The commentariat at Instapundit seems to view me as a big liberal, itching to vote for Hillary.
IN THE COMMENTS: Lots of interesting stuff, but I'm going to frontpage Carl Pham, who put up a very substantive 7-point analysis at 3:39 AM (not that he's necessarily in the Central Time Zone). I wasn't through point #2 when I decided I wanted to put this up for more detailed discussion. In fact, I'm going to make this a new post. Hang on.
२८ ऑक्टोबर, २०१४
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१०२ टिप्पण्या:
The commentariat at Instapundit are not fools.
They've got their own comments section now instead of using Althouse. This is a good thing.
Rainy Day Althouse #35 & 63.
By their fruits ye shall know them...
They're confident of Althouse's confidence in her womanly intuition, able to see reasons that guys are unaware of even after it's explained to them.
It's the proximity to Madison.
"I realize that sarcasm, impatience, and annoyance are a way of creating a barrier between me and them." Professor Althouse, tear down this wall!
OMG what a bunch of hatey haters who hate!
I hate that.
Perhaps Crack had a point about the crowd at Instapundit? (Which I read regularly, I must admit.)
It's that Scarlet "O" on your forehead.
Well, even I have been surprised by your positive posts on her..
Read the instapundit archive from 2001 or 2002, then read it now.
And that's why the comments section over there looks the way it does. Change your message, change your audience.
The commentariat at Instapundit seems to view me as a big liberal, itching to vote for Hillary.
Well, you did call her 'adorable' the other day, bringing to mind that dewy-eyed school girl who fell for the articulate man with the sonorous voice, in 2008.
If it's Bush v. Clinton again, I think we'll have to admit that our country has a problem.
Shuffle the deck, please.
Hillary's a woman. IMO, unless the Repubs nominate George Washington you'll find a way to vote for her.
Liberals default to liberals-
I am what I am
In that, there is no dishonor.
I have to admit, I'm going heavy that way in the pool.
The risk you run is becoming Madison's Juan Williams, cast out as he was cast out by the white progressives at NPR, but unwilling to consider the folks at Fox who kept him may have had a point.
"The commentariat at Instapundit seems to view me as a big liberal, itching to vote for Hillary."
Well, it's for sure you're not going to vote for the biggest racist, sexist homophobe ever to draw breath, which is who the repub nominee will be sold as.
When the commentariat says "She" over there -- are they referring to Althouse or to HRC?
(And the answer is: Yes... But don't answer the question as a logic test)
I speak only as being a daily reader of this blog since 2004, but the totality of that leads me to conclude that an Ann Althouse vote for Hillary in 2016 is very very probable. I may be wrong but I won't be surprised.
well, even with your attempt to mask it, it sure looks that way. I don't know why you don't acknowledge it. Hell you admitted to voting for Obama after all. Why be coy? We won't like you any less.
Whether this stuff is explicit politicking for her con compliance, or it is a more subtle overton vortex shaping technique, I'm sure it works.
Althosue is undeniably brilliant in most ways, but......
Prof A
With all due respect, while some think you
that dewy-eyed school girl who fell for the articulate man with the sonorous voice, in 2008,
some, er, less judgmental people, like me, just think you, arrogantly, were led astray by some preconceived ideas of the efficacy of his credentialism.
Neither of us would, I humbly suggest, be surprised if you might do so again with Hil or Fauxcahontas.
The election is two years away. Who can be bothered to care?
Althouse is undeniably brilliant in most ways, but......
...as a liberal, she will default to liberals, when push comes to shove. They all do.
Not sure why some are getting on her case for that.
"The election is two years away. Who can be bothered to care?"
Err... This is ironic. Right?
I mean, coming from someone who regularly wastes time here.
You are biased towards the left. You came of age in the late 1960's or early 1970's as a fine arts student so it could hardly be otherwise. Plus, you teach at one of the most left-leaning of the major state universities.
To your credit, I think you do try to reach rational conclusions and overcome your bias. But it's there. My prediction is that you'll be looking for reasons not to vote for the Republican candidate, whomever it is, in 2016 but not subject the Democrat to the same level of scrutiny. That's based on you rationale for how you voted the way you voted in 2008.
I speak only as being a daily reader of this blog since 2004, but the totality of that leads me to conclude that an Ann Althouse vote for Hillary in 2016 is very very probable. I may be wrong but I won't be surprised.
I don't see how anyone can say this without knowing who is actually, you know, running for office.
Is Meade's comment some sort of inside joke that I'm too stoooopid to get?
Err... This is ironic. Right?
I mean, coming from someone who regularly wastes time here.
I care about this blog because it is a Great Blog. It is art. It is the best of blogs.
But the election two years out? And the candidates unknown? And people complaining about who they think one particular person might vote for?
As I said, who can be bothered to care?
"I don't see how anyone can say this without knowing who is actually, you know, running for office."
Well, we can be pretty confident the republican nominee will be a republican ...
I'm also resolved to put less energy into politics than I did in the past. There has been no return on investment, so I'm investing elsewhere.
It's good to remember that in 2006, Hillary Clinton was the presumed nominee.
Hillary is the candidate of the future, and always will be?
Well you did vote for Obama...
"I'm also resolved to put less energy into politics than I did in the past. There has been no return on investment, so I'm investing elsewhere."
I read that out loud to Meade and he said "It's as if Freeman Hunt lives with us."
Freeman,
I was being ironic.
In the past I've spent a ton of time on this blog, using different names. And, it's still my go-to, when I get a chance to check out the tubes.
Was something supposed to be interesting about this blog entry?
Original Mike said...
"Hillary's a woman. IMO, unless the Repubs nominate George Washington you'll find a way to vote for her."
You know, the country sure could use a woman like George Washington right now.
Georgette Washington.
First in War, First in Peace, First in Walking for 10 hours through the streets of NYC while being talked to.
It's like saying Crack will vote for the black guy.
Duh.
Meadhouse should ditch this peculiar (I'm being kind with that description) fixation on blogging every day.
Why keep it up?
In the past Althouse has said that future blog researchers will be combing through her posts. I don't want to burst bubbles here, but.... er..., isn't it possible that this won't happen? Isn't it possible that blogging every day is more a negative than a positive?
Consider that Panetta is currently uber hot regarding political jabber. And, he's an insider with real knowledge and influence. Hopefully it's not mean to note that, obviously, Althosue's musings are many notches less notable. One could argue they're of no note.
But, even Panetta will be mostly lost by history. O'neill told us that Bush was planning to invade Iraq as soon as he got into office. That doesn't matter. Likewise, Panetta won't matter. And, the fact that Althouse blogged everyday for a super long time.....
You do the math.
Live more, blog less.
Anyone who voted from Obama in 2008 and was willing to admit it is capable of anything. When he goes ape after the election with nominations and EPA rules, you will really look dumb.
Well, it's for sure you're not going to vote for the biggest racist, sexist homophobe ever to draw breath, which is who the repub nominee will be sold as.
Near as I can tell, Althouse voted for both Obama and Romney for POTUS. At least once for Scott Walker. Hardly a "doctrinaire leftist", as a silly commentator at Instys link suggested.
In the past Althouse has said that future blog researchers will be combing through her posts.
I believe I was the one who wrote that.
The point of this blog isn't political musings. Yuck.
If Althouse dropped politics completely it would still be a good blog.
Instapundit would be, too.
I like the non-political posts the most.
"I believe I was the one who wrote that."
You may have also, but she did it in a post (not just a comment) too.
Actually Ann, I have gotten the impression from your posts over the past few weeks that you are looking for an excuse to vote a straight Democratic ticket. Nothing specific, just a feeling.
I like the politics much more than pictures of trees, dogs, and lakes.
But, I'd put the legal stuff on the same level as the politics.
IMHO.
I don't think Althouse is 110% kneejerk lirul vote but she has been insulated from the economic turbulence of the last 14 years by having a very secure job.
That inoculated her from feeling the effects of the economic insecurity that most Americans have experienced. Hence, she overvalues Dems who have little skill or success in all things economic.
I think I can guess who most of those commenters on Insty are...
"That inoculated her from feeling the effects of the economic insecurity that most Americans have experienced. Hence, she overvalues Dems who have little skill or success in all things economic."
Yes, Alabama (the most conservative state in the America) has the most skill and success in all things economic.
Hey, Garage, could you go over to Instapundit and tell them that,
I've voted for Walker twice and am about to do it again.
I voted for Romney in 2012 and Bush in 2004.
I voted for Ron Johnson.
Now, I also voted for Obama in 2008, twice if you count the primary.
I voted for Gore and Bill Clinton and Dukakis and Mondale and Carter (in 1980) and McGovern.
You voted for Bush in 2094?
Weird world. I thought the Bush dynasty petered out around 2046.
Don't forget Ford in '76. Ya big right wing nut job, you.
I love all these people bragging that they were smart enough to vote for John McCain. I did too. I always felt choosing the lesser of two evils was the "grown up" thing to do. McCain cured me of that. There is nothing grown up about voting for John McCain. He would have been a very bad president. Maybe not as bad as Obama, but maybe worse. Anyone who voted for McCain or Obama should feel deeply ashamed. We failed in our civic duty.
Plus, you voted for Nixon in 1960, remember? In Miss Whatshername's 4th grade class.
I wore a Nixon button in 1960, but the opportunity to vote in class came in 1964, when each home room had one electoral vote. Not only did I vote for Goldwater, I was instrumental, via class debate, in getting my home room to go for Goldwater, giving him his only electoral vote.
They're probably wrong about the itching part, but if Hillary's the Democratic nominee, you will almost certainly vote for her. The opportunity to vote for the first woman will prove as irresistible to you as was the opportunity to vote for the fist black guy.
I don't know if I'd call you "a big liberal", but I'm sure you'd like to vote for Hillary.
The question is, did you post that comment on Hillary because you want to look cruelly neutral before you vote for Her, or because she's so incredibly idiotic that she's making it hard for you to build you case for voting for her?
She took her vote, She took it down
Climbed the podium and debated down
And she saw her reflection in her classmates eyes
'Til the landslide brought it down
Get a room.
Meade having a Stevie Nicks moment. Isn't that too 70's for Althouse.
I thought I was regarded as a Hillary hater.
Weird. I voted against her in the '08 primary.
I've repeatedly said I don't think the first woman president should be someone who got there through a powerful man and that for Bill Clinton to return to the White House violates the spirit of term limits.
Re: "I like the politics much more than pictures of trees, dogs, and lakes..."
I like the betamax comments.
Boyoboy there are a lot of short memories here. As I recall AA circa 2008, she was maintaining a posture of cruel neutrality until late in the election process. She then announced that she was voting for Obama and explained in detail how McCain lost her. Remember how he suspended his campaign and demanded a meeting in Washington where he has nothing to contribute? Also, she wanted the Dems to take some responsibility for military and national security issues instead of just sniping and snarking. She was also aghast, as I recall, at the treatment of the Palins during that campaign.
I voted for McCain, but I never thought AA was anything but reasonable in her thought process.
Like Freeman Hunt and Meadehouse, I think the returns on energy expended on politics over the past 6 years have been minuscule. We have the worst political class in this country since before the Civil War, and we know how that turned out!
I have no problem with Althouse voting however Meade tells her to. America.
I've repeatedly said I don't think the first woman president should be someone who got there through a powerful man and that for Bill Clinton to return to the White House violates the spirit of term limits.
Was watching video Phil Donahue's late 1970's interview of Ayn Rand today.
An audience member asked Rand what she thought of the possibility of. someday a woman POTUS.
She said "No. And I wouldn't work for her (to become so)."
After audible audience gasps, she explained that there were many leadership positions perfectly
suitable for women, but not POTUS.
Her reason: "A Commander-in-Chief of the Army a woman!? No. I think it is unspeakable."
We don't remind ourselves enough of the vital Commander-in-Chief role of POTUS.
I wouldn't want a woman bouncer at a rowdy bar, nor as the guard at the front door of the White House, either.
Hey, Garage, could you go over to Instapundit and tell them that,
Probably not. And not likely to do any good, right? Conservatives seem to be unreachable these days, as Richard Posner points out here: The GOP Has Made Me Less Conservative.
I was joking, of course. Meade would only suggest. And then withhold breakfast.
I like to picture Meade dressed up as Hillary in the privacy of their home. I can picture the peculiar little Hillary dance that he does. Very Little Teapot, but stern. Its like I'm in the room with them, unseen. Behind the couch. Breathing very quietly. The room has a light woody smell. Light through the window almost gone. Breathe quieter. I can't help but rub my fingers on the wood floor in a precise one-inch square, left/right top/bottom/repeat. Meade's using his "Robert Wright" voice: I am mesmerized. Sshhhhh.
"Like Freeman Hunt and Meadehouse, I think the returns on energy expended on politics over the past 6 years have been minuscule."
I think that's a misanalysis. All of that energy was required to keep Obama from wreaking more havoc. Sometimes standing still is an accomplishment. To see this, just look at an example where we failed; ObamaCare, and all that portends for the healthcare system.
The biggest miscalculation that the Dems made was to sink their first year and all of their momentum into passing Obamacare with no GOP support whatsoever. The biggest miscalculation that the GOP made was allowing Ted Cruz and others to go forward with the fed govt shutdown when they had no plan for winning. The biggest miscalculation the the Tea Party made was failing to recognize that some who agrees with them 80% of the time is not their enemy.
All parties need to do a lot better at the political game for the good of the country.
Go Walker!
Who wrote that article, garage?
I don't see how anyone can say this without knowing who is actually, you know, running for office.
I could be wrong but I'm just offering my best guess.
Ann Althouse said...
I wore a Nixon button in 1960, but the opportunity to vote in class came in 1964, when each home room had one electoral vote. Not only did I vote for Goldwater, I was instrumental, via class debate, in getting my home room to go for Goldwater, giving him his only electoral vote.
Wasn't Hillary a Goldwater girl too?
The only question people have is "So what happened?"
My history:
Gore in 2000
Bush in 2004
Barr in 2008 (didn't trust McCain)
Abstained in 2012 (supported Romney but was busy and lived in a safe blue state)
I care less and less about voting as I get older. My vote doesn't count enough for me to be bothered. Maybe I'd care if I lived in PA of FL or OH.
Since you're checking out instapundit, I'm wondering what you have to say about the story on Dante Cunningham. Surely, if all violence against women is bad, then fake violence against women, with no repurcussions for teh woman filing a false report is also bad?
They kind of see you as Lucy with the football or the distaff Mickey Kaus, Ann, in that they expect you to be able to identify what the problems are, but then stay loyal to the team you grew up with. They're just preparing for the pre-election blog post they think will come about 730 days from now.
(Chicago Cubs fans can ID the same sort of woes their guys suffer, but still stay loyal to their team despite a century of foul-ups. Even inside government, Daniel Patrick Moynihan was famous from his report in 1965 while working for LBJ on the break-up of black families, up through his 'Boob bait for Bubbas" line about Bill Clinton's economic plans in 1993. Moynihan could identify the problem and go out and criticize those contributing to the problems, but then would turn right around and vote in the U.S. Senate for the same measures that caused the problems. DPM was born a Hell's Kitchen Democrat, and he was going to die a Hell's Kitchen Democrat, even if he knew the whole team was corking their bats, doing steroids and abusing the spouse on the side.)
Most of the negative posts reminded me more of lefty trolls trying to conduct some sort of divisive psy-ops campaign against the right.
Aren't there rooms full of unemployed political science majors being paid minimum wage by George Soros to do just that using multiple avatars?
Ann, you lost the "Anybody but Obama" crowd when you became the "Anybody but McCain" Prof. The fecklessness of Obama is stunning while McCain's Presidency is only conjecture.
Ok so Althouse voted for repubs in the past. So she says. So we can't say for sure that she will vote lib this time. And I suppose we can give her the benefit of the doubt.
Its just that vote for Obama is so hard to expunge. Its like a scarlet letter, the letter O emblazoned on her identity. I think it would cancel out the vote for at least three republicans
1. Only some see you as a big liberal, most see you as a big fool, who was conned by Obama and will be conned again, or as a cock-tease who pretends to get the male/conservo-libertarian concerns, but returns privately to predictable female/collectivist tendencies.
2. For a wide swathe of traditional men, the judicial/law professor temperament is distasteful in a woman: it reminds them unpleasantly of manipulation, deception, or disloyalty in a women close to them -- one they may have trusted to their regret. Indeed, I would argue it is attractive to a fairly narrow range of men in general (aside from outright betas who agree they need sensitivity training to be aware of when they leave hairs in the bathroom sink and who wouldn't dream of fondling an ass without politely asking permission first). Men don't mind reserve in a woman, but when it starts to seem calculating (which it has to be in the professor/judge role) it tends to trigger unease, ranging to paranoia in some cases.
3. There's tension between your occasional Woman/Womanhood As Victim ruminations and Instapundit's Men/Manhood As Victim ruminations. It's a very unusual person who can be neutral in the ancient battle of the sexes to win the Most Misunderstood And Exploited prize, or even see the merit that there might be in both sides of the endless argument.
4. There's blood in the water. After eight long years of a baffling preference of the majority of their fellow citizens for a smooth-talking prissy sleazebot and mealy-mouthed collectivist nostrums, there's the sense that now the red-blooded God-fearin' straight-shootin' black-coffee-drinkin' American they thought they lived amongst has finally woken up and is about to throw these changelings and cuckoos the hell out -- and the anticipation raises the blood pressure, while the possibility of a slip 'twixt cup and lip jangles the nerves. Result, partisan fervor.
5. Instapundit himself has changed (perhaps partly because of 4 above). There is less moderation and reflection, less non-political stuff, less independent libertarian stuff, and much more reflexive Obama hate.
6. Most bloggers and persistent commentariats tend to fossilize over time (and the comments in that thread are highly stereotyped). I think it's because it's extremely hard after a while for either the principal or the dinner guests to back down from an iffy and misguided thought -- you get savaged. So after time people tend to be less intellectually adventurous and open. This is a well-known effect in business: the larger the meeting, the more fossilized and traditional the positions. You only really get true experimentation and adventure in the ideas people express when the discussion is small, intimate, and private -- three adjectives that cannot possibly describe public blogging and commenting.
7. You also have a streak of provacateur or the intellectual flirt: you say things sometimes just (or mostly just) to provoke reaction and hot discussion. That makes all kinds of sense in your profession, of course. But, again, in a woman it can make many men uneasy -- few like a tease, which is kind of what this is.
Ann's problem is that she is not risible.
I wore a Nixon button in 1960, but the opportunity to vote in class came in 1964, when each home room had one electoral vote. Not only did I vote for Goldwater, I was instrumental, via class debate, in getting my home room to go for Goldwater, giving him his only electoral vote.
Are you asking for points for something that happened a half century ago? You're not the same person!
I've repeatedly said I don't think the first woman president should be someone who got there through a powerful man and that for Bill Clinton to return to the White House violates the spirit of term limits.
Good point. To the extent that Hillary leans on Bill for advice and perhaps even guidance, would her elevation to the Presidency violate the 22nd amendment? I'd argue that nothing in the 22nd amendment says one can't be an advisor after completing two full terms as President.
But I do agree that Susana Martinez or Nikki Haley or Kelly Ayotte would be better as the first female POTUS because in each case they got where they're at on their own. (In that order.)
Bob R @8:36 PM had it exactly right.
Anyone paid from public funds - be it elective office, bureaucrat, teacher, medical service provider, etc. - is motivated to Statism.
The "American Dream" is NOT home ownership, college education, secure job, ...
The American Dream is FREEDOM FROM GOVERNMENT MOLESTATION.
That is why I vote Libertarian. Both major parties are Statist.
It is worth quoting Bob R (whether he likes it or not).
==========
I love all these people bragging that they were smart enough to vote for John McCain. I did too. I always felt choosing the lesser of two evils was the "grown up" thing to do. McCain cured me of that. There is nothing grown up about voting for John McCain. He would have been a very bad president. Maybe not as bad as Obama, but maybe worse. Anyone who voted for McCain or Obama should feel deeply ashamed. We failed in our civic duty.
I don't think people give enough credence to the theory that Bill is the driving force behind Hillary's presidential ambitions. If left to her own devices, I'm not sure she'd want to. Bill, however, is dying to get back to the White House, and his only path is through Hillary. People seem to like Bill and give him the benefit of the doubt; conversely they don't like Hillary, and ascribe all sorts of bad motives to her actions. In reality, I think Bill is subtly or not so subtly pushing her to do this.
I keep wondering who these non Democrat partisan people upset by the shutdown are?
We got sequestration out of it, a trajectory toward a balanced budget, and a lot of pissing and moaning about it from the left and their leader, Obama.
What has Obama been able to do since the shutdown? It is like a set of handcuffs and he knows it. If we didn't vote to handcuff Obama when we voted to kick out Pelosi, I don't know what we were voting for.
BTW, I am kind of disappointed in the comment section at Insty. It is an echo chamber, who needs it? I can as easily draw the obvious conclusion from one of his posts as anybody, who needs his comment section?
Sorry, I got nothing against Hilly but, she's not going to be elected president.She had her shot in'08 and was rejected by her own people in favor of a smooth talking amateur.
"BTW, I am kind of disappointed in the comment section at Insty."
I suspect part of the problem is the threaded-comments format. Things don't evolve the same way in that form, it seems.
OT but it is gratifying to finally see the word incompetent sticking to Obama and pols in general by the media [and not just Fox News].
It is about time.
I suspect part of the problem is the threaded-comments format. Things don't evolve the same way in that form, it seems.
Branched vs. linear chain growth.
he biggest miscalculation that the Dems made was to sink their first year and all of their momentum into passing Obamacare with no GOP support whatsoever. The biggest miscalculation that the GOP made was allowing Ted Cruz and others to go forward with the fed govt shutdown when they had no plan for winning. The biggest miscalculation the the Tea Party made was failing to recognize that some who agrees with them 80% of the time is not their enemy.
All parties need to do a lot better at the political game for the good of the country.
Go Walker!
Obamacare will ruin the average persons interactions in healthcare (and cost MUCH more) but the "shutdown" was a big nothingburger. If anything the "shutdown" reminded the voters of the vindictiveness of the Obama/government classes.
There has been no return on investment, so I'm investing elsewhere.
Hear hear!
BTW, I am kind of disappointed in the comment section at Insty. It is an echo chamber, who needs it? I can as easily draw the obvious conclusion from one of his posts as anybody, who needs his comment section?
I don't comment there because I don't feel as if know any of the commenters. Weird, huh?
I handed out Goldwater bumper stickers in a shopping center parking lot in Alabama in 64. The only Republican on the local ballot was running against a KKK member. I handed out his stickers too. I bought my first Ayn Rand book in that same shopping center, The Virtue of Selfishness.
BTW, I am on my way to my new home in Austin.
Ah, so now it isn't Ken in SC anymore. Love your comments. Austin is great. I've got family there.
You voted for Obama. If you don't vote for Hillary, despite her being the most mendacious and despicable possible presidential candidate since maybe Johnson in early 1968, before he quit, everyone here will be amazed.
Happy, but amazed.
"If you don't vote for Hillary, despite her being the most mendacious and despicable possible presidential candidate since maybe Johnson in early 1968, before he quit, everyone here will be amazed."
You don't think Walker will be on the ticket in 2016?
Freeman @ 7:03pm,
Ah, going more prepper, eh?
Big Mike,
Kelly Ayotte? Please no. The only successful never-been-a-governor president we've had since the 1930's was a guy who ran the biggest mechanized invasion in world history.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा