Gates wonders how more combative politicians, like Lyndon Johnson, would have responded to the slights Obama has received from Congress. (“He would have grabbed these people by the balls and said, ‘I am the president of the goddamned United States!’ ”)I remember when Richard Nixon had a thing of saying "I am the President." It didn't work too well.
But that isn’t Obama’s, or Gates’s own, style, he says: “What people forget is that the most radical thing about Obama is that he was the first black man in history to imagine that he could become president, who was able to make other Americans believe it as well. Other than that, he is a centrist, just like I try to be. He’s been bridging divisions his whole life.”I hear Al Sharpton screaming. And Jesse Jackson. I think they imagined that they could become President.
That's my photo, by the way, of my button, acquired, with serious intentions, in 1988. But Gates didn't mean "Obama is... the first black man in history to imagine that he could become president." It was a qualified statement. The next clause is inextricably linked: "who was able to make other Americans believe it as well." I think Jesse Jackson would still be steamed. And you know what Jackson says when he's steamed. Speaking of balls.
Looking for that old photograph got me to a post from January 2007, which linked to this old conversation in which I talk about the button and talk about how various black leaders reacted to Obama's initial announcement that he was running for President. And here's the January 14, 2007 post that the conversation is based on. It's got an Al Sharpton quote about Obama:
"Right now we’re hearing a lot of media razzle-dazzle. I’m not hearing a lot of meat, or a lot of content. I think when the meat hits the fire, we’ll find out if it’s just fat, or if there’s some real meat there."And I said:
In a political culture in which the media have long consulted [Sharpton and other black leaders] and preserved a place for them in the debate, now it seems that Obama will be given that place, and Obama is likely to say things that are far more mellow and conciliatory to the majority of Americans. They have to be asking -- and we should ask too -- whether that is why Americans like Obama so much. Looking at the problem from this angle, we should see that it's not simply a matter of personal jealousy, it is a real fear that their message is being effectively excised from the national debate.And it was excised, wasn't it? As I said in the conversation linked above, Obama was bland. That's what people liked at the time.
I say "Obama is bland," and Bob Wright blurts it out: "That's the reason you can imagine him becoming President."
Posts
101 comments:
Coupla problems with this narrative thing:
The Obama the compromiser thing is BS. He lost big in the 2010 elections. This effectively stopped him dead in the water. He didn't compromise. He was defeated.
Remember what the Great Compromiser said back in 2008, before the electorate turned against him: "I won." Then he pushed through his despised Obamacare.
LBJ resigned under pressure from all sides. Exactly how does this fit in the narrative?
It's really about whether the electorate agrees with your policies, not the narrative.
I got yer narrative:
"‘I am the president of the goddamned United States!’"
He won because he was a blank slate.
Had they known the real Obama - an empty suit with liberal Republican values - he would've lost in a landslide.
Like Bush I and Carter, we didn't get what was promised.
Bland or weaksauce, pick yer poison. I buy the line of reasoning, though, AA.
LBJ resigned under pressure from all sides. Exactly how does this fit in the narrative?
Excuse me:
LBJ decided not to run for re-election because he was under pressure from all sides. Exactly how does this fit in the narrative?
It was obvious as far back as 2008 that he was an empty suit.
Why is everyone butthurt now?
People always compare Obama to Carter, but the president he may be most like is Nixon. Thin-skinned and paranoid.
I think the first black president was Colin Powell....we didn't reject him, he rejected us.
Sounds like a know-nothing caricature of LBJ, who knew how to horse trade and get things done in Congress a thousand times better than Obama ever will.
"It was obvious as far back as 2008 that he was an empty suit."
My old post and conversation are from January '07.
And I think people that knew Obama from before that were saying "empty suit."
That's my photo, by the way, of my {Jackson] button, acquired, with serious intentions, in 1988
I think Jackson led the Dems in Minnesota back then. What is it with stupid Midwestern white people and their love for a black, racist flim-flam man? I just don't get it.
Professor: You acquired the Jackson button with "serious intentions?" What prevented you from knowing the history of this man prior to that election? You cannot have seriously believed that this race hustler should be in public life much less elected as the president?
The narrative - and the problem with it - is that GodZero never wanted to govern, he wanted to rule.
Still does.
PS You had to do your diavlogs in the stacks?
Or was Meade there with you???
"PS You had to do your diavlogs in the stacks?"
That's my law school office.
"Or was Meade there with you???"
I didn't meet Meade until 2 years later.
Gates wonders how more combative politicians, like Lyndon Johnson, would have responded to the slights Obama has received from Congress. (“He would have grabbed these people by the balls and said, ‘I am the president of the goddamned United States!’ ”)
And today he would have been openly and universally mocked as a disgusting pervert looking for a cheap thrill.
He's governed stupidly
I think Huckabee would've won in 2008. Unlike McCain, he would pounded away on Obama's radical associations (aka Rev "Goddamn America" Wright) and opposed TARP and the Bailouts. McCain wouldn't do that, cause he was too good - at least that's what his staff sad.
He was lot better debater and politician then Johnny McCain.
Who knows what kind of President he would've made. Couldn't have been any worse then Obama.
(“He would have grabbed these people by the balls and said, ‘I am the president of the goddamned United States!’ ”)
@Maguro: exactly.
One might love or loath LBJ, but he knew how to count votes, cajol, buy, threaten, hold'em or fold'em.
Unlike some...
How can Obama have a coherent "narrative," given his utter betrayal of his base and of all he pretended to be on the campaign trail?
Yelling Tommy is correct in that Obama is not a compromiser...he's a capitulator.
People talk about what a political wizard LBJ was. They forget he had massive Democrat majorities in '65 and he was pushing an agenda that was very popular in the country: Medicare, Civil Rights, Fed aid to education, etc.
Even the 'War on Poverty' was popular.
JFK had to deal with a much more conservative congress.
Obama 2012 narrative: eat the rich, death to juice, free stuff. The Occupier people are all his, bought-and-paid-for malevolent goons with a side of hopelessly ignorant (government education).
"I think Huckabee would've won in 2008. Unlike McCain, he would pounded away on Obama's radical associations (aka Rev "Goddamn America" Wright) and opposed TARP and the Bailouts."
I don't think Huckabee would have had much luck in opposing TARP and the bailouts, inasmuch as they were implemented by the Bush Administration.
How can Obama have a coherent "narrative," given his utter betrayal of his base and of all he pretended to be on the campaign trail?
You've got to remember, Kookie, that nobody outside the commie left wants what you want.
If Obama had openly advocated what you want, he never would have won a primary.
The vast majority of those who voted for him in 2008 thought Obama was a slightly left of center Democrat, or that electing a black man would redeem our Original Sin or that he was somewhat better than the awful McCain.
Nobody, except for you and 1/10 of 1% of the electorate that wants to rekindle the Bolshevik Revolution, voted for Obama in order to kill the Kulaks and collectivize the economy.
Jesse Jackson won some early primaries. People imagined he could be president. Until the Hymietown comment. Started feeling confident and took his true self out for a stroll. Oops. Nobody to blame but Jesse.
"I don't think Huckabee would have had much luck in opposing TARP and the bailouts, inasmuch as they were implemented by the Bush Administration."
Huckabee says different. No reason why he had to support the Bush Administration. He wasn't a Bush guy
Relax, I am sure George Lakey is working on crafting a winning librul narrative.
"
One might love or loath LBJ, but he knew how to count votes, cajol, buy, threaten, hold'em or fold'em.
Unlike some..."
Are those days completely behind us, I wonder? Just a while back Boehner refused to take Obama's phone call. Perhaps related, Obama was at least smart enough to leave the Healthcare bill to Pelosi and Reid's arm twisting.
Maybe Obama's team should open up a twitter account where his ardent followers could post a suggested narrative.
LBJ had real power. As a Senator he did a lot of favors for others in both parties. He also traded favors as president.
Barack Obama never did anything for anyone. He hardly ever was in the Senate. He was too busy running for president after he was elected. he made no friends, did no favors, and no one owes him a thing.
Johnson also knew how the Senate worked. Obama never learned. Johnson could use his office to get what he wanted. Obama can't even get an Eggo.
Obama = Con Man.
End of story.
He learned early on (this is in his own books) how to appear to be a non-threatening (bland) black man. As Biden would say, neat, clean, well-spoken.
All part of his con, along with voting present much of his life, including hiding from the financial crises before the election (unlike McCain) so as not reveal he didn't have a clue what was causing it or how to fix it.
The problem with a "narrative" now, is that he also has a record. And it's not a pretty sight. Crony capitalism, corruption, depression. It's all his.
"Maybe Obama's team should open up a twitter account where his ardent followers could post a suggested narrative."
It'd be funnier if Iowahawk asked on his twitter:)
Ann Althouse said...
My old post and conversation are from January '07.
Thought it was '08.
"PS You had to do your diavlogs in the stacks?"
That's my law school office.
"Or was Meade there with you???"
I didn't meet Meade until 2 years later.
I was kidding. I saw that sidelong glance and smile...
Hey, Robert Cook, are you a truther?
Obama was a smiling and loving face that won the love of the independents and added a huge black tribal turn out.
But after he had lied about everything for three years of total corruption Chicago Style, he has lost the love of the independents and even disappointed the blacks that have recovered from brainwashing.
His only hope now is to create civil unrest, declare Marshall Law, and govern without Congress like Chavez does until the postponed elections can be rescheduled, maybe, someday.
Empty suit you say!! Empty Suit!! Hell no, He's an empty t-shirt.
"Nobody, except for you and 1/10 of 1% of the electorate that wants to rekindle the Bolshevik Revolution, voted for Obama in order to kill the Kulaks and collectivize the economy."
You forget that I did not vote for Obama, which I have made no secret of. When he voted for the revised FISA law shortly before the 2008 election--breaking his promise not only to not vote for it if contained retroactive legal immunity for the telecoms who aided Bush in his illeagl wiretapping of Americans, but that he would support a filibuster of it--he revealed all I needed to know about him, namely, that he was either so spineless that he would not stand on principle or by his promises, or that he was a liar and could never be trusted to mean what he said, (or both). That he did this before winning the election, and so close to the election, was shocking in its, ahem, audacity, and his supporters should have seen him then for the ambitious fraud he is.
But, whattaya gonna do? Believers wanna believe, as is demonstrated those who insist on Obama's supposed "good intentions," in spite of all, and on the donkey side by those who still believe Bush or Cheney were honorable, well-meaning men, that Palin is qualified to be anything more than a petty bureaucrat in a regional Division of Motor Vehicles office, or that any of those running for the Republican nomination are not also as pathetic.
Narrative, narrative. To some academics, everything is just a narrative: there’s just no reality that’s not a narrative (because there’s no reality- only ‘reality’).
But as ‘Shouting Thomas’ wrote, “It's really about whether the electorate agrees with your policies, not the narrative.”
"His only hope now is to create civil unrest, declare Marshall Law...."
Do you, perhaps, mean martial law?
"Hey, Robert Cook, are you a truther?
No.
"Huckabee says different. No reason why he had to support the Bush Administration. He wasn't a Bush guy.
You miss the obvious point: Tarp and the bailouts were begun while Bush was still President. Huckabee "opposing" them would have been the proverbial "closing the barn door after the horses have fled."
Obama's narrative, which is strictly a campaign narrative, is that his Republican opponent, whoever that may be, wants to kill women, minorities and the elderly. I'm sure that from Gates' standpoint that's a perfectly respectable centrist narrative and for all I know Althouse agrees, since the likes of Gates calling the likes of Obama a centrist didn't cause her to break stride.
Re: LBJ, it's still hard to believe that $100 billion- a mere $0.1 trillion! was considered a large federal budget in the 1960s.
Even with inflation, that's still only $0.7 trillion.
Pepe Escobar of Asia Times has a narrative:
http://www.infowars.com/pepe-escobar-iranian-plot-was-an-inside-job/
I doubt LBJ would have spouted off about how bad the local cops treated his Harvard professor friend. And I'm quite sure he wouldn't then have backtracked the whole thing and then brought the two together at the White House like it was some type of peace accord between the leaders rival nations.
That is still the lease presidential thing Obama has ever done.
deborah said...
Pepe Escobar of Asia Times has a narrative:
I didn't watch the video, but those are easily the most paranoid bunch of commenters I've ever encountered.
"His only hope now is to create civil unrest, declare Marshall Law...."
Do you, perhaps, mean martial law?
Sounds like an 80's detective series starring a tough Chuck Norris type.
I doubt that on a per day in office basis Nixon referred to himself as "president" more than does Obama.
Crunchy Frog said...
"His only hope now is to create civil unrest, declare Marshall Law...."
Do you, perhaps, mean martial law?
Sounds like an 80's detective series starring a tough Chuck Norris type.
And there was one.
PS Marshall law would have been if George Marshall had gotten universal military training in this country after WWII, so we would have been on the Swiss model.
I always wondered, if he'd had his druthers, rather have been able to go with the Victory Program (215 divisions) instead of the 90 Division Gamble.
Full disclosure, Tyrone, I got that link from a way-out-past-left-field-in-the-parking-lot relative...but, I clicked it open because of Pepe. It's just a weird story, and he mentions Fast and Furious.
Tell me; when you hire a plumber, or web designer, or advertizing company, or roofer, do you agonize over the way he says things about what he will do for you? Do you just take those words and analyze the hell out them to pick the best candidate for the job? Do the things he tells you and how he says them make the decision for you?
Or do you say: Show some work you have done, and some references from people you have done work for. Of course, they would have to have actually done something before they got to you.
Or would you say: I know you never did a roof before, and maybe never even used a ladder, but I like the way you promise to do a good job. You sound very confident. You're hired!
If you make that mistake, and pay such an idiot, you learn fast, unless it's politics.
What's really a shame is that a "law prof" turns a blind eye to the Ineligibility of the Usurper. Is that really the state of education?
Not ONE professor, and most must know, or else the whole lot is unqualified, hasn't been cowed or threatened or embarrassed by the "birther" or "Racist" epithet. They watch as a man with no allegiance to America does the bidding of the NWO Central Bankers. You blithely accept the degrading of the Constitution. If the President is not eligible is there a Constitution?
Maybe you should take a look back at your post about Federalist #68-- Maybe you will get a clue.
Or maybe this will help:
Minor v. Happersett:
"The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. "
Is it really that hard to understand that sole allegiance to America at birth is a Security requirement?
That is a SCOTUS holding. Virginia Minor was a US Citizen because she was a natural born Citizen. There has been no amendment or other SCOTUS case since then overruling it. Obama is ineligible because he was born British, no matter WHERE birth occurred, thus is ineligible.
Peter:
Comparing 1960 to today is difficult because it is not apples to apples. Since 1960, the feds have added many new programs. Plus soc sec and medicare were in their infancy back then and each has been larded up significantly.
A better way to evaluate is to calculate the spending by big category [defense, trasnportation, etc] per capita and adjust for inflation. Then do a comparison by big category.
Mick: "Not ONE professor, and most must know, or else the whole lot is unqualified....."
Mick, there is a hidden message in what you wrote. Can you find it?
AJ Lynch: Good point. Also, we should note that in the heyday of industry in the US, up to the 1960s there was no EPA, no Department of Education, no TSA.
But Gates didn't mean "Obama is... the first black man in history to imagine that he could become president." It was a qualified statement. The next clause is inextricably linked: "who was able to make other Americans believe it as well."
My white working-class boss, naval reservist, voted for Jesse Jackson in the New York State primaries in 1984. How's that for getting other Americans to believe, Mr. Gates?
I'm reminded of that Chappelle Show skit where Negrodamus answers the question "Why is Wayne Brady so popular" by saying something like "because he makes Bryant Gumbel look like Malcolm X".
Which of course led to this.
Yep. We've been taken for a ride all right.
Robert Cook...Sorry about the Marshall law slip you caught.
I must have been thinking about a U S Marshalls and not the 82nd Airborne.
The narrative of the week is Cain's 9 9 9 now plan endorsed by Paul Ryan and Art Laffer.
Sanity is returning to the narrative business.
"You miss the obvious point: Tarp and the bailouts were begun while Bush was still President."
Whatever. My original post had nothing to do with how Huckabee's opposition to TARP as a potential candidate - the Fall of 2008 - would have effected TARP in 2009.
That's your tangent.
How can Obama have a coherent "narrative," given his utter betrayal of his base and of all he pretended to be on the campaign trail?
Now that I know Cook celebrates Gore Vidal, Obama could never measure up.
Michael:
Libs like Fat Eddie Rendell lament that transportation is only 4% of fed spending today compared to 1950 when it was a much higher %.
Of course, Fat Eddie also fails to mention that total fed spending has been expanded substantially because back then we did not have all the big expensive depts you mentioned.
Libs like Rendell have no consciense nor ethics or morals. It's nothing but a big political contest to them. It's never about doing the right thing.
Althouse, I can possibly, maybe, kinda, sorta understand hoping Jesse won in '84. But '88? Seriously? What were you (still) smoking? Four years after Hymietown (and with a competent Al Gore in the primary mix), you were supporting Jackson? I have to admit to seeing you in a somewhat different light.
Robert Cook wrote I don't think Huckabee would have had much luck in opposing TARP and the bailouts, inasmuch as they were implemented by the Bush Administration.
While I don't think anyone but Bush could have stopped TARP, you must remember that awful week where candidates Obama and McCain were summoned to Washington to lend their authority to whatever was going down. It was the Republicans in the House, of course, who threatened passage of the thing and perhaps a candidate Huckabee could have given them cover to continue their opposition.
Or, perhaps candidate Huckabee, like candidates Obama and McCain would have played dead like a terrified opossum and crept away as soon as possible.
Hey Cook - if Kerry was president would he have done TARP?
Michael said...
"Mick: "Not ONE professor, and most must know, or else the whole lot is unqualified....."
Mick, there is a hidden message in what you wrote. Can you find it?"
Oh, are you the teacher now? If the purpose of the natural born Citizen requirment was to prevent foreign influence, then how is it possible that Obama, born British (admittedly), is a natural born Citizen?
Or disprove the SCOTUS holding of Minor v. Happersett, i.e that a natural born Citizen is born in America of US Citizen PARENTS.
Otherwise you say nothing.
Professor: You acquired the Jackson button with "serious intentions?" What prevented you from knowing the history of this man prior to that election?
In particular, Jackson"s "Hymietown" slur was made 4 years earlier in January, 1984. This is a bafflement just about as huge as her vote for Obama 10 years later. I don't get it either.
Victor Davis Hanson has an interesting turn of phrase about liberals who are now disenchanted with Obama: "In reading about Democratic and liberal uneasiness with Obama, one theme seems constant. There is a sort of repressed anger that Obama has somehow embarrassed many of his supporters, as if their ecstasy of 2008 now seems almost adolescent."
As for Althouse, there's nothing in anything she has blogged so far that indicates she won't vote for Obama again next year. But then, maybe she's just being enigmaticly coy, which she does sometimes.
"Hey Cook - if Kerry was president would he have done TARP?"
I have no idea. If all other circumstances were the same, I'd guess "yes," but at least there might have been some necessary strings attached, (but that may just be wishful thinking).
Of course Althouse will find any excuse to vote for Obama. Even if it's milquetoast Romney, she will find some convoluted reason to not vote for him.
Once a left-winger, always a left-winger.
Mick: No, I am not the teacher now. I am just another person commenting on this blog and seeing your posts, your chorus, on a topic that is stale and irrelevant and boring. You are wrong. You will never, a thousand years from now of your chorus going on and on, ever, change anyone's mind.
@Robert Cook -- The only politicians that showed coherent opposition to TARP where the House Republicans and they were smeared for it.
You may dismiss Jackson for his "Hymietown" slur, but he was eminently qualified after having done nothing productive his entire life except developing a career as a poseur and extortionist, but we all have different standards. He was also Black, and it's really cool to vote for that, or pretend to, if you're white. And that polishing always needs redone every few years. Racism is still with us you know.
I think the first black president was Colin Powell....we didn't reject him, he rejected us.
Well said Ron.
"..He had an election narrative but hasn’t found the vocabulary for governing."
That Colt 45 must have been pretty strong.
Obama is no centrist. Never was. anyone who says that is a lying and/or ignorant piece of shit.
Michael said...
"Mick: No, I am not the teacher now. I am just another person commenting on this blog and seeing your posts, your chorus, on a topic that is stale and irrelevant and boring. You are wrong. You will never, a thousand years from now of your chorus going on and on, ever, change anyone's mind".
So adherence to the Constitution is "stale" and "incoherent"?
No I am not wrong, which is why none of you can answer the questions posed above. It's obvious that you cannot refute the precedent of Minor v. Happersett. That the "law prof" fails to even talk about this important legal Constitutional issue borders on incopetence. That most people are ignorant of it is typical, and why the Usurpation has been allowed to happen.
G. Joubert said,
"As for Althouse, there's nothing in anything she has blogged so far that indicates she won't vote for Obama again next year. But then, maybe she's just being enigmaticly coy, which she does sometimes."
I will go out on a limb and say that the "law prof" knew that both McCain and Obama were ineligible, and picked who she felt would do the least damage. Now seeing the damage done due to Obama's lack of allegiance to the US, I would find it impossible to think she may vote for him again. That she refuses to talk about Obama's ineligibility is totally irresponsible.
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2011/10/09/multiple-instances-of-historical-scholarship-conclusively-establish-the-supreme-courts-holding-in-minor-v-happersett-as-standing-precedent-on-citizenship-obama-not-eligible/
will go a step further. Maybe the "law prof" has been threatened w/ her cushy job, should she debate Obama's eligibility publically. Maybe she welcomes my treatise because she agrees, but wants to keep her job. Yeah that's it!!
Do any of you believe that Obama has the allegiance and attachment to America necessary to lead it?
Yes, because governing is all about the narrative.
We are so screwed.
The narrative is a Diversity Hire - unqualified, no executive experience, chosen because of his skin color, in over his head, can't handle the workload, cuts class, grows frustrated then bitter then angry, blames everyone else for his mistakes, rejects counseling, files EEO complaint against America.
Damn every racist libtard that voted for this marxist charlatan.
"There is none so blind as he who will not see."
And now you have the bland leading the blind (plus the 47% who weren't).
a small point of order: in the good professors tags she indicates "testicles" I thought that the spelling was testicals and a visit to wikipedia would clear things up--alas, there appears to be two variants of the male gonads. Can someone tell me what is the proper spelling of the the boys that I scratch every morning when I wake up?
Never mind re the spelling of male gonads--further research on this pressing issue appears to be that "testicles" is, in fact, the proper spelling.
Life goes on
Anyone who thinks Obama is any kind of centrist has no idea where the center is in this country.
Jesse Jackson! I remember a time (year?) when he was cresting as a potential mayor of DC. He didn't take the bait and I decided he wasn't going to be Prez material if he wasn't willing to lead a serious city, state, etc.
The only shovel-ready job Obama has made is the one of making America dig its own grave.
"Obama is no centrist. Never was. anyone who says that is a lying and/or ignorant piece of shit."
"Anyone who thinks Obama is any kind of centrist has no idea where the center is in this country."
Fair enough, fair enough; I think a good argument can be made that Obama is somewhat to right of center.
Robert Cook, thank you for coming to the "Discover Politics" debate at the Ernest R Mayhew Memorial Gymnasium and sharing your socialist ideas!
I'm sure you gave the children something to think about.
-Pat Garrity
Plainfield North PTA
"The narrative" gets you the job. After you get the job, you're expected to show results.
9.1% unemployment this long after the recession is officially over, ain't the results people are looking for. Sending guns to Mexican drug gangs ain't the results people are looking for.
All his left-wing, academic, theories are so much bunk. When tried in the real world, they've failed utterly. The only response that the liberals have is, that, well, we just didn't try hard enough. Apparently not, since there still are people who are not destitute and dying in the gutters.
@Robert Cook, everything you believe is wrong. Absolutely, positively wrong. And the more strongly you believe it, the more certainly it is wrong.
"@Robert Cook, everything you believe is wrong. Absolutely, positively wrong. And the more strongly you believe it, the more certainly it is wrong."
Responding in kind, Big Mike: everything you believe is wrong. Absolutely, positively wrong. And the more strongly you believe it, the more certainly it is wrong.
Put another way: I know you are but what am I?
Verbal ability isn't leadership ability. It's not even a good measure of intelligence.
We overvalue the ability to speak clearly.
Do you really think that Jackson or Sharpton ever thought they could be elected President.
Both of them are professional race hustlers. Sharpton is the more poisonous of the two, but Jackson is plenty toxic.
They specialized, from the beginning, in inciting blacks to threaten whites so they could extract payoffs. See Jackson and Anheuser-Busch.
Sharpton is even cruder; his racket is hustling donations, grants, speaking fees, whatever, by pandering to the angry. Find a controversy, inflame one side, posture as the advocate of that side. He's incited arson and other violence.
If you took Jackson seriously, you were a fool. If you took Sharpton seriously, you were an idiot.
[The captcha for this entry is "sleyze"... How fitting.]
The Kantian(s) is/are frustrated that reality just doesn't conform. I expect his conduct to become increasingly squirrelly.
“What are the facts? Again and again and again – what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history” – what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!”
― Robert A. Heinlein
Fuck "Narrative"
Franklin said, People always compare Obama to Carter, but the president he may be most like is Nixon. Thin-skinned and paranoid.
Except Nixon was smarter, a better and more successful politician, and much better at foreign policy. And he accomplished more even with media who were not enthralled with him like they are with Obama. And Obama is damaging the country far more than Nixon ever did with the break-in.
“He would have grabbed these people by the balls and said, ‘I am the president of the goddamned United States!’ ”
I guess this is the new "civility" that Obama asked for.
Maguro said, Sounds like a know-nothing caricature of LBJ, who knew how to horse trade and get things done in Congress a thousand times better than Obama ever will.
Bingo.
Post a Comment