Althouse: At the Disorientation Café...

September 16, 2010

At the Disorientation Café...

... get thy bearings.

31 comments:

Kev said...: I remember Freshman Disorientation from college. That's where you show up right before school starts, and they drop you from all the classes you just signed up for, right?; 9/16/10, 11:50 PM
Palladian said...: What's with "progressives" and their attachment to the iconography of communism/fascism (the raised fist?) and their love of negativity (disorientation?)? I'm surprised the sign isn't red, white and black.; 9/16/10, 11:51 PM
jungatheart said...: My bearings are shot.; 9/17/10, 12:13 AM
traditionalguy said...: Is this a flight school for young men that don't need lessons in how to land? If the world was just, this group would already have been deported to Cuba where the other comrades of Ben Manski are already dishing out social justice.; 9/17/10, 12:28 AM
HKatz said...: I experienced disorientation during my freshman year of college when I spotted a few representatives of a campus progressive group sitting at a table with a sign that said Save North Korea from Capitalist Oppression. I asked them what they meant exactly, and discovered that we were inhabiting parallel universes with different sets of facts.; 9/17/10, 12:56 AM
Peter Hoh said...: Picking up on Don't ever try to hug a polar bear, here's how to clean a polar bear's nose.; 9/17/10, 2:21 AM
Anonymous said...: Today, Justice Clarence Thomas is speaking at my law school alma mater, followed by a reception for alumni.

Assuming that I get a chance to meet the man, who I greatly admire, what on earth can an insignificant baby lawyer like myself say to a Supreme Court Justice in order to not sound like a blithering idiot?

- Lyssa; 9/17/10, 6:04 AM
Unknown said...: I artfully avoided disorientation by finding the out-of-the-way student hangouts.

Of course, that was 45 years ago when the Big Brother types hadn't taken over yet.; 9/17/10, 6:09 AM
traditionalguy said...: Lyssa...Tell Clarence that you are thrilled to meet a man that cares enough to pass on a sane world to younger generations. Tell him he succeeded.; 9/17/10, 6:27 AM
KCFleming said...: What are the progressives even meeting for?
They won, fer chrissakes.

We live in a proto-Marxist society now (it's the closest thing, much as absolute Marxism seems to result in deaths-by-the-millions).

Wake up, moron, the progressives are running the country. This is what progressivism looks like in action.

Ugly, ain't it? I'll bet you expected Sugar Mountain, with the barkers and the colored balloons.

Well, get used to progressivism, young lawyer activists. It is the State run by the Id. Not the fun you expected, but after the first few deaths, it gets easier.; 9/17/10, 6:54 AM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: .. much as absolute Marxism seems to result in deaths-by-the-millions).

Venezuela

deaths-by-the-thousands.. to quote a more recent example.; 9/17/10, 7:59 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: I'm a bit disoriented at the moment.

I just got served notice that I'm being sued over an auto accident that happened years ago, and for which I was not in any way at fault. And both the person suing me, and their laywer, must know that I was not in any way at fault.

If this goes to trial, and there is any justice, I will win, hands down. However, I've been on a lawsuit jury, and know that there are a significant number of jurors who are incapable of rational thought. They see that someone was injured, and feel that something should be done to help that person, and they have the power to help. They give no thought to the fact that in order to help that person, they are harming someone else who was not responsible for the injury. That is especially true if they believe the payment will come from an insurance company.

I have insurance, so they will defend me and, if I lose, will pay the bill, so this is not a significant monetary issue for me. It's more the principal.

And I'm not feeling too cheery about personal injury laywers at the moment. I'm not a big fan of a 'loser pays' type reform of lawsuits, because there are certainly times when someone with a valid claim loses, and it would discourage poor people who can't affort to risk losing from bringing valid claims.

But there has to be some way to discourage this sort of thing.; 9/17/10, 7:59 AM
KCFleming said...: "But there has to be some way to discourage this sort of thing."

Vote against "bearded Marxists".; 9/17/10, 8:03 AM
Sofa King said...: Ben Manski? He's still around?

By far the most obnoxious thing about the sign, beyond its color, its iconography, or its insipidity, is its inappropriate use of "impacted" as a figurative transitive verb. Strewth, that pisses me off. What the hell is wrong with saying "affected?"; 9/17/10, 8:11 AM
Clyde said...: "This photo is currently unavailable."

Wow, is that part of the whole disorientation process? If so, it's working!; 9/17/10, 8:11 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: Vote against "bearded Marxists".

Funny you should mention that. The lawyer who is suing me was a former Democratic state representative. ( but not bearded. ); 9/17/10, 8:15 AM
Peter Hoh said...: "But there has to be some way to discourage this sort of thing."

Agreed.

If you live in Delaware, Pogo wants you to vote for someone who filed a 6.95 million dollar lawsuit claiming gender bias.

Link to one of those librul media outlets that's always smearing true conservatives.; 9/17/10, 8:17 AM
MadisonMan said...: Ben Manski?

Isn't he a candidate for the State Assembly, against Brett Hulsey?

Talk about having to hold your nose while you pick the lesser of two evils for that vote.; 9/17/10, 8:20 AM
Fred4Pres said...: Jeff Goldstein/Protein Wisdom posted this insider Democratic knife job of Barack Obama. Glenn Reynolds was giving blood yesterday. Looks like the President is giving a little blood too:

Such as this.

And this.; 9/17/10, 9:26 AM
KCFleming said...: "If you live in Delaware, Pogo wants you to vote for someone who filed a 6.95 million dollar lawsuit claiming gender bias."

If you live in Delaware, Pogo thinks you face the awful choice between a Marxist who most assuredly will permanently destroy the country's finances and a pretty little lunatic who won't.; 9/17/10, 9:51 AM
Peter Hoh said...: Pogo, I would love it if there were a fiscally conservative party in this country.

Heck, I'd settle for a divided congress.

You want to blame Obama and the Congressional Democrats? Just ask yourself, who screwed up so badly that swing voters actually voted for these people in 2006 and 2008?; 9/17/10, 9:58 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: peter hoh said...

...I would love it if there were a fiscally conservative party in this country.
Many of us would love that. Some of us are taking active steps toward that goal.

Heck, I'd settle for a divided congress.

Yes, a divided congress would be better than what we have. But it must be divided by ideology, not just the letter next to the name.

...who screwed up so badly that swing voters actually voted for these people in 2006 and 2008?

The GOP. That's why many of us are voting against the establishment candidates in the primaries. The candidates we are voting for are not perfect, but they tend to be significantly better on what many of us consider to be the most important issue at the moment.; 9/17/10, 10:19 AM
KCFleming said...: Peter, Ignorance is Bliss has it exactly right.

If D=R, then the destruction continues.; 9/17/10, 10:27 AM
Peter Hoh said...: You do remember the call for fiscal responsibility in Newt's Contract with America, don't you?

How'd that work out?; 9/17/10, 11:02 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: peter hoh said...

How'd that work out?

Not nearly as well as it should have, but much better than the Democratic alternative would have.

But of course, that was still the GOP establishment, even if it had a new leader with new promises. And I'm sure that if the new Tea Party candidates are left in Washington for a decade or more, many of them will become the new establishment, and will try to use our tax dollars to buy our votes. At that point, they will need to be kicked out. And if the Republican primary voters don't have the sense to kick them out, then the Democrats will take over again.; 9/17/10, 11:38 AM
Peter Hoh said...: Like I said, I would dearly love to believe that Tea Party candidates can turn the GOP in to the party of fiscal responsibility.

I will not hold my breath waiting for them to explain to the American people that we need to cut entitlements and ag subsidies and military spending.

I expect that they will get to DC and go on about how Obama is a Socialist, which will get them enough cover so that they can maintain the status quo and all the perks that go with it.; 9/17/10, 11:47 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: I will not hold my breath waiting...

Nobody is asking you to hold your breath, and nobody is asking you to wait. Work now to get fiscally conservative people elected.; 9/17/10, 12:32 PM
Anonymous said...: I agree with Palladian, what's with this now 40-year-old "protest" art? Isn't institutional anarchy kind of an oxymoron?; 9/17/10, 2:21 PM
Peter Hoh said...: Work now to get fiscally conservative people elected.

If you hear of any, please let me know.

Here's why we're screwed.; 9/17/10, 2:38 PM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: If you hear of any, please let me know.

Do your own civics homework. There are a number of them in pretty much every state legislature. And there are better and worse options during the primaries for national office. The key is to not wait until November, then complain that there are no polished politicians who agree with you on issues A-Z who are also fiscal conservatives.

Here's why we're screwed.

We're screwed because people like you believe crap like that.

Here are a few ways in which it is crap:
1) It uses static budgeting. Now I'm not saying that the tax cuts pay for themselves, but there should be some offsetting for their stimulative effect.
2) Just because he won't agree to President Obama's medicare cuts does not mean he would object to all medicare cuts. In particular, he may be willing to raise the age at which medicare kicks in.
3) Just because he's unwilling to agree to Gates' plans to control future spending does not mean he would oppose all defense cuts.
4) Just because we assume the amendment doesn't kick in until 2020 does not mean that we have to run up the deficit as much as Obama plans to between now and then, so our interest payments could be less.
5) We could choose policies that would allow the economy to grow, thus increasing revenue without raising taxes.; 9/17/10, 3:39 PM
pst314 said...: "What are the progressives even meeting for? They won, fer chrissakes."

From the point of view of the National Lawyer's Guild, it's because their work isn't done: You and I have not yet been packed off to the gulag--or better, received our five grains of lead in the back of the skull.; 9/17/10, 9:10 PM