23) Michele Bachmann (4)A few random questions for discussion:
23) Glenn Beck (4)
23) Pat Buchanan (4)
23) Victor David Hanson (4)
23) Charles Krauthammer (4)
23) Dennis Prager (4)
23) John Roberts (4)
20) Dick Cheney (5)
20) Mark Levin (5)
20) Clarence Thomas (5)
19) Paul Ryan (6)
15) Tom Coburn (7)
15) Laura Ingraham (7)
15) Sean Hannity (7)
15) Mike Pence (7)
12) Jeff Flake (8)
12) Jonah Goldberg (8)
12) Antonin Scalia (8)
11) Jim DeMint (10)
9) Ann Coulter (11)
9) Thomas Sowell (11)
7) Michael Steele (12)
7) Michelle Malkin (12)
6) Mark Steyn (13)
5) Newt Gingrich (17)
4) Fred Thompson (18)
3) Bobby Jindal (22)
2) Rush Limbaugh (29)
1) Sarah Palin (33)
1. In the Supreme Court category, why does Scalia outrank Thomas, why does Roberts come in only third, and why does Alito get no respect?
2. What explains the lingering love for Fred Thompson? That strikes me as pathetic. I can understand carrying a torch for Newt Gingrich, but why Thompson?
3. Mark Steyn ranks high. I enjoy his writing: He knows how to mix outrage and humor. I loved him as a fill-in host for Rush Limbaugh last August. (I see he got into a little trouble though.) Normally I won't even listen to the radio show podcast when there is a guest host, but I'd be happy that Rush was taking the day off if it meant we could listen to Mark. Don't you agree?
4. Are there people on that list that you know nothing about? There are for me. I won't tell you how many because it might be embarrassing. On the other hand, it might be to my credit.
IN THE COMMENTS: Meade answers Question #2:
People right-of-center love Fred Thompson the Myth: Hippie Slayer and Defeater of All Things Douchey.ADDED, APRIL 14, 2009: See why I love Meade?
पोस्ट्स
५९ टिप्पण्या:
Answer to Question (1): Scalia and Thomas are he old war horses, and everyone has had them front & center in their mind's eyes for a long time now. Roberts is the new kid on the block, and would be forgotten if he wasn't Chief Justice. Alito isn't Chief, so he IS forgotten.
(1) Scalia is the personality. People enjoy his does-not-suffer-fools style. Roberts is farther down because he's newer and hasn't built up the same reputation, but he is the Chief Justice. Alito also too new, and there is a limit to how many of the 1-12 voting slots someone will use on Supreme Court Justices.
(2) Why would that be pathetic? People like what he has to say. Contrary to this media picture of him as a lazy nobody, he tirelessly articulated the conservative message during the primary through editorials and radio addresses.
(3) I love Mark Steyn. I don't know a conservative familiar with him who doesn't. He's a great guest host. Walter Williams is my favorite Rush guest host though.
(4) A couple.
The lingering love for Fred is that his failure was due to not wanting the job enough. (And you know which job I mean.) We can respect that!
1. I don't think Alito has been around long enough.
2. He's another straight-talker like Rudy (who I am dismayed is not getting any love here). He just doesn't ever seem to say anything I disagree with, nor does he pull any punches, IMO. He comes across as meaning everything he says.
3. Major crush on Mark Steyn!
4. I knew them all. I'm actually wondering whether I should be embarrassed about that! :)
(No John McCain?? Ouch! LOL)
Is Paul Ryan the only one from Wisconsin? I don't know all the names, so I can't tell.
How many aren't from the east coast or the west coast? Those are the ones who should not be ignored.
People right-of-center love Fred Thompson the Myth: Hippie Slayer and Defeater of All Things Douchey.
I agree with Freeman - Scalia isn't just right, he's a happy warrior for the cause. You can't imagine Thomas going deep into enemy territory to duel with the President of the ACLU at the ACLU's own annual conference, as Scalia has done.
And as for Fred - I'm surprised to hear you say that. Here's a guy who put federalism front and center in his campaign, and you think it's "pathetic" that people still like him? I find that a very encouraging sign, myself. Perhaps he's demonstrated that he lacks the temperament to be a Presidential contender, but that doesn't exhaust his use.
It should surprise no one that Dick Cheney is on the list and that guy who ran with him a couple of times is not. I'm disappointed that Ann Coulter is on the list; Tom Coburn is good, but he's forever tied to a post you wrote during the Roberts hearings lambasting him for moving himself to tears with his own rhetoric!
An echo chamber.
What's really surprising is how few actual real-life practicing politicians (or business, scientists, religious social leaders) are on the list. Tells you something about America today and/or the people polled.
Most of these people are pencil pushing columnists or yak-yak artists.
(P.S....Where's Tom Clancy? How soon we forget....)
4. Four: Paul Ryan, Mike Pence, Jeff Flake, and two half points for Thomas Sowell (I knew he was a conservative writer but couldn't call up any more) and Jim DeMint (knew he was a pol, but couldn't place him, either).
Where's Frank J?
I don’t see George Will . . . he must be in the A list ;)
There are four people on the list I know nothing about.
I like reading Mark Steyn and listening to him, also. He's one reason I'll actually tune in to Hugh Hewitt's show if I'm in the car on the days when he pops in (I think it's Thursdays, but I'm not sure.)
Fred Thompson probably scores high on the list just because he's so visible. Same for Ann Coulter, who is obnoxious but manages to get herself out there, and often says things others wish they had the stones to.
AL, you just go right on living in your bubble. I'm sure the weather is nice there.
Favorite people on the right?
(1) Brian Giles;
(2) Ryan Ludwick;
(3) Nick Markakis;
(4) Jayson Werth; and
(5) Randy Winn.
If I remember correctly Markakis plays for Baltimore Orioles ;)
Thompson has two things going for him.
1. He doesn't have the "fire in the belly" to be elected Pres (or really to "run" for Pres). Conservatives actually view this as a benefit, not a bug.
2. When he speaks, it sounds like he is grounded in actual conservative priciples, unlike someone like .... say ... John McCain, who sounds like he is grounded in .... I don't know what.
I've never heard of Michele Bachmann--I have at least heard of the rest even if I don't know much about them. Also, it is Victor Davis Hanson.
I knew everyone on the list but could supply more info about the media and court people than the politicos. The odd congresscritters I could only identify as being congressxcritters.
I knew everyone on the list but could supply more info about the media and court people than the politicos. The odd congresscritters I could only identify as being congressxcritters.
I agree with Freeman - Scalia isn't just right, he's a happy warrior for the cause.
Whoa. And what cause might that be!
I think Fred's convention speech explains some of the love-lingering.
Are the Republicans really stupid enough to nominate Palin in 2012? Looks that way.
I spoke to a wingnut friend the other day about the election and I asked him about Palin. He liked her. I asked him about the Katie Couric interview. He thought she got a bad rap from the media and did really well in that interview.
They live in an alternate reality. Maybe only watching Fox news, and only reading right-wing blogs, with all the self-censorship that entails, will do that to you.
Laura "Ingraham, while writing for The Dartmouth Review in the mid-1980s, once attended meetings of a gay student organization for the purpose of publicly outing them in the newspaper. Ingraham secretly taped a meeting of the Gay Students Association, then published the transcript, identifying students by name and calling them 'sodomites'."
Nice.
http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Laura-Ingraham
dtl,
How's that Dan Rather lawsuit doing these days. He is one of your heroes, I magine, so ethical and not on Fox.
1. In the Supreme Court category, why does Scalia outrank Thomas, why does Roberts come in only third, and why does Alito get no respect?
A combination of the fact that Republicans see Scalia as more hated by the liberals than Thomas and the fact that Scalia is a brash motormouth on and off the court.
Also, the Republicans don't need to hold up Thomas as high in the little White Republican game of "I'm not racist because I love___ and I would love to vote for___ as President and I love ___ he's my favorite___". Because as you can see they now have the legendary Bobby Jindal and the historic, history making history man Micheal Steele for that game.
2. What explains the lingering love for Fred Thompson? That strikes me as pathetic. I can understand carrying a torch for Newt Gingrich, but why Thompson?
RBPS - Residual Buford Pusser Syndrome.
What explains the lingering love for Fred Thompson?
It's interesting that you would describe it as pathetic. Thompson was the one authentic conservative in the primary, philosophically and historically, who continued and continues to express core conservative positions in a variety of media. He has a sense of humor and a way of expressing positions that was a refreshing break from McCain/Romney/Huckabee. Thompson is liked for much the same reasons Palin is liked. Not perfect, but at least authentic, and authentically conservative.
Looks like the lawsuit is going well.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/business/media/17rather.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&oref=slogin
Judge Borked . . again ;)
downtownlad said...
"Ingraham secretly taped a meeting of the Gay Students Association, then published the transcript, identifying students by name and calling them 'sodomites'."
Explain to us the difference between what Ingraham did and the campaign of hate being waged by your allies against anyone remotely connected with Proposition 8.
Mark Steyn is great. Agree with other other posters, I only listen to Hugh Hewitt when he has Steyn or Likas (spelling?) on.
Loved seeing Coulter on the list, she's the one conservative who is funny and will fight back.
Puzzled is to why VDH got any votes. He's really a domestic liberal Democrat whose concerned about the WOT. Plus he's intellectually dishonest. Guess the "center" portion of the "center-right" liked him.
In the mid-1980s . . . Ingraham secretly taped . . .
Yeah, but she was a brunette then, now she's totally different.
garage mahal said...
"Whoa. And what cause might that be!"
For judges who are originalists, textualists, and within the margins of those requirements, conservatives. You might get some disagreement on the question of restraint - many conservatives say they like it. But I'm of the view that Jesse Choper is not only wrong, but in fact has it completely backwards - the courts should show restraint in dealing with individual rights and should be, if not activist, then at least active in enforcing the structural constitution. Many conservatives will agree with me for the next four years; most have not agreed with me for the last eight years. As Althouse has noted, the respect of the average person for the Constitution tends to depend on whether it is an obstacle or a platform, and that amply explains why, with all due respect, it often seems to me that the left displays indifference bordering on antipathy towards the Constitution (except when rights are involved, of course, which strikes me as being like travelling to the Jovian system and spending your entire visit gazing with fascination at the surface of Thebe).
I think that conservatives (and many liberals, for that matter) tend to believe that the approach of judicial conservatism will usually lead to politically conservative results. That isn't actually true (contrast the positions of the law-and-order conservatives Rehnquist and O'Connor to that of Scalia and Thomas in Apprendi and its progeny, or the confrontation clause cases, or on punitive damages), but that's the perception, and since that's the cause, I'm happy to have folks along for the ride. ;)
George Will isn't on the list because conservatives haven't forgiven him for his support for higher taxes in the late 80s, purportedly because of the budget deficits.
It was only after Bush the elder acquiesced to a tax increase, but federal spending went up even more, that Mr. Will finally got what President Reagan figured out ten years earlier: don't give the bastards another nickel because the'll spend an extra quarter. That is also why Dick Cheney's boss doesn't belong on the list.
Wow, are we (the right) in trouble.
Loud voices chanting slogans does not a movement make.
Intellectual dead pool.
I'm disappointed that Ann Coulter is on the list
Beyond the incendiary book promoting schtick she espouses solid, well thought out, and well stated conservative principles.
Simon my point was if one was a true constructionist, or textualist, there is no "cause".
Supporters of Prop 8 have all the hate - they are the ones who removed people's rights.
Simon doesn't believe that gay people have the right to protest. Shocker.
It will be a campaign of hate when gay people start killing straight people. But it actually works the other way - straight people kill gays - just for being gay - i.e. Matthew Shephard - a murder that I will remind you is one that Simon supported.
Simon finds the following 2 scenario morally equivalent.
1) An 18 year-old gay closeted gay student, in mid 1980's AIDS panicked America, trying to come to terms with his sexuality is publicly outed in his college newspaper and called a Sodomite.
2) Gay people boycotting businesses that funded Proposition 8, which removed the civil rights of gay people. Funds that were publicly listed in official registrars, as required by laws governing political donations.
Simon thinks these two are exactly the same. Seriously. That makes Simon evil in my book. No wonder he protested at Matthew Shephard's funeral.
a murder that I will remind you is one that Simon supported.
LOL I am so sure. Why would you even type something so silly?
It will be a campaign of hate when gay people start killing straight people. But it actually works the other way - straight people kill gays - just for being gay - i.e. Matthew Shephard
dtl, the last news story I read about the Shepard murder tended to cast doubt on the assertion that he was killed just for being gay. Here's a link.
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=277685&page=1
Do you know (or does anyone else) whether that story has been debunked? (Honest question, btw.)
Wow, are we (the right) in trouble.
Loud voices chanting slogans does not a movement make.
Intellectual dead pool.
This list is just sad. Some highlights just of the top 10?
Ann Coulter - a woman whose main shtick is wishing death on her political enemies.
Michael Steele - A one-term LT Gov of Maryland who hasn't added anything substantial to a policy debate yet. Really?
Newt Gingrich - A guy who was thrown out of your caucus by your own side.
And of course: Sarah Palin - A failed VP candidate and 2 year governor from a welfare state who thinks in page long sentences.
Your side is in real trouble.
garage mahal said...
"Simon my point was if one was a true constructionist, or textualist, there is no 'cause'."
I disagree. (I don't know what a "constructionist" is either - construction is just something courts do, be it loose, strict, or, as Scalia and I prefer, reasonable.) I think that preserving the Constitution against encroachment is a cause consistent with textualism. Particularly the structural constitution: abuses of rights are more likely to be redressed at the ballot box than are transgressions of the structure. Such transgressions may meet popular demands, even - but "[t]he Constitution’s structure requires a stability which transcends the convenience of the moment." Clinton v. New York, 524 U.S. 417, 449 (1998) (Kennedy, J., concurring). I think that resisting what I hesitate to call (because it has become trite) "the living Constitution" is a cause consistent with textualism, also.
Now, to be sure, when the court sets out in pursuit of a cause in ways that go beyond its institutional limits and competence, that's a problem. I don't suggest for a moment that the court relax standing doctrine, for example, just because a case would allow for a neatly conservative result. I'm advocating something less than activism but more than restraint (after all, to "make judicial restraint the starting point for all legal analysis ... contravenes the basic duty of the judiciary 'to say what the law is,'" Althouse, Enforcing Federalism After United States v. Lopez, 38 Ariz. L. Rev. 793, 812 (1996)).
downtownlad said...
Simon finds the following 2 scenario morally equivalent.
1) An 18 year-old gay closeted gay student, in mid 1980's AIDS panicked America, trying to come to terms with his sexuality is publicly outed in his college newspaper and called a Sodomite.
2) Gay people boycotting businesses that funded Proposition 8, which removed the civil rights of gay people. Funds that were publicly listed in official registrars, as required by laws governing political donations.
Downtownlad said...
"No wonder [Simon] protested at Matthew Shephard's funeral."
I was about five thousand miles away, and to my recollection, never heard the name Matthew Shephard until I moved to the states a few years after that.
Your habit of ascribing positions to people that bear no resemblance to anything they've said is somewhat tiresome, by the way.
"Your side is in real trouble."
Yes, it's a pretty sad list (Ann Coulter? Come on!) with some notable exceptions. But I wouldn't gloat. Who is on the liberal list? Your party nominated and elected a cipher who seems to have no actual philosophical system underpinning his political platform, save for an autobiographical mythos and the words "hope" and "change". Who is the intellectual future of your side of the spectrum?
There are two very notable names not on that list.
George W. Bush and Karl Rove.
Bush I understand - duff president. But it just goes to show what a phenomenal job Rove has done to minimise his legacy culturally with the last 8 years. Even the base have forgotten he's had his grubby fingers all over it! No wonder Donna Brazille is just amazed by what he can do.
It is interesting how a similar list of Liberal favorites would look like. Will it be dominated by MSNBC and Hollywwod characters?
It's interesting to compare this list with the previously released list of "least favorite people on the right." In that list John McCain was #1 and Sarah Palin didn't chart. In this list Sarah Palin is #1 and John McCain is nowhere to be found. (And for those of you who were wondering about Bush, he made #21 on the other list.) Here is the link to the "least favorite" list: Right-Of-Center Bloggers Select Their Least Favorite People On The Right (2008 Edition)
What explains the lingering love for Fred Thompson? That strikes me as pathetic
What? You voted for Obama. And you want to hammer us as pathetic? Please.
BTW, remember what Fred did to Michael Moore? Moore still hasn't been able to get Fred's cigar out of Moore's butt.
I think this would be interesting to the moonbats that O'Reilly isn't listed. He is demonized by the left by reflex.
Ann Coulter is hilarious, and the scowls and consternation that she causes are entertaining all by themselves.
Dualdiagnosis - O'Reilly is actually on the least favorite list (#16), tied with Ann Coulter, Andrew Sullivan and George Will. I wonder how Ann made both lists?
paul a'barge: hear hear!
HERE
I think a good place to be is down on BOTH Right-of-Center Bloggers lists. It will be a long hike in the wilderness for them. Just them and their beloved talisman of the Goddess Sarah, wandering about..
"BTW, remember what Fred did to Michael Moore? Moore still hasn't been able to get Fred's cigar out of Moore's butt."
Beat me to it. That clip was CLASSIC, and I would have voted for him on the strength of that alone.
But really, for me, what it boils down to is that I've never heard Fred contradict himself, and he always seems to have a calming way about him when he speaks about politics.
He also explains his views on things in a way that you can clearly recall what he said and his reason for saying it. I've never felt that way about either Obama or McCain.
Imagine that...a multi-year presidential campaign, and nobody really knows what one of the candidates stands for, while different people have different impressions of what the other guy stands for. Sigh. Clarity would be good.
Ann Althouse's vortices are dwarfed only by Ann Coulter's....
44 bloggers responded?
This is kind of funny. Ann posted a link to the earlier list of "least favorite people". First, the link was to last year's list. The corrected link was to a dynamic page--much like the current link on this post. So when I went to the page today, the story was no longer there. When I did a search, the top two links to "least favorite" lists were from July 2007 and July 2008. At that point, I had assumed that Ann's reference was to July 2008 list.
But I was wrong--the list actually appeared on November 13, but it was not at the top of the search on the site. So my comments earlier referred to the July list and not the current one--and that one is a list of "least favorite ELECTED REPUBLICANS". The top five people on that lists were Arlen Specter and Chuck Hagel (tie), Olympia Snowe, then Schwarzenegger and McCain. Now we have McCain, Stevens, Peggy Noonan and Colin Powell, before getting to Specter and Hagel.
I can understand the Noonan and Powell popularity--both slammed Sarah Palin, with Powell actually endorsing Obama. Stevens is a crook that keeps reminding the rest of the country of all the Republican corruption scandals. But the rest of the list is a bizarre list of crazy pundits, McCain surrogates and party "traitors" who criticized either Palin or McCain or some other aspect of the presidential campaign, but also three of the other presidential contenders this year (Paul, Huckabee and Romney).
Interestingly, a few people always show up near the top--McCain, Specter, Buchanan and Schwarzenegger. The elected Reppublicans list is a bit more consistent--it's mostly moderates, a couple of crooks and other assorted felons, plus Lindsey Graham. For general list, it's mostly the same characters, plus a lot of pundits. Ann Coulter and George W Bush make both the favorite and the least favorite lists.
But no matter what you think of the reasonableness of the lists, they are a rather weak indication of opinion. Of the 240 blogs polled for their opinion, the highest vote-getters over the last three years failed to break 30. So the lists are not even representative of the bloggers, let alone right-of-centrists as a whole. They are about as accurate as the Fox News post-debate phone-in polls that found McCain beating Obama handily by 84-16%.
So why, exactly, are we discussing this?
Jim Demint is not only my senator, but someone I grew up with and know from church and community contexts. He is the real deal. He is humble, intelligent, and truly conservative. He's a man of his word. In an age of skepticism (warranted) over elected officials, he is a breath of fresh air.
After seeing DeMint defending his comments about women several years ago on the Sunday talk shows I always thought he was a tad mental.
Pretty scary that Sarah Palin is #1.
Also scary that Michelle Malkin is #2. She's a proven LIAR!! And all you gotta do is search for the YouTube where Chris Matthews demolishes her over her smears on John Kerry's war service to know she is complete scum.
Michelle Malkin needs to be knocked off her perch. She is a proven liar of the lowest order. I don't trust any right wing bloggers who think she's great.
L-Oaf,
I'm sure many right wing bloggers worry about whether random Internet moonbats trust them.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा