it. Short posts work if they express a point in a pithy and amusing way. When you type weird, unsubstantiated posts, people just wonder if you are 13 or off your medicine.Trey
Synova, I'm not convinced that Obama will resist the calls to close Guantanamo (if he does, my opinion of him will rise). The most likely scenario, I think, is that he will simply acquiesce in Congressional action to close it, signing the bill but not taking full responsibility for the decision or actively pushing it. That strikes me as the most canny play for him. True, if he plays it that way, he won't take full credit from the left, but I doubt they will strongly fault him, and sacrificing a little approval from the left could be rewarded with favor from moderates. (Ann? Thoughts about how you would react to this scenario?)Still, let's assume that you're right. If anything, I would think that the chances of these prosecutions going forward increases in that scenario. The left expects a great deal from Obama; he is not going to deliver on most of it. Not going to deliver for several reasons (electoral expediency; genuine personal opposition; brute force practical reality; etc.), but still, undelivered. The longer the list of broken or unfulfilled promises gets, I think, the stronger the incentive will be to throw the left some bones. And prosecuting members of the Bush administration is a low cost high-protein soucre of left-sourced approval rating nutrition for Obama's administration.Justice Douglas may have been too paranoid in issuing it, but there is still wisdom in his warning that "[a]s nightfall does not come all at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there is a twilight when everything remains seemingly unchanged. And it is in such twilight that we all must be most aware of change in the air - however slight - lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." An investigation is not a prosecution, but it lays the groundwork. It is the process by which the administration can delay pulling the trigger and gather cards to play at the most advantageous moment. Lastly, I will be interested to see if we get some analysis of whether Obama's proposed non-military national service raises Thirteenth Amendment concerns from blawgs or the academy.
I hope that people really know what they're saying when they talk of "closing Guantanamo."It's a naval base. It's been a naval base for over a century. For six or seven years it's been where a prison has been located. We can close the prison without closing Guantanamo. At least I hope that's what people mean, but there's no telling with the levels of ignorance out there nowadays.
And prosecuting members of the Bush administration is a low cost high-protein soucre of left-sourced approval rating nutrition for Obama's administration.Because going after Clinton worked out so well for the Reps?
Republicans eat their own.Say what you will about us lefties, but at least when John Kerry lost he wasn't left out to dry. In fact he had as good a shot as anyone of winning this year's nomination, at least until he stuck his foot so far down his throat that he got toenail fungus in his duodenum.But we didn't jump all over him after the 2004 election loss, we let him self-destruct on his own.
The problem with that, Eli, is that a whole lot of people couldn't stand McCain before he got the nomination, so nothing has really changed.And while Kerry is just as popular as ever (I'm not sure that means he's popular) what about Lieberman?
Say what you will about us lefties, but at least when John Kerry lost he wasn't left out to dry.The funny thing is that you think this is an argument FOR the Democratic Party. :)
The link seems not to function again. The one I found washttp://www.rightwingnews.com/mt331/2008/07/rightofcenter_bloggers_select_8.phpThat's from July 2008. The is another one from July 2007.Yes, McCain is one of the people with the top votes, although getting 23 votes out of 240 blogs polled hardly qualifies as significant. Besides, Chuck Hagel shares the honors, followed by Arlen Specter and Olympia Snowe.I find it somewhat amusing that the top two are both vets and the next two are alleged moderates. Hagel is particularly interesting because he is a staunch social conservative. In truth, so is McCain, but half the time even he does not know what he thinks--that really showed during the campaign. Specter is certainly left-of-extreme-right that is most of the Republican Senate caucus, but he is no liberal.The problem, I guess, was in Hagel's refusal to endorse McCain, but supporting Obama's foreign policy, followed by Hagel's wife endorsing Obama. Snowe likely has the least conservative record of all Republicans--and now that Sununu and Smith are gone and Coleman is on life support, Snowe (and Collins) is the unquestionable liberal end of the party (although she's still right-of-center). Next to the two Mainers is Specter, which explains his presence on the list. But McCain??
Post a Comment