Althouse: Axelrod: "It’s surreal, so much of this is... It’s kind of hard to absorb and get your hands around all we’re trying to do."

March 9, 2009

Axelrod: "It’s surreal, so much of this is... It’s kind of hard to absorb and get your hands around all we’re trying to do."

Oh, yeah, it's really trippy — all that power.

God help us.

AND: I'm picturing:

205 comments:

1 – 200 of 205 Newer› Newest»

Anonymous said...: Yeah, my 401k, it's really surreal, man.

BTW I thought it was evil that Rove was in the White House. Why isn't it evil to have Axelrod in the WH?; 3/9/09, 9:52 AM
garage mahal said...: But can you just imagine McCain and Palin steering this thing. Whoa Nellie.; 3/9/09, 9:54 AM
Ann Althouse said...: It's not evil, baby. It's cosmic.; 3/9/09, 9:56 AM
Peter V. Bella said...: ...the strong belief in polling and focus groups...

I guess they are not as smart as they think. If they want to see real polls and focus groups pertaining to the Messiah's policies, all they have to do is follow the market. It just keeps going down; no confidence.; 3/9/09, 10:02 AM
Alex said...: PatCA - hasn't the WH chief of staff always been in the friggen White House? Yeah, suddenly Rove was the epitome of evil.; 3/9/09, 10:02 AM
Darcy said...: Gee. Surreal, huh? That's comforting.; 3/9/09, 10:04 AM
KCFleming said...: This is the Graham Nash administration.

Chicago
Somehow people must be free I hope the day comes soon
won't you please come to Chicago show your face
From the bottom of the ocean to the mountains of the moon
won't you please come to chicago no one else can take your place

We can change the world
rearrange the world
It's dying - to get better

We're on one ba-a-d trip, man.; 3/9/09, 10:04 AM
Gahrie said...: But can you just imagine McCain and Palin steering this thing.

Well, the conservative in me says there probably wouldn't be a dime's worth of difference.

What little Republican that is left in me says that the stimulus bill wouldn't have been quite the disaster we got, the treasury would probably be fully staffed, and we definitely wouldn't have had the multiple foriegn policy mistakes we have had.; 3/9/09, 10:04 AM
garage mahal said...: The crappy gift exchange and not knowing a Russian translation is where Obama lost me. God help us.; 3/9/09, 10:10 AM
Peter V. Bella said...: Garage,
Don't lose hope, there will be change. I'll bet that there is a State Dinner in the planning to honor some real leaders of the Western World. People of accomplishment who deserved to be recognized, rewarded, feted lavishly, and being the recipients of lavish gifts.

You know real leaders; Keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews, Barbara Striesand, Oprah, the editors of NYT, Cindy Sheehan, and others like them.; 3/9/09, 10:16 AM
KCFleming said...: Is garage now Dr. Strangeloaf?; 3/9/09, 10:16 AM
Alex said...: garage - "How I learned to stop worrying and love Althouse"; 3/9/09, 10:17 AM
DCPI said...: Alex:

Axelrod is not Obama's chief of staff -- that job belongs to Rahm Emanuel who was confirmed by the Senate. Axelrod is a "political advisor" who went through no confirmation at all.

Hopefully, he has not security clearance, but I have no faith that that is the case.; 3/9/09, 10:17 AM
Triangle Man said...: Blogger garage mahal said...

The crappy gift exchange and not knowing a Russian translation is where Obama lost me. God help us.

Yep, you never would have seen a gaffe like that back in the Bartlet administration.; 3/9/09, 10:22 AM
sohereiam said...: But Ann! This is what we like about the Obama administration. Some measure of doubt, humility and reflection. I would much rather have people in the White House who go in shaking their heads at the overwhelming nature of the job than people who leave whipped by it. That was the problem with the Bush administration. They entered with such confidence, and on the way out, in all those interviews he gave, you could see that President Bush was only at the very end coming to terms with the fact that perhaps his gut and his instincts hadn't been enough to meet the challenges of the job.; 3/9/09, 10:23 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Althouse said:

"God help us".

LOL.; 3/9/09, 10:30 AM
Henry said...: Garage Mahal wrote: But can you just imagine McCain and Palin steering this thing. Whoa Nellie.

These two quotes from the article should reassure you:

(1) a meeting about how to sell President Obama’s economic plan was set to begin (my emphasis)

(2)Axelrod said ... "I’m not trying to supplant the brilliant policy makers who are here."

Given the brilliance of the policy makers in Congress (let's be real), I think McCain's poor salesmanship would be a feature, not a bug.

sohereiam -- I agree with you to the point that Axelrod does come across as pretty human:

"Everybody looks extraordinary," Mr. Obama said. "Even Axelrod has cleaned up pretty well."

Triangle Man -- funny!; 3/9/09, 10:32 AM
William said...: "Can I speak for the American people here?" Axelrod said in one of the meetings. Ugh. Axelrod thinks he is an avatar of the American public, and Obama trusts in Axelrod to keep him grounded. If Obama and Axelrod keep reading adulatory profiles of themselves in the Times and keep having frequent meetings with sincere admirers, they will come to regard their megalomania as a form of humility....Napoleon on Elba is said to have thought that the French people had failed him and the dream of glory that he had offered them. If America is a worse place in four years, we will have failed Obama and the brave, good men who surround him.; 3/9/09, 10:38 AM
garage mahal said...: I'm not sure how future historians will rank the gift exchange scandal as far as foreign policy blunders . But I'm sure it will be right up there.

Right now the DOW is up +1.03. Obama must have said something really really small, but positive, to investors. Like 1 point's worth of positiveness.; 3/9/09, 10:43 AM
Clyde said...: Dude, someone sold us some bad acid! This is really a bad trip we're on, man!; 3/9/09, 10:47 AM
Matt Eckert said...: What's the big deal? They are just doing what Democrats do. Taxing and spending. Throwing our allies under the bus. Kissing the ass of our enemies and wondering why they want to hold us hostage and cut off our heads.

Haven't you seen this show before?
It is a repeat.; 3/9/09, 10:47 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: This is what we like about the Obama administration. Some measure of doubt, humility and reflection.

Yep...this is exactly what I want in the pilot of the airplane I'm flying in.

Doubt and reflection:

"Holy SHIT. I doubt that I can fly this plane! Woah...look at all these button thingies"

"Let me see if I can remember and reflect on the diagrams of the control pannel that I saw one time in a training manual."

"Too bad I didn't really pay attention or take the time to learn about this plane."

"Oh, well, how hard can it be to fly this thing anyway? Didn't the last guy do it for awhile and he wasn't cool and exciting like me."

"Maybe if I just keep chanting my mantra and get my mind into the zone.... we can take this puppy off the ground. Ooommmbamaaaaa...OOOommbabmaaaa ...."

Here we go....hang on to your seats, it's going to be a bumpy flight.; 3/9/09, 10:50 AM
garage mahal said...: Now up +7.88! Is he talking about tax cuts or something? Whatever it is, keep saying it.; 3/9/09, 10:51 AM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: Obama must have said something really really small, but positive, to investors. Like 1 point's worth of positiveness

O crap.....It is 8.55 am here and Obama is blathering again on the television. Isn't he so tired....why doesn't he take a day off and give us and the market a break?; 3/9/09, 10:53 AM
J said...: "But can you just imagine McCain and Palin steering this thing"

You mean somebody capable of making a decision without a committee and somebody who's actually run a government, both offset by an opposition congress? I guess you're right - there's no way they could outperform the crack team we have in place now.; 3/9/09, 11:00 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: DBQ:

Goods ones especially "all the button thingies".

LOL.; 3/9/09, 11:08 AM
john said...: DBQ said -
Doubt and reflection:

"Holy SHIT. I doubt that I can fly this plane! Woah...look at all these button thingies"

Hit the RESET! Hit the damn RESET button before we crash!; 3/9/09, 11:11 AM
sohereiam said...: Dust Bunny Queen --

I really try to refrain from such nonsense, because you all are so sensitive around here when it comes to times past, but in your analogy, I think President Bush would be hiding in the passenger restroom, hoping someone else had volunteered to pilot.; 3/9/09, 11:14 AM
David Walser said...: But can you just imagine McCain and Palin steering this thing. Whoa Nellie.

With McCain and Palin there would have been a decent chance Romney would be Treasury Secretary today. I'd find that thought very comforting.; 3/9/09, 11:19 AM
Matt Eckert said...: Actually, President Bush knows how to fly a plane.

President Obama knows how to file his nails.; 3/9/09, 11:19 AM
Alex said...: sohereiam - if that were the case President Bush wouldn't have handled 9/11 so well and with aplomb. You lie again.; 3/9/09, 11:20 AM
Alex said...: sohereiam - oh and just because you don't like Bush's policy after 9/11, doesn't mean he wasn't strong. Either Bush was evil or stupid, you can't have both.; 3/9/09, 11:21 AM
JAL said...: But can you just imagine McCain and Palin steering this thing. Whoa Nellie.

Since the record shows Palin actually CUTS THINGS OUT of the budgets presented to her. She actually cuts back government expenses. (Not that she would have had anything to do with the budget were she VP -- maybe just put her in charge of -- the middle east crisis? Nah, Joe B can handle that in the Senate. Coulda' had her watching energy development and getting us off the hook with the Middle East so we can have time to develop sensible and cost effective alternatives in a thoughtful manner. That's something this ideological administration has ZERO sense about.)

For all you who slandered and made fun of McCain and Palin -- I detected somewhat of a more common sense approach with them. And McCain was not going to be able to tap his BlackBerry and get his way on everything, so yes, it would have been better.

Better would have been some true conservatives running against this hopeless change. But even people who don't meddle in stuff they do not understand and do not smack a radical template on everything would have been better.

Axelrod, yoo hoo -- you do NOT represent the American people.

Thing is -- it would have been bad, and the media would have been howling about how McCain made it worse - because they would have nothing to compare it to. The upside is, now we know how bade the hopeless change folks can make something.

A McCain win, however unsatisfying to the right, would have been MORE unsatisfying to the left.

And it would have been villify time for the press.

Now the evening news comes on and I flip it off as they clearly are still drinking kool aid.; 3/9/09, 11:30 AM
Ernesto Ariel Suárez said...: They are counting on people actually feeling sorry for them, and "giving them a chance". I am sure many of the true believers will. However, I wonder how many other people without such faith will also feel the same. They sold The Messiah (PBUH) as the Guide and Savior, The One, The One We Had Been Waiting For, and so on...Are they telling us now that he's a simple, inexperienced, fumbling mortal who can be very easily overwhelmed? Some people should get their money and votes back...; 3/9/09, 11:31 AM
JAL said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 3/9/09, 11:31 AM
JAL said...: Did you know that Obama thinks only rich people own stock?; 3/9/09, 11:33 AM
Matt Eckert said...: You people are really something. Haven't you ever dealt with someone who got their job because of affirmative action?; 3/9/09, 11:37 AM
Richard Dolan said...: Team Obama needs a shock, like the Clintonistas got with the '94 midterms, to break through their isolating arrogance, summed up in Rahm's "crisis too good to waste" stuff. They are brushing aside what got them where they are -- what convinced the electorate in normally Rep-leaning places like Ohio, Indiana, NCarolina and Colorado to go with the untested O-man -- and instead are launching off into agendas that those folks would never have bought into. Clinton did the same thing in 92-94.

There's no doubt that a similar kind of shock is coming for Team O. When it does, the issue will be whether things are too far gone, either on the economic front domestically or on one of any number of problems brewing internationally, for Team O successfully to get back to what led to their "we won" moment in the first place. The display that we've seen in the last 6 weeks suggests that Team O doesn't quite have the agility (and perhaps the political smarts) to pull of the same kind of correction that the Clintonistas did after the '94 rout.; 3/9/09, 11:40 AM
Titussayhellohowareyougreat! said...: No one is more outraged by this administration than me.

We are being led by a bunch of hippies and commies.

Lord Help Us.

We are doomed.; 3/9/09, 11:42 AM
MadisonMan said...: I think President Bush would be hiding in the passenger restroom, hoping someone else had volunteered to pilot.

Can I fly the plane now Dick? You promised you'd let me fly it now? When can I fly it?; 3/9/09, 11:43 AM
Chennaul said...: Ya there was this little whiny column from an ex-Clinton aide-

Every Breath You Take
Obama's job is hard enough without making him be the next FDR, too.

He was bitchin' about how all the Liberal fawners are making things harder for Obama.

We are so Geithnered!; 3/9/09, 11:43 AM
Titussayhellohowareyougreat! said...: We can only hope that in 2010 the good people of America come to their senses and elect a republican congress. It is our only way of stopping this madness. It will force the Obama administration to stop this insanity.

I am so mad. Pissed really. Disgusted too. And really ticked off. I haven't used the term ticked off in a long time so you know it is bad but that is how I feel.

What are you guys hearing?; 3/9/09, 11:46 AM
sohereiam said...: Oh, Alex, I think you can have evil and stupid wrapped up in one -- there's a solid list somewhere of petty dictators the world over that fit the bill --, but I didn't use either of those words to describe President Bush.

I can see how it's tough to figure out what I meant by my hiding in the passenger restroom imagery! My point was that President Bush always seemed overwhelmed by his job and ready to pass responsibility on to others. I'm sorry if you felt I was being unclear!

Anyhow, you did hurt my feelings by calling me a liar, although, I couldn't really quite see how expressing my difference of opinion was a form of mendacity.

Ta ta for now, Alex!; 3/9/09, 11:53 AM
Matt Eckert said...: First of all that is a stupid metaphor. Black people don't like to fly. They take the bus.; 3/9/09, 11:57 AM
MayBee said...: He went around the room, calling on a cluster of strategists who were on hand to discuss the latest batch of polls and focus groups conducted for the White House.

Ha ha ha.

Obama last week:
"And, you know, the stock market is sort of like a tracking poll in politics. It bobs up and down day to day, and if you spend all your time worrying about that, then you're probably going to get the long-term strategy wrong."

Trippy.; 3/9/09, 12:00 PM
former law student said...: Oh, yeah, it's really trippy — all that power.

David Axelrod was no trippy hippy dippy. David Axelrod was a reporter and political writer for the 70's Chicago Tribune -- in an era where the only exception to their slate of Republican endorsements were men named Daley.

While still political writer, Axelrod was picked to be campaign manager by Paul Simon. How can I compare this endorsement of his character by Simon -- a social liberal and fiscal conservative, and a truly honorable man?

Haven't you ever dealt with someone who got their job because of affirmative action?

Well, I've known a lot of bosses who got their job only because of who their daddies were. Affirmative action at best gets your foot in the door -- much like marrying a rich felon's daughter.

Incompetents don't rise unless they are powerfully connected -- I know it took a lot of political pull to get into the National Guard at the height of the war in Vietnam, for example.; 3/9/09, 12:01 PM
Titussayhellohowareyougreat! said...: Mccain and Palin would of been a gift from God compared to what we have now. I say this as someone who had some issues with Mccain but he would of never been this bad. In my wildest dreams I didn't think it would be this bad. Lord Help Us.; 3/9/09, 12:03 PM
Dust Bunny Queen said...: My point was that President Bush always seemed overwhelmed by his job and ready to pass responsibility on to others

A good pilot will have a competent co-pilot to rely upon, an experienced ground crew, mechanics and a flight control deck to help guide the plane into a safe landing or keep the plane from crashing into other planes.

Sharing the tasks and the operations of flying the plane is the mark of a good pilot, a good CEO or a competent leader.

So far I don't see any competence in the ground crew, the co-pilot (Biden) or the flight control deck and Obama seems to want to be everywhere all at once all the time. I don't want the pilot vacuuming the plane or greasing the landing gear.; 3/9/09, 12:04 PM
Titussayhellohowareyougreat! said...: President Bush was neither evil or stupid. Anyone who thinks that was is evil or stupid.; 3/9/09, 12:06 PM
Ernesto Ariel Suárez said...: I agree, FLS, I wouldn't call the Chicago Political Machinery "affirmative action". Only those well connected to it, independently of their race, will get anywhere.; 3/9/09, 12:08 PM
Ernesto Ariel Suárez said...: Hey, garage:

DJIA 6560.35 -66.59; 3/9/09, 12:11 PM
Chennaul said...: Titus-

You never saved some people trusted Obama enough to leave their money in the markets.

Everyone I know got out-precisely because they saw Obama equivocating and the media letting him get away with it.

Still what you are doing is making fun of the people that trusted him enough.; 3/9/09, 12:13 PM
Methadras said...: So Axelrods experience is surreal and not realistic? Stunner. The incompetency keeps on flowing.; 3/9/09, 12:16 PM
garage mahal said...: Since the record shows Palin actually CUTS THINGS OUT of the budgets presented to her. She actually cuts back government expenses.

And the fact Alaska is #1 per capita in pork is not her fault! Or the fact she is lining up for some of that stimulus money she blew off Republicans to get. And every one of the Republicans who voted against the stimulus are all taking the principled stand of refusing all of it. Right?; 3/9/09, 12:26 PM
Matt Eckert said...: “Well, I've known a lot of bosses who got their job only because of who their daddies were.”

That is very true. That is why we need governmental affirmative action because African Americans are so often confused as to who their daddies were.

That is why fathers day is most confusing day in Harlem.; 3/9/09, 12:28 PM
former law student said...: Everyone I know got out-precisely because they saw Obama equivocating and the media letting him get away with it.

Where is everyone you know putting thir money -- not government bonds or Government-insured bank accounts, surely? This would show an unwarranted faith in government.; 3/9/09, 12:29 PM
Chennaul said...: Actually you can go to the mattresses, you can go to gold, you can go to high grade short term munis-with the interest being tax free.; 3/9/09, 12:34 PM
Ah Pooh said...: Perhaps Matt Eckert is Michael - same karma.; 3/9/09, 12:35 PM
Chennaul said...: munis that are high grade can be utilities where you can hope at least the liberals aren't that stupid or it is controlled by Republicans.

Even liberals know to vote for republicans locally and send liberals federally to go screw everyone else.

Case in point -

After Dinkins-

Rudy Giuliani.; 3/9/09, 12:38 PM
Matt Eckert said...: Ah Pooh, suck my dick.; 3/9/09, 12:39 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Matt:

One Cedarford is all this blog can tolerate.

Why don't you take a hike with the racist crap?; 3/9/09, 12:40 PM
Ernesto Ariel Suárez said...: madawaskan, the agents provocateurs are out in masse today.; 3/9/09, 12:41 PM
Matt Eckert said...: Let the suckfest continue.; 3/9/09, 12:43 PM
Synova said...: My point was that President Bush always seemed overwhelmed by his job and ready to pass responsibility on to others.

I suppose that's one way to spin it.

Now delegating tasks isn't leadership but someone passing responsibility they find overwhelming.

This way, Obama's apparent inability to trust anyone else to do their jobs is interpreted as a sign of a *good* leader.

Decision making aside... it's just not. Priorities have to be determined and responsibilities delegated. No person could possibly take on all of it and do a good job. Obama has never had any job where he had to delegate authority of any sort. Not. Ever.

We can hope he figures out how. That would be the best thing.

In the mean time there will continue to be those who think that it's a *good* thing that Obama wants to keep stirring all the pots himself, doing everything important himself, making all the important decisions about everything, and all with a spirit of humility and self-doubt. Because there's a certain virtue to negativity. It proves a person is smarter than everyone else because they don't let optimism get in the way of the truth.

Some people, I realize, really LIKE that Obama is indecisive and gloomy.; 3/9/09, 12:44 PM
Chennaul said...: ElcubanitoKC-

For certain.; 3/9/09, 12:46 PM
Shanna said...: My point was that President Bush always seemed overwhelmed by his job and ready to pass responsibility on to others. I'm sorry if you felt I was being unclear!

I don’t think President Bush passed on responsibility…Obama is the one I always hear blaming staff and being tired for his faults. For all Bush’s faults, I think one of his strength’s is that he DID take responsibility! And he did act decisively, whether you think he did the right things or not.; 3/9/09, 12:48 PM
reader_iam said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 3/9/09, 12:49 PM
reader_iam said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 3/9/09, 12:54 PM
Shanna said...: I know it took a lot of political pull to get into the National Guard at the height of the war in Vietnam, for example.

I think this is a fallacy. Most of the males in my family were in one form of the guard or another and none of them were especially well connected.

I honestly think the "but they take it" argument is stupid.

Yep. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't. Taxpayers of the states ARE paying for all of this, so it's only fair that they get some of it back. A ridiculous, circular waste of money, but only fair.; 3/9/09, 12:56 PM
Synova said...: And the fact Alaska is #1 per capita in pork is not her fault! Or the fact she is lining up for some of that stimulus money she blew off Republicans to get. And every one of the Republicans who voted against the stimulus are all taking the principled stand of refusing all of it. Right?

Sure they are... because it's all or nothing. Right?

You should know better. Alaska gets a whole lot of federal money... so what is the right thing to do? Take none of it? Take all of it and try to get as much more as possible? Take what is offered and try to use it prudently? Try to develop more sources of income for the State in order to reduce the need and unwanted dependence?

Palin does the last two. Granted, trying to develop Alaska's resources is hamstrung by Congress at every turn, so is it wrong to take money from those who deny what might make Alaska independent, or at least more so?

Making the argument that because huge changes aren't made over-night, that the entire budget of Alaska isn't purged of anything funded with federal money over-night, that the ONLY principled stand is to say "No" and send back every last cent yesterday... it's an opportunistic and unserious argument.

But it's really the only one that can be made about Sarah, isn't it? She's so reduced her personal budget as governor (dispensing of the private jet would do that all on it's own) that the only thing left is to pretend that the remaining expenses to transport her family and herself to Wasilla and back is a huge scandal. She actually does cut expenses from the budget there and seems highly prudent about longer term planning and financial needs in Alaska so the only thing to do is become appalled that Alaska has a budget at all.

It's unserious, but does seem to work for the people it's meant to persuade.; 3/9/09, 12:59 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: My point was that President Bush always seemed overwhelmed by his job and ready to pass responsibility on to others.

I suppose that's one way to spin it.

Now delegating tasks isn't leadership but someone passing responsibility they find overwhelming.

This way, Obama's apparent inability to trust anyone else to do their jobs is interpreted as a sign of a *good* leader.

This is the classic difference between business school and law school, and in particular between Harvard B School and Harvard Law School. Bush was trained to delegate, and Obama never was. Indeed, that is the last thing that is rewarded in law school.

So, we had four years of an Administration that ran smoothly, with no real scandals, except for a couple ginned up by the press that turned out to be more smoke than anything. No tax cheats or nanny problems. Almost no one running off on their own, unchecked.

Micromanaging may be useful in a law career. But it fails miserably when one is trying to run the U.S. government with millions of employees, hundreds of millions of stake holders, and trillions of dollars of revenue and expenses.

The government worked so smoothly under Bush (43) that we all lost track of how hard it really is to make such an organization work. We are now seeing what happens when we put someone with no training or experience in management in charge of such a large and complex operation.; 3/9/09, 1:01 PM
garage mahal said...: Why accept the money if it's going to make the situation worse? What is the actual reason to accept the money? It might do some good? Can't say that now can you!; 3/9/09, 1:01 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: Sorry, we had eight years of a smoothly running government, not four.; 3/9/09, 1:02 PM
former law student said...: Most of the males in my family were in one form of the guard or another

When did they join?

In my experience it took considerable clout to get in. The one I knew best was a son of a big contractor, who had run against Mayor Daley as a Republican, and who at the time was the regional director of HUD. Another's dad was tailor to and a landsman of a fairly high ranking officer.; 3/9/09, 1:04 PM
Matt Eckert said...: It is always racist to criticize black elected officials who are incompetent and who only got elected because they were black. It is the David Dinkins rule.

I bet the President would be a great washroom attendant.; 3/9/09, 1:06 PM
former law student said...: Sorry, we had eight years of a smoothly running government, not four.

If we're speaking about the Bush, jr. administration, we had nine months of a smoothly running government, before the shit hit the fan.

I will admit that Bush, jr.'s inability to cope with Hurricane Katrina was in accordance with his father's lackluster response to Hurricane Andrew.

Considering that Bush, jr.'s most extensive managerial experience was obtained as owner of the Texas Rangers, why did the Republicans not nominate Bud Selig to succeed him? Bud not only ran a team, he led all of MLB.; 3/9/09, 1:12 PM
reader_iam said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 3/9/09, 1:13 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: FLS:

I knew several Guardsmen in the Vietnam War period. I don't think any of them or theor families had more than an average amount of polictical savvy or pull.

Your claim was wrong IMHO.; 3/9/09, 1:13 PM
KCFleming said...: "Why accept the money if it's going to make the situation worse? What is the actual reason to accept the money?"

The better to immanentize this particular eschaton, garage.; 3/9/09, 1:15 PM
Shanna said...: It's not as if states can "opt out" of their taxpayers funding their proportion of the bailout.

Apparently this is a favorite argument too, because weren’t some folks trying to use this for Social Security a while back? As in, “you plan to take social security so how dare you criticize it”? Because it’s the same deal, if you can’t opt out and you’re forced to pour your money into something, what choice do you have but to take the money? It’s YOUR money!; 3/9/09, 1:18 PM
reader_iam said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 3/9/09, 1:20 PM
Alex said...: reader_iam - garage would have it in the way that punishes anyone he disapproves of. He's a childish personality that way.; 3/9/09, 1:23 PM
BJM said...: madawaskan @11:43

We are so Geithnered!

LOL! I am so stealing that!; 3/9/09, 1:24 PM
Paul said...: "I know it took a lot of political pull to get into the National Guard at the height of the war in Vietnam, for example."

Not to fly widowmakers. The people trying to get into the NG to avoid combat duty weren't likely to be interested in flying planes in which the mortality rate due to accidents was about the same as in theater combat.

GWB wanted to fly a fighter jet and TANG was his best bet. He logged 953 hrs flight time when 600 for six years was all that was required. He also volunteered to go to Viet Nam but by the time he had the required flight time in they were scaling way back and retiring the F103s anyway.

As to Bush's not taking responsibility, remember the Iraq Study Group and all the pressure to declare defeat and bring the troops home? Bush did just the opposite, approved the surge, won the war, and handed AQ a massive defeat.

But no good deed goes unpunished as they say.; 3/9/09, 1:24 PM
Synova said...: (National Guard service during Vietnam)

When did they join?

I wonder if the best question wouldn't be "where" did they join.

The National Guard isn't all one thing with the same policies everywhere. It's entirely possible that in some areas getting into the guard required very powerful family connections. In others it might have been more luck than anything, or volunteering and qualifying for the right particular job. Compared to active duty the Guard tends to be surprisingly flexible, and I'd consider the Air Guard more than others.

What was the case in Texas?

I have no clue. OTOH, nothing about what was reported about Bush's service struck me as untoward. Was it hard to get a spot? I don't know. Was Bush treated special once he was in the Guard... I really doubt it. Not, in any case, compared to other young fly-boys. Pilots always think they are exempt. I can't say they're wrong about that.; 3/9/09, 1:27 PM
Paul said...: "Considering that Bush, jr.'s most extensive managerial experience was obtained as owner of the Texas Rangers, why did the Republicans not nominate Bud Selig to succeed him? Bud not only ran a team, he led all of MLB."

Jeez and all this time I was under the misapprehension that GWB was governor of the great state of Texas.

Michael Savage is a cretin but he's right about one thing. Liberalism truly is a mental disorder.; 3/9/09, 1:28 PM
reader_iam said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 3/9/09, 1:29 PM
Shanna said...: When did they join?

I really don’t know except “during Vietnam”, this being way before my time. My dad and my uncle had no pull with anybody I know (and somehow I think my dad was in two forms of the guard, Air Force and Army), but I think my other uncle did get some help. Some guy my mom went to high school with died in Vietnam, and his father got as many of his classmates in as he could, including her brother. But it’s not like that guy was a super rich senator or anything. I guess he knew people.; 3/9/09, 1:32 PM
AllenS said...: fls--

Since your profile is blank, and I have no idea how old you are, I'm going to posit that you don't have any idea what you're talking about. I worked in a factory in the 1960's, and everyone who wanted to join the guards did. If you wanted to be a pilot, you had to have some college education. You just don't join the guards and become a pilot. It ain't like riding a bike.; 3/9/09, 1:34 PM
Titussayhellohowareyougreat! said...: Can't we get some better liberal trolls here. Their defense of this administration is mind blowing. Totally man.

I am angry.; 3/9/09, 1:36 PM
Titussayhellohowareyougreat! said...: All my liberal friends are even voting republican in 2010-across the board.

The last two months they said have been a disaster.

Nice to know they realize this now.

Better late than never I guess.; 3/9/09, 1:41 PM
BJM said...: FLS, in case you missed it in 2004, John Fucking Kerry joined the Naval Reserve in 1966 at the height of the draft. He obviously had some help as well.

You don't understand the context of the time. LBJ drafted 90,000 19-20 yr olds in '66 from CA alone.

In '65 & '66 every one who was 1A was trying to get either a deferment to finish college or into a reserve unit to keep their ass out of the draft. Neither were seen by most as dishonorable, but prudent.

However, very few got in the reserves, other than those who were well connected. There were no open enlistment slots due to the sheer numbers of draft aged men at the time.; 3/9/09, 1:43 PM
David Walser said...: "Most of the males in my family were in one form of the guard or another"

When did they join?

In my experience it took considerable clout to get in. The one I knew best was a son of a big contractor, who had run against Mayor Daley as a Republican, and who at the time was the regional director of HUD. Another's dad was tailor to and a landsman of a fairly high ranking officer.

What seems to be misunderstood is that the availability of slots in the Guard varied widely from state to state and from unit to unit within a state. The Guard was and still is a state organization. Just because Illinois is all full does not mean there's not space available in Texas or Indiana.

Same's true for type of Guard unit. Just because the local (Army) Guard (infantry) unit is full does NOT mean another unit (Air Force, air transport) in the same state is not short of staff. Members of the Guard are trained for a particular mission. You can't simply take someone who drives a tank and drop them into a helicopter pilot's seat.

For example, my father was in the Air National Guard when we lived in California during the Vietnam years. We moved to Utah while the war was still going on and there was no room for him in the local Guard unit there. He continued to fly with the California unit for a couple more years before retiring from the Guard. (Just fyi, he'd served in WWII and Korea. For him, serving in the Guard was not a way to avoid combat. He fully expected his unit to be called up, but it never was.)

So, while FLS may be remembering accurately anecdotes that proved to him that one needed pull to get into the Guard, you didn't need pull to get into every Guard unit.; 3/9/09, 1:44 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Heh even Dr. Strangeloaf and his Manhattan friends have seen the light!; 3/9/09, 1:44 PM
Kirk Parker said...: J,

"crack team"

Hehehe; 3/9/09, 1:44 PM
JohnAnnArbor said...: I will admit that Bush, jr.'s inability to cope with Hurricane Katrina was in accordance with his father's lackluster response to Hurricane Andrew.

Actually, in both cases, the (Democratic) governors sabotaged the work. In both cases, they delayed giving the federal government the authority they needed to go it. In the case of Katrina, Blanco delayed more than 24 hours after being BEGGED to allow things to move forward. Bush would have been called a fascist if he had ignored the legalities (and would have been sued, called racist, etc.). Of course, all that happened anyway. Can't win, by design.

During that whole time, though, the US Navy and Coast Guard were doing amazing rescues with helicopters. They were prepared and moved in as fast as they could to pick up the pieces after the mayor ignored his disaster/evacuation plan and the governor ignored her duties. Of course, the media ignored the military effort and local leaders' incompetence. Didn't fit the narrative of Sean Penn needing to get a boat because evil ol' Bush was letting people drown.; 3/9/09, 1:50 PM
JohnAnnArbor said...: As for Guard duty, I can think of a lot safer duty than flying an underpowered interceptor that was known to kill its pilots regularly (the F-102). Like being a behind-the-lines reporter or something.; 3/9/09, 1:52 PM
Kirk Parker said...: "Alaska gets a whole lot of federal money... "

How much of that is outside of military spending?

Bruce Hayden,

"But it fails miserably when one is trying to run the U.S. government..."

Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU, for writing what you did instead of the ridiculous phrase we see to often: "run the country".; 3/9/09, 1:54 PM
JohnAnnArbor said...: I assume Matt Eckert is a Moby, so that some wiseass blog can say "look at the racist comments over at Althouse! And no one condemned them!" More like, no one believes it's anything but badly-done trolling.; 3/9/09, 1:55 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, Geeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, give the One a break.

He has only been in office 40 something days. Give the poooooor guy a break!!!!!!!!!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Less than two months- the market keeps going down with no confidence in the Administration, banks still refuse extend credit and the newer terms are onerous, and the international community thinks we are a bunch of cheap, juvenile clowns. Never have so many things gone so wrong so fast with no upside in sight.

The children are in charge of this cartoon administration. When the luddite green policies come on line we will be living in bedrock with the Flintstones.

Hell Barney and Fred could do a better job than this cast of toons.; 3/9/09, 1:57 PM
JohnAnnArbor said...: Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU, for writing what you did instead of the ridiculous phrase we see to often: "run the country".

Seconded.; 3/9/09, 1:58 PM
Zachary Sire said...: You all say "God help us" now, but how many of you were saying it 2 years or 5 years ago? Clowns.

Just think, it's only been two months...how many "God help us" chants will it take to save you two years from now? Hahahahaha; 3/9/09, 2:00 PM
ricpic said...: We must manage the people, manage the herd,
We must show them the truth and the way,
We must feed them a giant sandwich of turd,
They must taste the progressive and gay.; 3/9/09, 2:06 PM
Paul said...: OTOH this commenter

http://www.blogger.com/profile/08237879055691019968

from another blog thinks Obama has a plan.

"we need 4 more months of pain so the great messiah can ram his agenda down our throats...

then the switch will be pulled, mark to market will be turned off...

3000 up in the dow in 4 weeks...

90% of all home loans are current and then poof! they will be counted at full value, thus sending the balance sheets on USA banks (and those that own those derivatives overseas) zooming...

this is a ploy to change the direction of the American policy...

thanks Mr Obama!

All hail the great father..."; 3/9/09, 2:07 PM
Matt Eckert said...: Nobody likes it when you speak the truth to power.; 3/9/09, 2:15 PM
reader_iam said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 3/9/09, 2:16 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Zach:

If the stories are true about Obama being tired after less than two months?

And remember Obama himself complained in public that his staff was exhausted after less than 3 weeks on the job.

Then why is it so unfair or wrong for a rational person like Althouse to wonder "WTF God Help Us"?; 3/9/09, 2:25 PM
garage mahal said...: reader
Jindal has said he would reject approx 1% of the stimulusslated for LA, so I think it's fair to say he is at least "okay" with the remaining 99%. His political objections notwithstanding.; 3/9/09, 2:26 PM
JAL said...: And the fact Alaska is #1 per capita in pork is not her fault!

Did I miss the fact that Palin is a US Senator or Rep some place?

Was I talking pork or state budgets? (Something His Highness never bothered with -- as with guilty grant money the pool is deep and the spring always flowing. Post this "stimulus" it's a gusher.)

And Palin was TRASHED by the Dems when she cut back (not cut OUT, as they lied through implication)on items last year.

Selective memory.

I'm not syaing McCain-Palin was the best team ever, I'm saying they would have done a better job in comparison.; 3/9/09, 2:29 PM
AllenS said...: Dow 6,531.12 -95.82 -1.45%

40 minutes left. Can we avoid triple digits?; 3/9/09, 2:32 PM
Dark Eden said...: sohereiam said...

But Ann! This is what we like about the Obama administration. Some measure of doubt, humility and reflection.

Wait wait wait wait...

Obama... humility?

Really?

Seriously?

The One... the lightworker... the Won... Captain nose in the air, the one who will cause the oceans to recede... Humble???; 3/9/09, 2:44 PM
Anonymous said...: Given Matt E.'s immediate sexualized response to Pooh's commnents, I'm assuming Matt E. is either Michael, Alpha, or some other liberal man with masculinity issues.; 3/9/09, 2:46 PM
JAL said...: In all this talk about Alaska it occurred to me that if Alaska were a country (and not run by DC) I wonder if it wouldn't be a very solid country economically.

They would be free to develop their resources as they saw fit. They could arrange for the US to have bases (they'd get paid money for that, right?) They would still have some benefits of being allies. Palin would recognize the Marine One helicopter toy as both cost cutting and a great toy for Trig.

And Palin would know what to do with an Inuit language reset button, as she will already have pushed it.

Other countries would benefit, and so would their citizens.

Now there's a thought.

Ooops ... the Alaska separatists have already thought of it ...; 3/9/09, 2:49 PM
DaLawGiver said...: Just think, it's only been two months...

it's only been one month

it's only been two months

it's only been three months

it's only been four months

I see a pattern here. Not too long from now Zach's mantra will be

it's only been a year

it's only been two years

etc. etc. etc.; 3/9/09, 2:50 PM
Henry said...: In parallel:

It's only been 1 trillion.

It's only been 2 trillion.

It's only been 3 trillion.

...; 3/9/09, 2:53 PM
Zachary Sire said...: Times are scary, but they were just as scary for liberals who had to endure 8 years of Bush. You all made fun of them for being paranoid crazies, so it's hilarious to see you all doing the exact same thing.

While I have a job, I'm not immune to what's going on out there. I was unemployed for almost 5 months.

Althouse loves stroking you guys though, feeding you red meat by fretting over the Obama administration prematurely. And you all eat it up hook, line and sinker.; 3/9/09, 2:54 PM
Alex said...: Zachary - I have to admit. Althouse knows how to feed the ravenous beast!; 3/9/09, 2:58 PM
Paul said...: "Althouse loves stroking you guys though, feeding you red meat by fretting over the Obama administration prematurely. And you all eat it up hook, line and sinker."

Yes but the really neat trick is how she's pulling the same stunt with Wall Street.; 3/9/09, 3:01 PM
KCFleming said...: Yeah, amazing how Althouse can find all the screw-ups by Team O. It's like finding a needle in a stack of needles!; 3/9/09, 3:08 PM
garage mahal said...: Pogo
Specifically, what do you think Obama's biggest screwups are, so far...?; 3/9/09, 3:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Hope and Change... Now I get it.

He meant that once elected we would all "Hope" that we have any "Change" left in our bank accounts when he's done with us.; 3/9/09, 3:22 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: We may as well start the Obama coundown now. How many days until January 20, 2013?; 3/9/09, 3:26 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: The family connections for GWB getting into the TANG as a pilot has been repeatedly debunked, but still keeps coming back to haunt us. (The URL I had by another TANG pilot is no longer valid).

At the time that Bush joined, there were open flying slots in the TANG, but likely not enlisted slots.

Why?

Some have pointed out that the plane they were flying was dangerous. But as importantly, the obligation was significantly more for pilot slots than for the enlisted slots, and even than for being drafted. Indeed, it was more comparable to a regular air force flying slot. The reason for this was that it cost a lot of money to train a pilot, and so the Air Force/TANG wanted to get their money's worth out of those whom they trained to fly.; 3/9/09, 3:35 PM
KCFleming said...: Biggest screw-up is a massive one.
Economics.
Expanding entitlements in a Depression.

What a maroon.; 3/9/09, 3:44 PM
Henry said...: Specifically, what do you think Obama's biggest screwups are, so far...?

I got that one.

1. Signing off on a Congressional stimulus package without reading it -- simultaneously breaking campaign and inauguration speech promises to only support spending programs that worked.

1a. Insisting on a rushed-schedule for said stimulus package, which guaranteed the irresponsible outcome.

1b. Proposing a bloated and sadly typical long-rage budget filled with economic tax discentives (I'm not all that shocked or appalled by the latter, but couldn't it have waited?)

2. Screwing up the sub-cabinet appointment process so that major players in the administration (Geithner, Clinton) are operating blind. (Admittedly, Bush took a long time to fill sub-cabinet posts, but he was working with a hostile Congress).

3. Screwing up the cabinet appointment process by vetting for the wrong things -- simultaneously making a mockery of his own stated standards about not appointing ex-lobbyists.

4. Engaging in amateurish foreign policy theatrics while bungling something as simple as a state visit at home.

Nothing too serious, here, except for the impulse buy of a trillion dollars of horseshit.; 3/9/09, 3:46 PM
Chip Ahoy said...: This morning I was called to the door by two neo Nazis, check that, two concerned citizens acting on some unstated authoritah, asking if I had storage. I answered, "Yes." They asked if I was storing a CO₂ tank. I answered, "Yes." They go, "You have to get rid of it." I answered, "It's empty." It's also barely used but that's irrelevant. They go, "You have to get rid of it anyway."

Bitches.

I feel so welcome in this renown land of freedom, where I'm told I can not even store an empty CO₂ tank an area where I'm paying extra to store such things. It's for the aquarium but I'm using a simpler method presently so I'm storing the tank. This makes me want to fill it and start using it again, and then stick out my tongue in the direction where I imagine them to be.

Then they told me what not to eat and what kind of toilet paper to use and how much of it is acceptable. Surreal, Man. * pushes hair away from face *

I might have made up that last part.; 3/9/09, 3:53 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: Nothing too serious, here, except for the impulse buy of a trillion dollars of horseshit.

Which will fertilize a lot of organic farms and make the greenies with the beanies very very happy.; 3/9/09, 3:55 PM
jeff said...: I am betting it's Michael. Can't be that many people out on the far left side of the IQ bell curve.

"You all say "God help us" now, but how many of you were saying it 2 years or 5 years ago? Clowns.

Just think, it's only been two months...how many "God help us" chants will it take to save you two years from now? Hahahahaha"

I know, funny as hell. With all the people loosing jobs and retirement money......doesn't get any funnier than that. As I remember, a lot of the things your side was fearful of the Bush administration for are being continued by the Obama administration. Still worried?

I feverishly hope that you and Titus are correct and that this plunge off the cliff is just funny as hell and the country will recover and we will all sit around and laugh and laugh and laugh about how it appeared the country was melting down. It just doesn't look likely right now.; 3/9/09, 3:57 PM
Revenant said...: Specifically, what do you think Obama's biggest screwups are, so far...?

I'm hard-pressed to think of a non-screwup. Do you have any suggestions?; 3/9/09, 4:27 PM
Bart DePalma said...: garage mahal said...

But can you just imagine McCain and Palin steering this thing. Whoa Nellie.

The experienced McCain would not have been "overwhelmed" by the workload of a President as has our green President Obama.

McCain would have had an economic team in place and would have already taken over the banks to start sorting out the bad debt rather than dithering like Geitner and Obama.

McCain would have kept spending basically in check without a Porkulus bill and would have threatened a veto of the earmark choked omnibus bill. The possible exception would be more spending on bailing out mortgage holders, which would have earned him the same bric brats that have been thrown at Obama for this awful idea of soaking the responsible to pay the irresponsible.

If Palin had any serious input, McCain would be offering a series of tax cuts to get the economy moving. McCain was already suggesting cutting our high corporate income tax rates and Palin and the GOP in Congress would be pushing for income tax rate reductions.

With movement toward solving the bank crisis and the familiar and proven stimulus of tax cuts, the stock markets would be moving sideways instead of taking the nose dive they have been on since the Porkulus was enacted and Obama announced his intended tax and spend spree. Your 401Ks would be 301Ks rather then the 201Ks heading down to 101Ks you are left with now.; 3/9/09, 4:35 PM
Synova said...: Ooops ... the Alaska separatists have already thought of it ...

Alaska became a state on January 3, 1959. When a person doesn't even have to be OLD to remember when Alaska wasn't a State, the idea that some people might think that it wasn't so great a decision isn't all that shocking.; 3/9/09, 4:41 PM
JAL said...: ZPS Times are scary, but they were just as scary for liberals who had to endure 8 years of Bush.

"JUST AS SCARY?" Like how -- being on yellow alert because we actually had some maniacal terrorists kill 3000+ men, women, and children while attempting to destroy the financial and political centers of the USA and much of the world? Because there were some guys picked up coming into the US to blow up parties, or arrange for dirty bomb releases?

Because everyone had their telephones tapped and couldn't check out dirty books from the library without someone in the Town Hall going "Whooeee! Take a lookee here!" Or maybe it was someone at the state level checking on child support payments and tax records and leaking them to the press?

You all made fun of them for being paranoid crazies, so it's hilarious to see you all doing the exact same thing.

So who was paranoid?

While I have a job, I'm not immune to what's going on out there. I was unemployed for almost 5 months.

Sorry you were jobless. But -- the unemployment during Bush's time was -- until we got the Dem congress in -- what -- running at 5% and sometimes less?

Since Obama does NOT understand business in America (and based on his attachments to F.M. Davis and his communist father -- dreams and all -- perhaps despises it deeply) real jobs (not stuffing- the-ballot-box government ones which supplant real jobs) are not going to be coming back unless Obama gets an epiphany and say Oh Crap. And helps businesses out instead of hamstringing them.

Bush's 8 years were not perfect, not saying they were, but being "paranoid for the 8 Bush years" makes me wonder what you were smoking.

Sunstance, please, not fantasy.; 3/9/09, 4:43 PM
JAL said...: That's "substance" please.; 3/9/09, 4:44 PM
JAL said...: I don't get Synova's point.; 3/9/09, 4:47 PM
garage mahal said...: I'm hard-pressed to think of a non-screwup. Do you have any suggestions?

In less than two months he signed an executive order lifting the ban on fed dollars for stem cell research. To people like me, that alone was enough to vote for him. Just that. And the reaction by fundies of course.

With movement toward solving the bank crisis and the familiar and proven stimulus of tax cuts, the stock markets would be moving sideways instead of taking the nose dive they have been on since the Porkulus was enacted and Obama announced his intended tax and spend spree.

Right. Those tax cuts for have been proven so well, haven't they. Out of curiosity, what do you think the bigger "bang for the buck" for infusing money into the economy is? Tax cuts or food stamps?; 3/9/09, 4:48 PM
JAL said...: I'm tired and overwhelmed by the time change.

Not to mention figuring out what to do with our IRA to stop the hemmrrhaging.; 3/9/09, 4:49 PM
Beth said...: Actually, in both cases, the (Democratic) governors sabotaged the work. In both cases, they delayed giving the federal government the authority they needed to go it.

No, what Blanco did was refuse to federalize the National Guard, not refuse authority for the Guard to respond. Haley Barbour, GOP governor of Mississippi wasn't even approached by the Bush administration about federalizing the Guard. Bush chose only to pressure the Democratic governor on that point.; 3/9/09, 4:50 PM
jeff said...: "In less than two months he signed an executive order lifting the ban on fed dollars for stem cell research. To people like me, that alone was enough to vote for him. Just that. And the reaction by fundies of course."

Why? What do you think this accomplished? What is so important you would base your vote on it?

"Out of curiosity, what do you think the bigger "bang for the buck" for infusing money into the economy is? Tax cuts or food stamps?"

Tax cuts of course. How many jobs do you suppose are created by food stamps? How much capitol is raised by food stamps. Or were you being satirical?
Not to mention, of course, that tax cuts are nothing more than NOT taking someone else's money that they have earned.; 3/9/09, 4:54 PM
jeff said...: "Haley Barbour, GOP governor of Mississippi wasn't even approached by the Bush administration about federalizing the Guard. Bush chose only to pressure the Democratic governor on that point."

Possibly due to Mississippi not being so unprepared for disaster. I must have missed the pictures of the Mississippi school buses sitting in water while citizens were stuck in their shelters. What Katrina did, or the media reporting of it did is Federalize every local disaster. No longer will the local authorities be considered responsible for the initial response. Do nothing, let the Feds take care of everything.; 3/9/09, 4:59 PM
Bart DePalma said...: garage mahal said...

Right. Those tax cuts for have been proven so well, haven't they.

Every single time. See JFK/Johnson 64, Reagan 81 and Bush 03.

Out of curiosity, what do you think the bigger "bang for the buck" for infusing money into the economy is? Tax cuts or food stamps?

Taking money from Peter to pay Paul depresses the economy by punishing the productive to subsidize the unproductive. You can justify reasonable charity in the form of welfare and food stamps on moral grounds, but not on economic ones.

In stark contrast, reducing marginal income tax rates creates two forms of stimulus - (1) the citizenry spends the money more efficiently than the government providing themselves the goods and services they need and (2) lowering marginal tax rates in a progressively more punitive income tax code lowers the penalties against and thus encourages economic activity.; 3/9/09, 4:59 PM
Joan said...: In less than two months he signed an executive order lifting the ban on fed dollars for stem cell research. To people like me, that alone was enough to vote for him. Just that. And the reaction by fundies of course.

Great, GM -- you're so happy that now my tax dollars can pay for research that destroys innocent human life? That alone is reason enough to vote for Obama? That's sick.

I suppose you'll be totally on board with federally-funded abortions and forcing all hospitals, even the Catholic ones, to perform them? So much for that first amendment right of freedom of religion. (Can't wait to see how the administration responds when Catholic hospitals close their doors rather than perform abortions. It's non-negotiable.)

You are, of course, free to disagree that embrionic stem cell research destroys innocent human life, but gleefully proclaiming that Obama's executive order today makes everything else "worth it" is just moronic. You do realize that tremendous advances have been made in stem cell research without having to destroy embryos, and that using embryonic stem cells invariably harms more than it fixes?

You want research on embryonic stem cells, start writing checks. I'm not at all happy about having to pay for it, just as I'm not at all happy about having to pay for abortions anywhere -- abroad or at home. Catholics and any other pro-lifers who voted for Obama should hang their heads in shame.; 3/9/09, 5:02 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: So I guess Crhistopher Reeves will be back walking any day now.

Or maybe I am confused- it was John Edwards who promised when John Kerry became president, Reeves would walk again.; 3/9/09, 5:03 PM
KCFleming said...: "the ban on fed dollars for stem cell research."

Now we can finally dissect old aborted fetuses that we used to just waste, and fix our genes. Thanks, you old clump of cells! Into the grinder and the the centrifuge; have a good ride!

Say, why can't we use folks what're still alive, like say prisoners and the elderly and the poor? Jobs!; 3/9/09, 5:04 PM
KCFleming said...: So the one thing Obama got right was one thing that didn't need doing all that much. Hoo-rah.; 3/9/09, 5:05 PM
garage mahal said...: According to Moody's

Return in dollar spent--

Food stamps $1.73
Expanding unemployment benefits $1.64
Tax cuts $0.29-0.48; 3/9/09, 5:05 PM
garage mahal said...: So I guess Crhistopher Reeves will be back walking any day now.

Ah, the ole Christopher Reeves Will be Walking Again Zombie Talking Point!; 3/9/09, 5:07 PM
Synova said...: I don't get Synova's point.

About Alaskan separatists?

It was just a general statement responding to "what if Alaska was it's own country" and the fact that there is an Alaska Independence party of some sort up there which seemed to offend sorts since Sarah was apparently civil to them as Governor and Todd (maybe) a member at some time in the past (as well as being a member of the Steel Workers Union his entire adult life.)

I just don't think it's that shocking or radical a notion that people for whom statehood actually is something that happened in their own life-times might want to revisit the decision... particularly with so many in the lower 48 who feel entirely comfortable telling them how to manage their wildlife and forbidding them developing their own resources as they see fit.; 3/9/09, 5:11 PM
AllenS said...: Why not just pretend that you're aborting a fetus, but secretly keep the thing alive so you could harvest some organs and stem cells. Then find cures for heart disease, hair loss, and other important stuff. Really put our tax dollars to work, instead of proping up 401k's and mutual funds. Since winter is now ending, do people really need a house now?; 3/9/09, 5:12 PM
JAL said...: In less than two months he signed an executive order lifting the ban on fed dollars for stem cell research.

Bullshit.

http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2004pres/20040714b.html

(Quick, before Team Obama rewrites history.)

There were federal funds for stem cell research. The ban was using federal funds for killing new embryos. Nothing stopped private funders from funding stem cell research on new embryos. Money was available.

Also the progressive president signed (on a Friday, as usual)an order to provided money for overseas abortions -- while we are in the biggest financial crunch since, according to him, the Great Depression, he is sending money overseas to pay for abortions. Nice touch. That will endear us to many.

Also on a Friday the progressive president signed an order that removes the right of conscience, and free speech from health professionals to decline to provide assistance to women seeking to abort their babies.

"Choice" works only in ONE direction in the progressive universe of Barack Obama.

Now you all "progressives" out there are rejoicing. Funny how death is the reason.

No child left behind.; 3/9/09, 5:12 PM
Synova said...: Say, why can't we use folks what're still alive, like say prisoners and the elderly and the poor? Jobs!

I need to go get my glasses to fix the "gay prisoners... wha???" problem.; 3/9/09, 5:13 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: AllenS:

It's up to 58 degrees here so I'd have to answer no! LOL.; 3/9/09, 5:14 PM
JAL said...: OK Synova. Got it.

I took it negatively.; 3/9/09, 5:15 PM
JAL said...: That link ends with .html; 3/9/09, 5:16 PM
Darcy said...: Ohh...I didn't know all of that, JAL. Thank you for posting that.
And Amen to your comments (and those of Joan's and Pogos, etc.)

By the way, JAL, I disagreed with a comment of yours and was unkind to you here a while ago, and I do want to apologize for it. I've regretted it.; 3/9/09, 5:18 PM
KCFleming said...: garage, if food stamps or any other stimulus has a real multiplier greater than one, then the US gummint should print a trillion trillion food stamps and we'd all be freakin' swimming in gravy.

Economic bullshittery, that one. Food stamps have a multiplier, minimally, locally, and only briefly, and then it becomes a negative due to its incentives.; 3/9/09, 5:19 PM
Synova said...: People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome.; 3/9/09, 5:20 PM
Revenant said...: In less than two months he signed an executive order lifting the ban on fed dollars for stem cell research.

In other words, he further increased the multi-trillion-dollar budget deficit in order to spend federal dollars on something that doesn't require federal funding. But at least it annoys Christians.

And that's your top example of a non-screwup? Says it all, really.; 3/9/09, 5:42 PM
KCFleming said...: But at least it annoys Christians.

That can be done for free most places.; 3/9/09, 5:46 PM
Revenant said...: Out of curiosity, what do you think the bigger "bang for the buck" for infusing money into the economy is? Tax cuts or food stamps?

Tax cuts, obviously, since tax cuts leave the money in the economy; food stamps take money out of the economy, waste some of it on government overhead, then put it back into one specific sector of the economy (food purchases) without regard for whether that's the best economic use of the money.

Of course, food stamps have other advantages (helping the poor buy food) and disadvantages (driving up prices for everything else). But in terms of pure stimulus effect, tax cuts are better.; 3/9/09, 5:49 PM
Bart DePalma said...: garage mahal said...

According to Moody's
Return in dollar spent--
Food stamps $1.73
Expanding unemployment benefits $1.64
Tax cuts $0.29-0.48

Moody's uses fairly traditional Keynsian multiplier assumptions, but as with all Keynsian multiplier assumptions does not offer any historical data to back up the assumptions.

In contrast, Obama's lead economist Christina Romer analyzed the actual historical data in her essay "What Ends Recessions?" and other works to find that for every dollar returned to tax payers through tax cuts, GDP increased by three dollars. In contrast, fiscal stimulus in the form of increased government spending (robbing Peter to pay Paul) had no measurable effect on GDP.; 3/9/09, 6:04 PM
Matt Eckert said...: Instead of food stamps, why don't you feed poor people stem cells and embryos. Like an omlet.

We can save some money and still help those poor unfortunates who do not want to work for a living.; 3/9/09, 6:05 PM
Patm said...: God help us.; 3/9/09, 6:18 PM
AllenS said...: God, Matt, your mind is even more twisted than mine.; 3/9/09, 6:36 PM
sohereiam said...: Just to note, food stamps are one of the fastest ways to inject money into the economy. Tax cuts take much longer. Food stamps must be spent right away, whereas money returned to the consumer via tax cuts can be saved or sheltered off-shore.; 3/9/09, 6:46 PM
JohnAnnArbor said...: whereas money returned to the consumer via tax cuts can be saved

"returned"? It's their money, not the government's. Damn those taxpayers, trying to save money!; 3/9/09, 7:11 PM
Revenant said...: Just to note, food stamps are one of the fastest ways to inject money into the economy.

You can't get money to a person any faster than by leaving it in his wallet to begin with.

Tax cuts take much longer. Food stamps must be spent right away, whereas money returned to the consumer via tax cuts can be saved or sheltered off-shore.

We save our money by either investing it, or depositing it in banks which then invest it. Either form of savings directly stimulates the economy in a more efficient manner than the government is capable of doing.

Many decades ago it could plausibly be argued that savings were taken out of the economy, because most Americans saved money personally (e.g. hiding it under the mattress) rather than by depositing it. But that hasn't been the case since before anyone here was born -- these days, our savings get reinvested in the economy, as do savings "sheltered off-shore".; 3/9/09, 7:18 PM
Penny said...: I am sadly going to jump in before reading everything up above...ONLY because I want to get into this discussion before I need to go to bed.

Just to get it out of my mind...Axelrod is in your basement and STILL pretending to be your kid who is good with this tech stuff.

..burp..; 3/9/09, 7:28 PM
former law student said...: Of the revisionist Vietnam Era history being bandied about, the one thing that seems semi-plausible is that the Air Guard was the only outfit that would let a liberal arts major with a C-average learn how to fly fighter jets.

Because I don't believe that flying a fighter jet over the bikini beaches of South Padre Island was actually more dangerous than flying in combat in Vietnam. Because, you know, Ho Chi Minh didn't have any MiGs flying along the Gulf Coast.

What I do know is that once the war heated up, people who had used up their college deferment, who still did not want to come home from Vietnam in a body bag, tried to enter the Guard and Reserves. These people were fairly evenly distributed across the United States. To get into the Guard in Indiana, for example, it took the clout of little Danny Quayle's mom's dad, who published newspapers such as the Arizona Republic, and the Indianapolis Star, whose endorsements could make or break politicians.

People who had been in the Guard forever and a day did not have to worry about getting in.; 3/9/09, 7:47 PM
former law student said...: We save our money by either investing it, or depositing it in banks which then invest it.

Haven't you heard? We are selling all of our stocks, at fire sale prices, and putting the money in our mattresses. Disinvestment is the order of the day.; 3/9/09, 7:50 PM
Penny said...: Now that I got that rod out my ass, I can talk to you about his new best friend...Favreau.

Nice credentials for a young adult just starting out. I even forgive him for getting drunk and tweaking Hillary's cardboard tits.

The thing that blows my mind even more than good acid back in the day is that this kid is writing all of Obama's speeches that got him into our homes in the first place!

I am not ageist. I am simply APPALLED that our current president has found a boy/man who he allows to speak for him when it matters most.

The kid isn't married. He has no kids. Does he own a home? How about stocks in a 401k?

Yet he and Obama are channeling each other to the American public WITH GREAT SUCCESS! One with experience as a community organizer, and running a campaign, and the other as a wordsmith, and participating in a campaign.

Does anyone doubt that we have equal opportunity?; 3/9/09, 7:51 PM
Revenant said...: Of the revisionist Vietnam Era history being bandied about, the one thing that seems semi-plausible is that the Air Guard was the only outfit that would let a liberal arts major with a C-average learn how to fly fighter jets.

No branch of the military uses college grades to determine who is allowed to operate military vehicles. Strange as it may seem, the ability to discuss the role of revolutionary sentiment in late 19th century German literature is not actually de rigeur for a fighter pilot.; 3/9/09, 8:13 PM
JohnAnnArbor said...: Because I don't believe that flying a fighter jet over the bikini beaches of South Padre Island was actually more dangerous than flying in combat in Vietnam.

Feel free to point out where anyone said that.

Though there is a Senator who used to claim he flew combat in Vietnam, but actually just test-flew planes after repairs out of the Philippines.

Guess which party.; 3/9/09, 8:19 PM
Chennaul said...: Sounds like Harkin.; 3/9/09, 8:25 PM
Paul said...: "Because I don't believe that flying a fighter jet over the bikini beaches of South Padre Island was actually more dangerous than flying in combat in Vietnam. Because, you know, Ho Chi Minh didn't have any MiGs flying along the Gulf Coast."

The rate of death just flying those dangerous F102s in training maneuvers was about the same as the rate of death for ground forces in theater in Nam.

The point is that cowards need not apply. Nor idiots. The written tests alone were extremely difficult, let alone flying the damn things.

Of course that doesn't fit the narrative of the true cowards and idiots like yourself who need to feed and support their BDS.; 3/9/09, 8:31 PM
Titussayhellohowareyougreat! said...: I just pinched a loaf that had many layers and levels to it. It was a constant "rolling out" of the loaves. It felt really really good too.

How are you?

I was angry before but now I am not. But I could get angry quickly.; 3/9/09, 8:33 PM
Titussayhellohowareyougreat! said...: How was everyone elses loaves today? I would love to hear about them.; 3/9/09, 8:34 PM
JohnAnnArbor said...: Yeah, the F-102 made up for being underpowered by being hard to maneuver. It was supposed to be a stopgap until the much faster, far more capable F-106 came on line. Well, the F-102s stuck around a bit longer than that, and Guard units got to fly them. But--and this surprises people--Guard units were "standing alert" just like regular forces for interception duty. They just weren't on-duty for as long a stint as regular USAF would be.

I've heard Democrats mock the Texas duty: who would attack Texas? Well, you know, in a war, it was then (and still is now) a very large domestic supply of oil, with their associated refineries. A tempting target for the Soviets, especially as part of a surprise attack.

Of course, some Dems (not all, but some) pretend the Soviets were no threat at all.; 3/9/09, 8:45 PM
Host with the Most said...: And exactly where is Joe Biden while this is going on?

Who is in charge of watching Joe?; 3/9/09, 8:52 PM
The Dude said...: How could the soviets be a threat? They are on the same side as democrtats.; 3/9/09, 9:01 PM
Shanna said...: Tax cuts take much longer.

Speaking of taxes, I just looked at my taxes and my brothers. I paid lets say 4k and am getting under a grand back. He paid a grand and is getting over 4k back. What a country!; 3/9/09, 9:12 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Come on Host! Joe Biden, Super Genyous, is leading another critically important summit for the Obama administration.

It is called The Middle Class Summit but unfortunately Slow Joe failed to include any folks from the middle class.

I am shocked NOT.; 3/9/09, 9:14 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: "...but they were just as scary for liberals who had to endure 8 years of Bush."

Ah yes, more paranoid conspiracy fantasy fom another tin foil hat wearer. Let me guess, your phone and internet were tapped, you were followed by black helicopters emblazoned with VWRC on the side, swat teams burst into your home and ripped it apart during a warrantless search looking for evidence of liberalist documentation.

you want to talk about scary? how about the picture of that machine gun toting swat member holding a terrified Eliot Gonzales as he ripped him from his families arms. That was scary.

That great Liberal, Bill Clinton ordedred that terrorist raid on an innocent family. Take a kid at gun point and return him to Clinton's idol, Fidel, in Cuba. Yeah, tell me about scary. Tell me again how liberals care so deeply about human rights.

Oh and the great icon and God of liberalism, FDR, ran concentration camps holding American citizens prisoners. Yeah liberalism is so comforting.; 3/9/09, 9:21 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Poor FLS! His confidence in an old liberal myth has been unneerved. Now when the subject comes up at one of his libtard cocktail parties, he will still nod his head in agreement but deep inside he will have real doubts.; 3/9/09, 9:30 PM
Penny said...: Give Obama time, Shannon. I am sure he will run right soon enough. I expect he will pass legislation that will equalize our taxes. It will be called ETOC. (Equal Taxation Opportunity Commission).

He aims to give young and middle aged white guys a shot at the government's brass ring.

No telling where this carousel might stop.; 3/9/09, 9:39 PM
JohnAnnArbor said...: you were followed by black helicopters emblazoned with VWRC on the side

I've always liked the word "emblazoned."; 3/9/09, 9:42 PM
sohereiam said...: Hmmmm. Let's a take a look at the result of Favreau's speeches.

They kinda. . . worked. . . didn't they? They kinda. . . helped a black guy get elected. . . didn't they?; 3/9/09, 9:43 PM
sohereiam said...: Also, the point of tax cuts is that unless we're talking about a sales tax cut or a payroll tax cut (we're not), you won't see the results of that kind of tax cut until next time we all file. Food stamp money can be deployed into the economy right away, in at least two ways I can think of. First of all, the money can almost instantaneously go out via the electronic food stamp cards -- nobody is waiting around for stimulus check. Secondly, families who are able to pay for food using food stamps are able to use their cash to buy things, like a new washer, or a new car, driving sales in the economy -- these are families that are not likely able to save their money, but must make economy-driving purchases.; 3/9/09, 9:46 PM
sohereiam said...: Or I should say, "my point about tax cuts"; 3/9/09, 9:49 PM
dick said...: I guess sohereiam is missing a wee bit about tax cuts. The tax cuts are noticed immediately by smaller amounts being withheld from your pay so you have the tax cut money in your hand immediately. You don't have to wait until you file to get it. That is even faster than food stamps and you don't have to wait for the govt to process them (with their fees for doing so).

Actually if the Dems took a good look at where the money is being spent and analyzing if it is being spent properly and economically then the amount the govt needs to function could be cut big time and we would not even need to get rid of the tax cuts we already have at all. Then there would be fewer people on the dole and the govt revenues would be much higher. That is what usually happens with tax cuts. See JFK as an example.; 3/9/09, 9:57 PM
sohereiam said...: Dick, we're not talking about putting small amounts month by month into the economy -- we're talking about trying to make an immediate difference with an infusion of cash that will be spent.

You, along with seemingly the entire conservative movement, are missing the point about what it is to stimulate the economy.; 3/9/09, 10:00 PM
sohereiam said...: Besides. Obama has already passed a middle class tax cut, lowering our already extraordinarily low tax burden. We just aren't gonna cut taxes anymore, especially not by a meaningful enough margin to jump start the economy within the year.

Conservatives who want tax cuts are hewing to an ideology, when such ideological maneuvers, while appropriate to certain scenarios, aren't practical for this one.

It would be nice to get rid of everyone's taxes, and it would be nice if the FAA somehow managed to operate without any funding, and it would be nice if the elderly just prudently saved enough to pay for their own health insurance, despite the fact that none of them know how long they're going to live, and it would also be nice if they just saved enough money for their retirements, again, despite the fact that they don't know when they're going to die, and it would be nice if the economy weren't in a mess, a dire, dire mess that we can't wait for the markets to fix themselves. . .

All of that would be nice, really nice. But you know, it is America, and we're the can-do guys, right? And the conservative movement just has no convincing answers, no answers that don't sound like the shrillest of party orthodoxy hastily repackaged to look like some kind of recovery package.

I mean, my gosh. . . we've had eight years of tax cuts. Where are we now?; 3/9/09, 10:16 PM
Revenant said...: Also, the point of tax cuts is that unless we're talking about a sales tax cut or a payroll tax cut (we're not), you won't see the results of that kind of tax cut until next time we all file.

Bzzt! Wrong.

The only kind of "tax cuts" that need to wait for filing time are the so-called "tax cuts" where low-income workers get back more money than they ever paid in taxes. Those aren't tax cuts; they are delayed welfare payments, and yes they take up to a year to receive. But actual tax cuts can take place immediately, by reducing income tax withholding from workers' paychecks. If you cut my income tax rate in half I'd see hundreds of dollars added on to every paycheck I receive from here on out.; 3/9/09, 10:18 PM
Bart DePalma said...: sohereiam said...

We just aren't gonna cut taxes anymore, especially not by a meaningful enough margin to jump start the economy within the year.

Sure you can. For the price of the Porkulus, Obama could have granted a 4 month income tax holiday and coupled that with a permanent income tax decrease returning us to the 1987 rates.

The economy would be booming by 2010.; 3/9/09, 10:51 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 3/9/09, 11:17 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: It is called The Middle Class Summit but unfortunately Slow Joe failed to include any folks from the middle class.

I heard that it is a summit of one. No one told Joe what or who people are.; 3/9/09, 11:20 PM
JAL said...: we're talking about trying to make an immediate difference with an infusion of cash that will be spent

via food stamps??

Like what did I miss here?

Everyone's going to get food stamps? Automatically -- one of those little card thingeys in the mail?

The people who qualify for food stamps should already be getting food stamps. The rest of us do not *qualify*.

Or are you telling me the Obama plan is to issue everyone with income under $250,000 FOOD STAMPS?

Because otherwise who is going to go down to the food stamp place and sit in that room and fill out those forms and get interviewed by a government employee (of which there would need to be a LOT more... Oh! Is that where the 3.5 million jobs are going to be?) And having to document all their expenses and assets ... like equity in a house, and $1000 in the bank?

Or is this just more bribery on the part of the Obama administration?

Using other people's money to buy votes.

Sounds like a Chicago thing to me.

FOOD STAMPS?

You sure you're not talking Soviet ration books here? Have to have FOOD STAMPS to be able to buy groceries! It's patriotic! Gets the economy going! Yeah Amerika!

(And the people already on food stamps are going to say -- Hey! What about us? If THEY get food stamps what do we get??)

Full disclosure: Been there. Done that. Not interested in going there again, no matter how "middle class" Barack Obama tries to make it.

Crappy idea.; 3/9/09, 11:41 PM
Beth said...: Possibly due to Mississippi not being so unprepared for disaster. I must have missed the pictures of the Mississippi school buses sitting in water while citizens were stuck in their shelters

Yes, you did miss a lot. Mississipians suffered terribly from Katrina. Relief workers - from private and church groups - reported people coming out of the woods, some of them naked, 3-5 days after the storm passed, when the relief vehicles made it to them. They'd been in there since the storm.

There's been a lot going on in the recovery in Mississippi, too, that you probably haven't been paying attention to.

You're wrong about the lesson, as well. All levels of government failed in many respects during and after Katrina. And there's been action at all levels to improve that response. I'm sure there will be other failures, and I hope we'll learn from them, not cover them up.; 3/10/09, 12:01 AM
Beth said...: [annoying Christians] be done for free most places.

Pogo, many of life's simple pleasures are free. What a gift!; 3/10/09, 12:02 AM
reader_iam said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 3/10/09, 12:50 AM
Joan said...: [OT] Speaking of free gifts, Beth, any chance of you posting the recipe to go along with all those fantastic photos you posted recently? /OT

You know, if you try to annoy a Catholic during Lent, we'll just offer it up.; 3/10/09, 2:46 AM