tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post3722967743387171315..comments2024-03-19T08:07:28.854-05:00Comments on Althouse: One more night of convention blogging. The Invesco Field extravaganza.Ann Althousehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01630636239933008807noreply@blogger.comBlogger216125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-91237935194681745082008-08-29T08:22:00.000-05:002008-08-29T08:22:00.000-05:00""We can keep AK-47s out of the hands of criminals...<I>""We can keep AK-47s out of the hands of criminals." All right, then! Can I have an AK-47? I'm not a criminal."</I><BR/><BR/>You will be, though, once Obama gets his way.Xrlqhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07178228505351262548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-63869188217406159772008-08-29T08:12:00.000-05:002008-08-29T08:12:00.000-05:009:48: "We can keep AK-47s out of the hands of crim...<I><BR/>9:48: "We can keep AK-47s out of the hands of criminals." All right, then! Can I have an AK-47? I'm not a criminal. He's trying to say we can accommodate gun rights and gun regulations, but he won't admit to anything near the level of gun regulation he'd support, so he ends up sounding silly.</I><BR/><BR/>If you had an AK-47, Ann, you would obviously give it to a criminal. Therefore, no, Obama will not let you have an AK-47.<BR/><BR/>My wife and I had this very discussion as he said this. My wife said: But you're not a criminal! I said, I know, that doesn't matter.Kevinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08756365895376866071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-78915592888526312432008-08-29T07:56:00.000-05:002008-08-29T07:56:00.000-05:00I associate Crooks and Liars with John AmatoAnd no...<I>I associate Crooks and Liars with John Amato<BR/><BR/>And now you'll associate John Amato with crooks and liars.</I><BR/><BR/>That's funny, I associate him with Duran Duran. How could that have happened??knoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13231876226573540476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-39364838907226239592008-08-29T07:25:00.000-05:002008-08-29T07:25:00.000-05:00luckyoldson said..."It's one thing to say you disa...luckyoldson said...<BR/>"<I>It's one thing to say you disagree but c'mon, ... Obama 'isn't a good orator?'</I>"<BR/><BR/>Correct. I don't think he's a good orator unless your definition of good oratory is the ability to speak at tediously at great length without actually saying anything. Tony Blair also has this down pat.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Blogger Mark said...<BR/>"<I>This was an assertive, confident speech in the mold of Roosevelt.</I>"<BR/><BR/>Oh please. This was a speech in the mold of all of his other speeches, a rhetorical style that recalls Orwell's imagery of words "fall[ing] upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outline and covering up all the details." Or we might borrow from Twain: Obama's speeches are unbelievable because "[t]o believe that such talk really ever came out of people's mouths would be to believe that there was a time when time was of no value to a person who thought he had something to say; when it was the custom to spread a two-minute remark out to ten; when a man's mouth was a rolling-mill, and busied itself all day long in turning four-foot pigs of thought into thirty-foot bars of conversational railroad iron by attenuation; when subjects were seldom faithfully stuck to, but the talk wandered all around and arrived nowhere; when conversations consisted mainly of irrelevancies, with here and there a relevancy, a relevancy with an embarrassed look, as not being able to explain how it got there."<BR/><BR/>The speech is clever, I suppose, insofar as it's so thoroughly wrong as to defy analysis. To fisk it, you'd first have to invest considerable time explaining and debunking the numerous false premises whence it proceeds before one can even reach the speech itself, and I just don't think Obama is to be taken seriously enough to invest that kind of time.Simonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10065798213115341398noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-89836207060917436032008-08-29T07:07:00.000-05:002008-08-29T07:07:00.000-05:00"Nicole Belle, who wrote that post, is shamefully ..."Nicole Belle, who wrote that post, is shamefully dishonest."<BR/><BR/>What? A liberal blogger is shamefully dishonest?<BR/><BR/>You can only imagine my shock.JBloghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17838349868229069605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-57376215976136780562008-08-29T03:25:00.000-05:002008-08-29T03:25:00.000-05:00when he spouts off about energy./off the bus when ...when he spouts off about energy.<BR/>/off the bus when he spouts off about energy..chickelithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10773887469972534979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-20105023967445990652008-08-29T02:55:00.000-05:002008-08-29T02:55:00.000-05:00@blake: can't live with him; can't live without hi...@blake: <BR/>can't live with him; can't live without him.chickelithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10773887469972534979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-60618975978123352882008-08-29T02:47:00.000-05:002008-08-29T02:47:00.000-05:00Carbon is your friend.Carbon is your friend.blakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05430444326700437630noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-58044536371934890132008-08-29T02:28:00.000-05:002008-08-29T02:28:00.000-05:00FLS: So guess what happens when the Messaih start...FLS: So guess what happens when the Messaih starts touting natural gas? <BR/>I guess we should compare <A HREF="http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0872966.html" REL="nofollow">boners</A> when it gets down to that.<BR/><BR/>But oh yeah, sorry FLS, Nat. gas. is not fungible (I love that word-who uses it except when talking about hydrocarbons) when we talk about addiction to foreign oil (energy)<BR/><BR/>Obama is right on when he talks about coal, but, as I said, he needs to throw al-Gore(peace-prize-be-upon-him) when he spouts off about energy.chickelithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10773887469972534979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-83461884567652006422008-08-29T02:07:00.000-05:002008-08-29T02:07:00.000-05:00CH4, CH4, mea culpa mea culpa.Molecules with more ...CH4, CH4, mea culpa mea culpa.<BR/><BR/>Molecules with more than one carbon atom create more than one CO2 molecule when they combust. Was that hard to follow?<BR/><BR/>To be "clean" these days, coal would have to have its CO2 sequestered as it burned -- a daunting task.former law studenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15196697206046544350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-5834234776478990542008-08-29T01:58:00.000-05:002008-08-29T01:58:00.000-05:00FLS said: In addition, natural gas is mostly meth...FLS said: <I> In addition, natural gas is mostly methane which is CH3, which has no carbon bonds to break, so less carbon dioxide so less effect on global warming.</I><BR/><BR/>Well methane is not CH3 (that's a methyl dude) and when it does combust it makes CO2. Not to be pedantic, but you just proved you really don't know what the fuck you're talking about do you?<BR/><BR/>In the same breathe, Obama talked about "clean coal" which, if implemented would creates oodles of CO2 as by-product. <BR/><BR/>Don't get me wrong- I'd love to see coal drive the US. But first Obama would have to throw alGore (peace-prize-be-upon-him) under the bus, or at least cut his nuts off. just sayin'chickelithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10773887469972534979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-87858499480044667812008-08-29T01:39:00.000-05:002008-08-29T01:39:00.000-05:00And if the enviros won't let us drill for oil off ...<I>And if the enviros won't let us drill for oil off the U.S. coast, then why should we believe they will allow us to drill for gas?</I><BR/><BR/>Did Obama say to drill offshore? <BR/><BR/>One big advantage if he did: there would be no natural gas spills, no squads of animal lovers trying to get natural gas off shorebirds, etc.former law studenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15196697206046544350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-76661491460654326312008-08-29T01:12:00.000-05:002008-08-29T01:12:00.000-05:00Natural gas replaces home heating oil, which makes...<I>Natural gas replaces home heating oil, which makes homes cheaper to heat and also makes more Diesel No. 2 available (essentially the same as home heating oil) without increasing oil imports while still lowering its price. In addition, natural gas is mostly methane which is CH3, which has no carbon bonds to break, so less carbon dioxide so less effect on global warming.</I><BR/><BR/>And any oil saved by not using it to heat homes will quickly be consumed in other ways by a growing economy, domestic and foreign, so more oil will still be needed in the future.<BR/><BR/>Growing economies need more energy, not less, especially of the liquid kind.<BR/><BR/>And if the enviros won't let us drill for oil off the U.S. coast, then why should we believe they will allow us to drill for gas?<BR/><BR/>They won't.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-24628394066708035552008-08-29T01:11:00.000-05:002008-08-29T01:11:00.000-05:00Whenever W. expressed an opinion on a bill, McCain...<I>Whenever W. expressed an opinion on a bill, McCain voted W.'s way 90% of the time.</I><BR/><BR/>I noted, above, that Simon's rebuttal was weak. The 90% figure is still a bit dishonest, though, since Obama is trying to present that as an example of McCain being wrong 90% of the time. The problem with that is that Obama himself voted with Bush 40% of the time. McCain's voting record for issues where Bush and Obama disagreed is more like 80%, with key issues like torture, taxation, and campaign finance reform included in that 20%.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-25266006944216482742008-08-29T01:01:00.000-05:002008-08-29T01:01:00.000-05:00I assume Lucky figures everyone has forgotten his ...I assume Lucky figures everyone has forgotten his defense of pedophilia. Is that the cause of the long absence? No internet in the big house? I see your posting style remains classic troll.jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01892213227811281098noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-44601165077453525772008-08-29T01:00:00.000-05:002008-08-29T01:00:00.000-05:00Ann, you don't think that's going to harsh the mel...Ann, you don't think that's going to harsh the mellow of the Late Night Calm?Bethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16774002797359859550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-28480610136366859332008-08-29T00:59:00.002-05:002008-08-29T00:59:00.002-05:00(Comments after 200 are a little hard to find if y...(Comments after 200 are a little hard to find if you don't know how.)Ann Althousehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01630636239933008807noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-48900033550613820732008-08-29T00:59:00.001-05:002008-08-29T00:59:00.001-05:00So that makes us gay racist wingnuts!Just an FYI: ...<I>So that makes us gay racist wingnuts!</I><BR/><BR/>Just an FYI: here in the deep south, there ARE gay racist wingnuts. Moronic, yes, but not oxymoronic.Bethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16774002797359859550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-29541471785822925392008-08-29T00:59:00.000-05:002008-08-29T00:59:00.000-05:00We're about to hit 200, so feel free to continue u...We're about to hit 200, so feel free to continue under the <A HREF="http://althouse.blogspot.com/2008/08/some-late-night-calm.html" REL="nofollow">Late Night Calm</A> post.Ann Althousehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01630636239933008807noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-56977353870359869422008-08-29T00:56:00.000-05:002008-08-29T00:56:00.000-05:00it's perfectly reasonable that Obama isn't proposi...<I>it's perfectly reasonable that Obama isn't proposing to deal with anybody like you'd deal with Hitler.</I><BR/><BR/>So why bring up Roosevelt at all? If he's just saying that he promises to defend the United States in the event another nation declares war on us first -- well, no shit. Any President who didn't would be impeached and sent back to Kansas whether he came from there or not. What makes Roosevelt special is that he specifically picked a fight with Hitler and did everything he could to get America into a war in which America had absolutely zero national interest -- he chose the morally right path even though it was (a) contrary to American interests and (b) enormously unpopular. He got lucky in that Hitler was stupid enough to declare war on us after Pearl Harbor, and so people often forget that Americans were more opposed to war with Germany in mid-'41 than they are to war in Iraq now.<BR/><BR/>But let's say he wasn't proposing to deal with threats like Roosevelt did. Was he proposing to deal with threats the way Kennedy did? Massive nuclear arsenal buildup, nuclear brinksmanship with the rival superpower, invasion of weak enemy nations that pose no direct threat to America, sending US troops into a foreign quagmire... which of these policies is Obama admiring, exactly? Or was the "Kennedy" he was invoking the magical, post-assassination Kennedy that the Left actually grew to retroactively like and approve of?<BR/><BR/>I think we know the answer to that question.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-73551043290271244482008-08-29T00:28:00.000-05:002008-08-29T00:28:00.000-05:00Comparing Putin to Hitler is a big stretch, but no...<I>Comparing Putin to Hitler is a big stretch, but not remotely as big as stretch as comparing Obama to Roosevelt or Kennedy..</I><BR/><BR/>Good, then, we agree that with no Hitler on the scene, it's perfectly reasonable that Obama isn't proposing to deal with anybody like you'd deal with Hitler.<BR/><BR/>And I believe that the historical analogy of the day is that Obama is <I>Lincoln</I>, which is more of a stretch to my ear. They were both Illinois state legislators for eight years, but...neil k.https://www.blogger.com/profile/00675145263527061977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-17346923427902021532008-08-29T00:27:00.001-05:002008-08-29T00:27:00.001-05:00All the democrats say "Barack Obama" like it's one...<I>All the democrats say "Barack Obama" like it's one word</I><BR/><BR/>Elision is popular with dems, maybe? Something shoots through me when Biden says Lays and Gentlemen.<BR/><BR/><I>you guys look down on other Americans, like big balled Southerners</I><BR/><BR/>Had airconditioning not been invented, the South would be as backwards as Uruguay. Although the South had lured "cut and sew" businesses from the north previously, the Southern economy didn't really pick up till the 60s, when southern states offered tax holidays and the prospect of a low-wage union-proof work force to get northern industries to move.<BR/><BR/>Of course those jobs have since moved on to Mexico (thanks Clinton) and to Southeast Asia. So it's back to their historic industries of moonshine and tobacco.<BR/><BR/><I>Obama resorts to the 90% meme debunked here</I><BR/><BR/>Debunked? Whenever W. expressed an opinion on a bill, McCain voted W.'s way 90% of the time. That's good enough for me unless some mind readers can provide additional data.<BR/><BR/>Times when W. didn't give a hoot one way or the other must be excluded from the analysis. The times when W. kept his opinion to himself and his Creator can either be excluded, or assumed to follow the same pattern as the publicly disclosed ones.<BR/><BR/><I> CQ’s study recorded only votes taken by McCain where the President had an explicitly-stated view</I><BR/><BR/><I>why is it okay to drill for more natural gas, but it is not okay to drill for more oil?</I><BR/><BR/>Natural gas replaces home heating oil, which makes homes cheaper to heat and also makes more Diesel No. 2 available (essentially the same as home heating oil) without increasing oil imports while still lowering its price. In addition, natural gas is mostly methane which is CH3, which has no carbon bonds to break, so less carbon dioxide so less effect on global warming.<BR/><BR/><I>Obama turned down debating McCain. </I><BR/><BR/>Obama turned down town hall barnstorming with McCain, each in their own campaign bus, where the two of them would put on a good show every week in a different Knights of Columbus hall, or junior high auditorium.former law studenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15196697206046544350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-10429369877811126252008-08-29T00:27:00.000-05:002008-08-29T00:27:00.000-05:00I'd also add that Kennedy is an odd example for Ob...I'd also add that Kennedy is an odd example for Obama to pick. Kennedy sent the first US troops into combat in Vietnam and launched a disastrous invasion of another country, Cuba, that did... what's that phrase? Oh yeah, "lasting damage to America's moral standing". At least among left-wingers. On the home front, he was also a good buddy of Joe McCarthy during the witch-hunt years -- crushing of dissent, anyone?Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-64788192330672404262008-08-29T00:21:00.000-05:002008-08-29T00:21:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Lokioldsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11141650406674628780noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-33585673462859516532008-08-29T00:18:00.000-05:002008-08-29T00:18:00.000-05:00Who's Hitler in this analogy? Is Russia's incursio...<I>Who's Hitler in this analogy? Is Russia's incursion into Georgia really supposed to equal the annexation of Austria?</I><BR/><BR/>Comparing Putin to Hitler is a big stretch, but not remotely as big as stretch as comparing Obama to Roosevelt or Kennedy. Although it is somewhat telling that he had to reach back nearly half a century to find a Democrat who wasn't a complete idiot on national defense.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.com