They are not saying "Boo-urns;" They are just saying "BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!" That is, until the music drowns out the crowd.
File under uncomfortable moment infinity: For tonight's Rangers- Flyers game in Philly, Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin dropped the puck at the ceremonial puck drop for the Flyer's opening game. The owner of the Flyers and regular Republican donor, Ed Snyder, decided to develop a political gimmick to feature Palin as the Flyers ran a promotion to find the best Hockey Mom. To honor that Hockey Mom, Snyder decided the most famous "Hockey Mom" in the country, yes that would be Palin, would drop the first puck for the opener.
Hilarity ensues when the Flyer fans reject the shallow political photo-op.
I am all for including politics into sports. In fact, I hate how sports ends up being a politics-free zone, especially when public money supports stadiums, etc. But I do love it when fans reject a political photo op and love the rejection even more when it occurs to Sarah "Hockey Mom" Palin. Synder disrespected his players by putting them in this situation; therefore, he deserved for this to happen to his VP of choice.
Talk about losing the important Hockey Moms vote.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
McCain Walking Back Rhetorics of Venom???
Yesterday Solon had a post acknowledging this moment. Here it is, condensed.
Harrogate admits to having lost a lot more objectivity than he would have liked, at this point. Part of him really, really wants to applaud McCain's effort here; there is something very, very frightening being let loose at this point in the election, and it is good to see McCain arguing with it here. But at the same time, Harrogate cannot escape the feeling that McCain is fundamentally unserious about diffusing this ugliness.
If he was serious about dampening down these dangerous Rhetorics of the Scary Other, would McCain have Really picked Sarah Palin as his running mate?
Harrogate admits to having lost a lot more objectivity than he would have liked, at this point. Part of him really, really wants to applaud McCain's effort here; there is something very, very frightening being let loose at this point in the election, and it is good to see McCain arguing with it here. But at the same time, Harrogate cannot escape the feeling that McCain is fundamentally unserious about diffusing this ugliness.
If he was serious about dampening down these dangerous Rhetorics of the Scary Other, would McCain have Really picked Sarah Palin as his running mate?
It's Britney, Bitch
Well, it seems that Britney is back. I know that many of us here at the Situation have been hoping for this for quite a while, and it's good to see Ms. B back in her element: pretty boys, nudity, sexy disguises--remember the video for "Toxic"? Fun stuff.
Maybe if Britney can make a successful comeback, so can the rest of us... ;)
Friday, October 10, 2008
25 Shopping Days Left to the Election...
An odd day....
The Dow dropped again. Even though the country's economy may or may not collapse as the Government will purchase a share of the country's banks in order for banks to be in a position to lend money so we can have just a little recession, other aspects of the campaign feel different tonight.
Normally, I would say that as the economy drops, so does McCain's electoral victory. However, there are a few other reasons why McCian may not win in November.
First, the Troopergate report is available tonight. MSNBC is reporting that while the results of Troopergate are not devastating, the report states that Palin abused her power and violated state law in the firing of Walt Monegan. It is unclear as to what will happen next in this investigation other than McCain's campaign calling it a partisan witch-hunt.
For Palin, what credibility does she have to make moral arguments about the character of Obama? After a bipartisan investigation finds that, as Governor, you abuse your power to fire people for personal reasons you do not have much going for you. If you are not a reformer, have no knowledge on foreign policy and the economy, and do not know too much on energy... what can you offer your ticket? Christianism?
Second, on the campaign trail, McCain talked a constituent down. According to Swampland, McCain stopped a supporter from calling him as a "Arab Terrorist."
Whether or not McCain pulls the Ayers ads may be a little too much to ask for Abe Simpson, but he "blinked," (not winked). Maybe McCain is attempting to reclaim his honor; maybe he knows his fate. This may be just the beginning.
It is almost as if Conservatives realized, as David Brooks wrote today when speaking of rhetorician Richard Weaver, "Ideas have consequences."
Third, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled today that bans of same-sex marriage were against the state's constitution. In a 4 - 3 decision, the Court stated that the State "failed to establish adequate reason to justify the statutory ban."
The Dow dropped again. Even though the country's economy may or may not collapse as the Government will purchase a share of the country's banks in order for banks to be in a position to lend money so we can have just a little recession, other aspects of the campaign feel different tonight.
Normally, I would say that as the economy drops, so does McCain's electoral victory. However, there are a few other reasons why McCian may not win in November.
First, the Troopergate report is available tonight. MSNBC is reporting that while the results of Troopergate are not devastating, the report states that Palin abused her power and violated state law in the firing of Walt Monegan. It is unclear as to what will happen next in this investigation other than McCain's campaign calling it a partisan witch-hunt.
For Palin, what credibility does she have to make moral arguments about the character of Obama? After a bipartisan investigation finds that, as Governor, you abuse your power to fire people for personal reasons you do not have much going for you. If you are not a reformer, have no knowledge on foreign policy and the economy, and do not know too much on energy... what can you offer your ticket? Christianism?
Second, on the campaign trail, McCain talked a constituent down. According to Swampland, McCain stopped a supporter from calling him as a "Arab Terrorist."
Indeed, he just snatched the microphone out the hands of a woman who began her question with, "I'm scared of Barack Obama... he's an Arab..."
"No, no ma'am," he interrupted. "He's a decent family man with whom I happen to have some disagreements."
Whether or not McCain pulls the Ayers ads may be a little too much to ask for Abe Simpson, but he "blinked," (not winked). Maybe McCain is attempting to reclaim his honor; maybe he knows his fate. This may be just the beginning.
It is almost as if Conservatives realized, as David Brooks wrote today when speaking of rhetorician Richard Weaver, "Ideas have consequences."
Third, the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled today that bans of same-sex marriage were against the state's constitution. In a 4 - 3 decision, the Court stated that the State "failed to establish adequate reason to justify the statutory ban."
Cover Girl
It goes without saying that no one on this blog will be scandalized by W's November cover with Angelina Jolie breastfeeding. But I got a sneak preview of the shot and it's so beautiful that I wanted to share:
Inoculation Theory
Communication strategy whereby a person delivers a message to an audience to make sure that that an audience is resistant to future attacks. This strategy has the effect of reinforcing the beliefs of the audience, making those beliefs stronger, and diminishing the possibility that competing messages will persuade an audience.
An example:
Just as in the Democratic primary, one candidate is months ahead of the other.
An example:
Just as in the Democratic primary, one candidate is months ahead of the other.
Good-bye, Congratulations
This is something that has weighed upon My Mind for Some Time Now, Gentle Reader, and I feel as if My Silence is no longer so very Golden. For those Readers who are not, perhaps, the Most Constant Readers of This Humble Author's work, some background: despite the heavy-handed Victorian Sensibilities, This Humble Author sides more with her Sister Suffragettes than she does with her Sister Lintons and Ellises and Ouidas. That is to say, This Humble Author is, first and foremost, a Feminist. As she is a Nineteenth-Century Gal stuck in a Twenty-First Century World, she also regrets the lack of suffragetting in her life, per se.
All of this preamble to say this: I am saying so long, farewell, and good-bye to the notion of Congratulations. Not that I would not, say, congratulate Dr. Solon on his recent accomplishments. No, Friends, far from it! Rather, I am Tired, yes, Tired of the Self-Congratulations we see toward My Sister Feminists.
Recently, there has been Much Discussion regarding powerful women and their "Ability" to balance both family and career. This is a familiar topic, is it not? We have heard it before, Gentle Reader, and I dare say, even with the stalwart efforts of This Humble Author, we shall hear it again and again. Women are to be Congratulated for Amazonian efforts toward balancing Family and Career.
In my humble opinion, Friends, this damages everything feminism has fought so very hard for.
By saying that a woman is to be Congratulated for "Balancing Family and Career," we reiterate, again and again, ad nauseam, the following:
1) That family and career are things that must be balanced;
2) That to do so is Rather Difficult;
3) That this is a problem Unique to Women;
4) That if a woman does not do such balancing, then she is not to be Congratulated, which then
5) Assumes that all women want both a Family and a Career, when we all know Rather Well that some women want both, or neither, or just the one, and is not that what feminism fought for, anyhow?
Ultimately, however, by saying a woman is to be Congratulated for balancing a Family and a Successful Career, we are saying that Women Must Do So and thus we perpetuate the stereotype over and over again that Women Must Go Above And Beyond to participate in any sphere, public, private, or otherwise.
The personal is political, yes, and as My Third-Wave Sister Feminists responded to their Big Sisters, so, too, is the political personal.
That is to say, We, all of us, man, woman child, canine, must balance Something and Something. More often than not, we must balance Lots Of Things. I am rooting this in the discussions surrounding politically powerful women, yes, but if such women were childless and rather, say, the sole caretaker of ill parents, would we still try to give them the same applause? No, because there is something that is seen as Unique to Motherhood and thus Not-Unique to Fatherhood, or Parenthood, in general.
This is not a diatribe against Motherhood or Parenting or even politically powerful women. Nor is this a Call To Action. Rather, this is a Call to Awareness. Let us stop insisting that this is something to be Congratulated, because then we are just perpetuating the idea that women cannot simply live their lives in the public eye as vice president nominees, as the wives of presidential nominees, as community leaders, as graduate students, as stay-at-home moms, as single women, as teenaged girls.
We, All Of Us, are balancing something every day. I have great respect for my friends who balance work and children, the same as I have great respect for my friends who sacrifice personal time to volunteer, or stop school to take care of sick parents, or simply drive an extra 18 miles a day, with the price of gas well over three dollars, to let the dog out. Let us instead celebrate what we are rather than how we socket into preconceived notions of what one gender should or should not do.
Wait. I do not want to leave this Gender Neutral.
No, let us celebrate that women no longer need to socket into stereotypes. Let us celebrate that in 2008, we can deny those pre-conceived notions of what constitutes Motherhood, Parenthood, Selfhood, Partnership, Friendship. We can all of us Right Now make the Conscious Decision to Reject the Stereotypes and Labeling that, while we like to think we have conquered, still suffer under greatly.
The first step is to stop acknowledging that women, in order to have something other than just their careers, must Balance.
And then, we can say Good-bye to Congratulations.
All of this preamble to say this: I am saying so long, farewell, and good-bye to the notion of Congratulations. Not that I would not, say, congratulate Dr. Solon on his recent accomplishments. No, Friends, far from it! Rather, I am Tired, yes, Tired of the Self-Congratulations we see toward My Sister Feminists.
Recently, there has been Much Discussion regarding powerful women and their "Ability" to balance both family and career. This is a familiar topic, is it not? We have heard it before, Gentle Reader, and I dare say, even with the stalwart efforts of This Humble Author, we shall hear it again and again. Women are to be Congratulated for Amazonian efforts toward balancing Family and Career.
In my humble opinion, Friends, this damages everything feminism has fought so very hard for.
By saying that a woman is to be Congratulated for "Balancing Family and Career," we reiterate, again and again, ad nauseam, the following:
1) That family and career are things that must be balanced;
2) That to do so is Rather Difficult;
3) That this is a problem Unique to Women;
4) That if a woman does not do such balancing, then she is not to be Congratulated, which then
5) Assumes that all women want both a Family and a Career, when we all know Rather Well that some women want both, or neither, or just the one, and is not that what feminism fought for, anyhow?
Ultimately, however, by saying a woman is to be Congratulated for balancing a Family and a Successful Career, we are saying that Women Must Do So and thus we perpetuate the stereotype over and over again that Women Must Go Above And Beyond to participate in any sphere, public, private, or otherwise.
The personal is political, yes, and as My Third-Wave Sister Feminists responded to their Big Sisters, so, too, is the political personal.
That is to say, We, all of us, man, woman child, canine, must balance Something and Something. More often than not, we must balance Lots Of Things. I am rooting this in the discussions surrounding politically powerful women, yes, but if such women were childless and rather, say, the sole caretaker of ill parents, would we still try to give them the same applause? No, because there is something that is seen as Unique to Motherhood and thus Not-Unique to Fatherhood, or Parenthood, in general.
This is not a diatribe against Motherhood or Parenting or even politically powerful women. Nor is this a Call To Action. Rather, this is a Call to Awareness. Let us stop insisting that this is something to be Congratulated, because then we are just perpetuating the idea that women cannot simply live their lives in the public eye as vice president nominees, as the wives of presidential nominees, as community leaders, as graduate students, as stay-at-home moms, as single women, as teenaged girls.
We, All Of Us, are balancing something every day. I have great respect for my friends who balance work and children, the same as I have great respect for my friends who sacrifice personal time to volunteer, or stop school to take care of sick parents, or simply drive an extra 18 miles a day, with the price of gas well over three dollars, to let the dog out. Let us instead celebrate what we are rather than how we socket into preconceived notions of what one gender should or should not do.
Wait. I do not want to leave this Gender Neutral.
No, let us celebrate that women no longer need to socket into stereotypes. Let us celebrate that in 2008, we can deny those pre-conceived notions of what constitutes Motherhood, Parenthood, Selfhood, Partnership, Friendship. We can all of us Right Now make the Conscious Decision to Reject the Stereotypes and Labeling that, while we like to think we have conquered, still suffer under greatly.
The first step is to stop acknowledging that women, in order to have something other than just their careers, must Balance.
And then, we can say Good-bye to Congratulations.
GOP to Voters: We Will Either Rule the World or Destroy It
And so winds down the end of a big blog spree from Harrogate. But Harrogate needed to pass this along, a must-read for all Americans.
and
And then for all you Nader sympathizers out there: Harrogate Truly Madly Deeply symathizes with ye. But hearken to these words before ye go splooge yer inviolable principles all over the voting booth:
Apparently, John McCain sees the Democratic presidential candidate as not worth addressing by name. While McCain downgraded Obama's status to the subhuman "other" in the second debate, he refused to even acknowledge Obama's presence in their first meeting. This should strike viewers as quite disturbing, considering that the whole point of a debate is for each candidate to directly engage the other's issues and stances.
and
Increasingly, right-wing conservatives and Republican political leaders are issuing dire warnings to the American public that they – and only they – are the legitimate rulers of the United States and the world. This basic contempt for anything but one-party rule is manifested in a number of dire threats repeated by the party, with its members promising the end of Western civilization as we know it if they lose their dominant status in government.
And then for all you Nader sympathizers out there: Harrogate Truly Madly Deeply symathizes with ye. But hearken to these words before ye go splooge yer inviolable principles all over the voting booth:
The Democratic Party today may be morally bankrupt, spineless, and bland, but none of those are anywhere near as dangerous as the Republican Party's fundamentalist contempt for multi-party elections and bi-partisan politics.
About The Last South Park Episode; and A Tip of the Hat to Andrew Sullivan
Gotta hand it to Sully on this, he boiled down very nicely the value of Wednesday's ridiculously out there South Park episode. "How out there was it," do you ask? It was sooooo out there, that Cartman and Butters' heroic, exquisitely vulgar, and ultimately penis-damaging efforts to stop China from conquering the United States was relegated to subplot status.The Primary Plot of the episode, as signified by the above image (which Sully also has on his Post), involved our collective efforts to deny the fact that with their last installment of the Indiana Jones franchise, Spielburg and Lucas metaphorically Raped Indy, and though everyone sensed this when they saw the movie, we proved too cowardly to resist going on about our business, as though nothing had ever happened.
Verily. Butters' confused response to the whole spectacle at the end, "I thought the movie was pretty good," just doesn't cut it.
As Sullivan writes:
I was in denial about "The Crystal Skull" until that episode. Now I understand. I can't keep the flashbacks from coming into my head. And it's rough. It creeps up on you.
So thank you Matt and Trey, for forcing us to come eyeball to eyeball with a truth that we had been avoiding for months. Harrogate takes back every lame compliment he gave to the final Indiana Jones installment.
"Our job is delivery; not safe delivery"
I've been working to resolve a UPS damage claim for over two months now. I just learned today that UPS will settle my claim for less than 1/3 the replacement value of the damaged item, a mere 1/2 of the estimated repair costs. Why? Because that's the dollar figure for which the shipper insured the package.
Okay, sure. I guess this makes sense. It doesn't seem reasonable to settle a claim for more than the insured value of the item. At least not until you consider this:
They damaged the merchandise!!!
They were hired to deliver a package. And they dropped it along the way, damaging my stuff. But somehow they don't think they ought to be held accountable. Why is this?
You know, when I hire someone to deliver a package, I'm not just hiring them to get it from A to B, I'm hiring them to get it there in good condition. If they break it, then they didn't do their job. But somehow, they think differently. They think their job is simply to get it there, in any condition. If you want to make sure that your merchandise is protected, well you have to purchase insurance for that. Don't expect them to be responsible for what they're handling.
"Sometimes things just happen," the UPS representative told me. Yes, I understand that. But if that something happens on your watch, is it not your responsibility? "It's no different than when you buy a car and have to purchase insurance for the car," she followed up. No, it's not just like that. If I buy a car, and the dealer wrecks it prior to delivery, then said dealership is responsible, right?
I mean, what if insurance hadn't been purchased for the package at all? What would they tell me then? "Yes, it's our fault that it's damaged; too bad you didn't purchase insurance, because now your stuck with broken stuff." But thankfully some insurance was purchased for my item. So now they're just telling me, "if you want to fix the damage we caused, then you have to pay half."
Bullshit! Pure bullshit!!
Okay, sure. I guess this makes sense. It doesn't seem reasonable to settle a claim for more than the insured value of the item. At least not until you consider this:
They damaged the merchandise!!!
They were hired to deliver a package. And they dropped it along the way, damaging my stuff. But somehow they don't think they ought to be held accountable. Why is this?
You know, when I hire someone to deliver a package, I'm not just hiring them to get it from A to B, I'm hiring them to get it there in good condition. If they break it, then they didn't do their job. But somehow, they think differently. They think their job is simply to get it there, in any condition. If you want to make sure that your merchandise is protected, well you have to purchase insurance for that. Don't expect them to be responsible for what they're handling.
"Sometimes things just happen," the UPS representative told me. Yes, I understand that. But if that something happens on your watch, is it not your responsibility? "It's no different than when you buy a car and have to purchase insurance for the car," she followed up. No, it's not just like that. If I buy a car, and the dealer wrecks it prior to delivery, then said dealership is responsible, right?
I mean, what if insurance hadn't been purchased for the package at all? What would they tell me then? "Yes, it's our fault that it's damaged; too bad you didn't purchase insurance, because now your stuck with broken stuff." But thankfully some insurance was purchased for my item. So now they're just telling me, "if you want to fix the damage we caused, then you have to pay half."
Bullshit! Pure bullshit!!
How to Control the Media 101; or, Political Violence and the 2008 Election
As Solon recently pointed out, political violence is becoming an issue with respect to this election. Both Senator McCain and Governor Palin have been giving speeches amid shouts of "kill him!" and "he's a terrorist!" Has anyone seen a clip where either of these political figures reprimanded this kind of talk from their peanut galleries? No? Neither has Harrogate. But John McCain is an honorable man.....
Look. It is upon us now, whether we like it or not. See the desperation of the GOP, horrified at what seems like a very good chance that Barack Obama will win. Rhetorically, their last refuge is to blow racial dog whistles and to hope that somehow, by screaming 'William Ayers,' 'Jeremiah Wright,' and 'ACORN,' Americans will come to the conclusion that Barack Obama is a terrorist.
It is that ugly. We know that. But here's what's uglier, what really worries Harrogate the most. This is a blog first and foremost about Rhetoric. And so it needs to be pointed out, on this Blog, the obvious Truth that by screaming over and over again "Why isn't the Media covering the Ayers connection? Why isn't McCain running Ads calling Obama a terroirst enabler? Why is there a coverup for Obama's nefarious otherness?" By screaming these things, they create a story. Goddammit. Just turn it to any Cable News network, choose your M&M. You'll see that the Talking Heads are all Talking About Obama "palling around with terrorists." Some are criticizing the meme, some are pushing it, others are just reporting it. But ALL are replicating the meme. And that, dear chums, is all that the GOP ever needed.
So that's how the GOP drives the National Conversation. And as Readers know, Harrogate has long ascribed to the Argument that Controlling the Conversation Means Controlling the Kingdom. But in the end Solon is Also right that the Media's power at times gets taken away by the People themselves. Witness the Terri Shiavo fiasco, no matter how hard the Media tried to convince us that Shiavo's tragic situation belonged in the political discourse, people refused to bite. It was a good moment for our country. And now, it is going to be up to the Voters whether to buy this current garbage or not.
What a stain on the soul of this country if the GOP's beneath the floor tactics work. This is a gut check for the United States. A chance to prove that we will not be held hostage by Rhetorics of Fear and Loathing. That we are a people capable of being serious and capable of prizing thoughtfulness & pragmatism as values in solving large problems. Sigh. But it is also our chance to prove that we are the most infamously, banally unserious population imaginable.
But more on political violence. Little memes of violence are seeping in everywhere now from the Right, all of it connected to the Idea that to prevent Obama from winning, bloodshed is viable. Witness Townhall's Head Reporter, Amanda Carpenter. Pretty, charming, giggly, and always telegenic on Bill O'Reilly's show. Now see this blog post in which she blithely suggests:
All hail "those angry men"!!!! All hail the idea of "storming the Capitol"!!!!! This is what we have come to. It is all these greenbloods have left.
And then today, we have a former (and indubitably, future) Assy McGee Award® winner, Ann Althouse, derisively blogging the following Headline:
So the idea that Obama pals around with terrorists is not a "virulent meme." God, no!!!
But, the idea that charging Obama with terrorist ties is Real Hate Speech--That is a virulent meme.
The first sentence of Althouse's post tells you everything ye need to know:
Hear that, Readers? To the extent that Some Media Outlets are worrying about the growing potentiality for political violence playing a role in our elections, said Media Outlets are really just Fuddie-Duddies wanting to "squelch any enthusiasm."
Just good clean Enthusiasm. That's what it is, when people are screaming "Kill him!"
Damn. Harrogate hopes that this is all a Tale Told by an Idiot, Full of Sound and Fury, Signifying Nothing. He really, really hopes so.
Look. It is upon us now, whether we like it or not. See the desperation of the GOP, horrified at what seems like a very good chance that Barack Obama will win. Rhetorically, their last refuge is to blow racial dog whistles and to hope that somehow, by screaming 'William Ayers,' 'Jeremiah Wright,' and 'ACORN,' Americans will come to the conclusion that Barack Obama is a terrorist.
It is that ugly. We know that. But here's what's uglier, what really worries Harrogate the most. This is a blog first and foremost about Rhetoric. And so it needs to be pointed out, on this Blog, the obvious Truth that by screaming over and over again "Why isn't the Media covering the Ayers connection? Why isn't McCain running Ads calling Obama a terroirst enabler? Why is there a coverup for Obama's nefarious otherness?" By screaming these things, they create a story. Goddammit. Just turn it to any Cable News network, choose your M&M. You'll see that the Talking Heads are all Talking About Obama "palling around with terrorists." Some are criticizing the meme, some are pushing it, others are just reporting it. But ALL are replicating the meme. And that, dear chums, is all that the GOP ever needed.
So that's how the GOP drives the National Conversation. And as Readers know, Harrogate has long ascribed to the Argument that Controlling the Conversation Means Controlling the Kingdom. But in the end Solon is Also right that the Media's power at times gets taken away by the People themselves. Witness the Terri Shiavo fiasco, no matter how hard the Media tried to convince us that Shiavo's tragic situation belonged in the political discourse, people refused to bite. It was a good moment for our country. And now, it is going to be up to the Voters whether to buy this current garbage or not.
What a stain on the soul of this country if the GOP's beneath the floor tactics work. This is a gut check for the United States. A chance to prove that we will not be held hostage by Rhetorics of Fear and Loathing. That we are a people capable of being serious and capable of prizing thoughtfulness & pragmatism as values in solving large problems. Sigh. But it is also our chance to prove that we are the most infamously, banally unserious population imaginable.
But more on political violence. Little memes of violence are seeping in everywhere now from the Right, all of it connected to the Idea that to prevent Obama from winning, bloodshed is viable. Witness Townhall's Head Reporter, Amanda Carpenter. Pretty, charming, giggly, and always telegenic on Bill O'Reilly's show. Now see this blog post in which she blithely suggests:
There needs to be a backlash against these people. Those angry men at McCain's rallies need to start storming the Capitol
All hail "those angry men"!!!! All hail the idea of "storming the Capitol"!!!!! This is what we have come to. It is all these greenbloods have left.
And then today, we have a former (and indubitably, future) Assy McGee Award® winner, Ann Althouse, derisively blogging the following Headline:
McCain/Palin supporters are an angry mob. That's the virulent meme this week.
So the idea that Obama pals around with terrorists is not a "virulent meme." God, no!!!
But, the idea that charging Obama with terrorist ties is Real Hate Speech--That is a virulent meme.
The first sentence of Althouse's post tells you everything ye need to know:
To my eye, it looks as though the MSM is anxious to squelch any enthusiasm.
Hear that, Readers? To the extent that Some Media Outlets are worrying about the growing potentiality for political violence playing a role in our elections, said Media Outlets are really just Fuddie-Duddies wanting to "squelch any enthusiasm."
Just good clean Enthusiasm. That's what it is, when people are screaming "Kill him!"
Damn. Harrogate hopes that this is all a Tale Told by an Idiot, Full of Sound and Fury, Signifying Nothing. He really, really hopes so.
Tribute to the Awesomeness of Last Weekend
As faithful Readers know, last weekend Harrogate and the Lovely Supadiscomama had the pleasure of hosting Solon, whilst he completed his transition to becoming Dr. Solon.
It was a real shot in the arm for many of us down here. Get togethers and fun were experienced by many last weekend, drinks were consumed, pool was played, and then there was that really strange dude that decided to join our table at the bar and carry on as though he'd known us all along. And of course, it was made all the better by the appearance of none other than the great Oxymoron.
Verily, there was a moment last weekend when Solon, Oxymoron, Supadiscomama, Harrogate, and Best Buddy/Supadiscobaby happily watched the following classic movie scene together.
The quality of the clip aint the best. But the memory. That's forever. "Oh yes, it's a wonderful song. I think you're familiar with it"
It was a real shot in the arm for many of us down here. Get togethers and fun were experienced by many last weekend, drinks were consumed, pool was played, and then there was that really strange dude that decided to join our table at the bar and carry on as though he'd known us all along. And of course, it was made all the better by the appearance of none other than the great Oxymoron.
Verily, there was a moment last weekend when Solon, Oxymoron, Supadiscomama, Harrogate, and Best Buddy/Supadiscobaby happily watched the following classic movie scene together.
The quality of the clip aint the best. But the memory. That's forever. "Oh yes, it's a wonderful song. I think you're familiar with it"
Thursday, October 09, 2008
Last time we saw Junior Soprano...
drool was pouring out of his mouth while a cat sat on his lap at a N.J. state hospital for the elderly.
It seems not much has changed, though he can do some voice overs...
It seems not much has changed, though he can do some voice overs...
Cutting off birth control supplies to Africa
How is it that George Bush and John McCain can claim to be pro-life when this policy, in fact, proves quite the opposite?
Analyzing Gibbs's Methodology; Or, Rachel Maddow Listened to Her First-Year Composition Teacher
One of the things that I constantly tell my composition students is that they need to "show, not tell." That is to say, they should demonstrate their points through examples and description, rather than simply stating their points and expecting their audiences to concede said points without evidence.
In an effort to emphasize the importance of this rhetorical necessity, I often remind students that I am from Missouri, and that Missouri is the "Show-Me State." Consequently, if their arguments are not showing me, then they're not persuading me. And if they're not persuading me, then they're not effective. And if they are not effective, then...well, then they're far from A-territory.
On Countdown last night, Keith Olbermann discussed the Hannity-Gibbs clip that the almighty Roof posted yesterday. In doing so, he asked Rachel Maddow to comment on Gibbs's methodology and to describe how he acheived success against Hannity. Maddow's response:
This wonderful pedagogical moment begins at the four-minute mark.
In an effort to emphasize the importance of this rhetorical necessity, I often remind students that I am from Missouri, and that Missouri is the "Show-Me State." Consequently, if their arguments are not showing me, then they're not persuading me. And if they're not persuading me, then they're not effective. And if they are not effective, then...well, then they're far from A-territory.
On Countdown last night, Keith Olbermann discussed the Hannity-Gibbs clip that the almighty Roof posted yesterday. In doing so, he asked Rachel Maddow to comment on Gibbs's methodology and to describe how he acheived success against Hannity. Maddow's response:
He did it by showing, instead of telling.
This wonderful pedagogical moment begins at the four-minute mark.
Thursday Musical Tribute
I woke up with this song running through my head this morning. As it is a good one, I thought I'd share. . .
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
Assy McGee Award®: Camille Paglia (Heh)
Harrogate suspects there might be Board Members at least somewhat curious as to what that crazy old gal, (Heh), Camille Paglia, has to say about the election. Well, Breaking News: Paglia still calls herself an Obama supporter, but for the life of her, cannot figure out why Palin's Veep run isn't being celebrated as a huge feminist achievment.
So here's to ya, Camille. You Betcha and you're Darned Tootin', nobody deserves the October 8th Assy McGee Award® more than you.
Your concern about the foreign-policy world-view of liberal Democrats is certainly justified. The university culture at Columbia and Harvard through which Obama passed has been drenched in a reflexive anti-Americanism for several decades. Armchair blame-America-first leftism is the default mode. Disdain for the military is rampant, and conservative voices are rarely heard.
and
Yes, both Todd and Sarah Palin, whom most people in the U.S. and abroad had never even heard of until six weeks ago, have emerged as powerful new symbols of a revived contemporary feminism. That the macho Todd, with his champion athleticism and working-class cred, can so amiably cradle babies and care for children is a huge step forward in American sexual symbolism.
and
And where is all that lurid sexual fantasy coming from? When I watch Sarah Palin, I don't think sex -- I think Amazon warrior! I admire her competitive spirit and her exuberant vitality, which borders on the supernormal.
and
People who can't see how smart Palin is are trapped in their own narrow parochialism -- the tedious, hackneyed forms of their upper-middle-class syntax and vocabulary.
That's right. But, Friends: These are only teasers. Follow the link to get the full ridiculousness.
The Obama Craft Project
Our friend Sarah introduced me to The Obama Craft Project blog:
The Obama Craft Project seeks to celebrate and archive the work of the manyYou really should check out some of these crafty items! Some of my faves:
crafters who have created projects inspired by Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign for
the Presidency.
My Hero, Robert Gibbs
After the debate last night, Robert Gibbs appeared on Hannity and Combs. During the appearance, Hannity and Gibbs discussed the William Ayers relationship.
In this clip, Gibbs attacked Hannity for a recent show on Hannity's America that attacked Obama and his "radical connections" and turns the tables on Hannity's guilt by association tactics. While Hannity attacked Obama's judgment because he sat on a board with Ayers, Gibbs argues that if this guilt by association tactic is correct then Hannity is anti-Semitic since Hannity allowed an anti-Semite on Hannity's America.
Besides hijacking Hannity and Combs and brining rationality to it, Gibbs takes Hannity's position to its logical conclusion, weakening Hannity's ethos and limiting his ability to make arguments.
I wonder why Hannity let Gibbs speak?
In this clip, Gibbs attacked Hannity for a recent show on Hannity's America that attacked Obama and his "radical connections" and turns the tables on Hannity's guilt by association tactics. While Hannity attacked Obama's judgment because he sat on a board with Ayers, Gibbs argues that if this guilt by association tactic is correct then Hannity is anti-Semitic since Hannity allowed an anti-Semite on Hannity's America.
Besides hijacking Hannity and Combs and brining rationality to it, Gibbs takes Hannity's position to its logical conclusion, weakening Hannity's ethos and limiting his ability to make arguments.
I wonder why Hannity let Gibbs speak?
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
Solon's Last Post Reprised, and a Tuesday Musical Tribute
My friend, my friend hes got a knife
A statement from his former life
When he was easy but alone
Beside him was an empty throne
But what of silver silken blade
Affix his gaze, his features staid
Grasps the handle, clips the cable
One steps up, sits at his table
My friend, my friend, hes got a knife
My friend, my friend, hes got a wife
My friend, my friend, the clever ruse
Persuasion through his thoughts peruse
A hidden relic from his past
That wasnt there when he looked last
He feels it ticking like a bomb
Feeding fear, assaulting calm
Takes the object, starts the game
Moves closer to the flame
Phrase of the Night:
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends. My Friends.
Ouch!
From The Rolling Stone:
In its broad strokes, McCain's life story is oddly similar to that of the
current occupant of the White House. John Sidney McCain III and George Walker
Bush both represent the third generation of American dynasties. Both were born
into positions of privilege against which they rebelled into mediocrity. Both
developed an uncanny social intelligence that allowed them to skate by with a
minimum of mental exertion. Both struggled with booze and loutish behavior. At
each step, with the aid of their fathers' powerful friends, both failed upward.
And both shed their skins as Episcopalian members of the Washington elite to
build political careers as self-styled, ranch-inhabiting Westerners who pray to
Jesus in their wives' evangelical churches.
In one vital respect, however,
the comparison is deeply unfair to the current president: George W. Bush was a
much better pilot.
Ideas Have Consequences: State of the Race
With 28 eight days to go and the second presidential debate scheduled for this evening, the bottom is about to fall out.
Currently, the Republican "mavericks" rely on guilt by association arguments. Of course, the self-defined "mavericks" do not engage in any introspection over the consequences of their actions.
Cases in point: First, at a McCain rally yesterday, McCain asks his audience, "Who is Obama," and an audience member responds a terrorist. Second, at a Palin rally, while the Hockey Mom attacks Obama as a terrorist, an audience member shouts out "Kill Him!!!" Additionally, as Matthew Yglesias notes, at the Palin rally, Palin continued to attack a press that dare ask her questions while her audience members wave thunder sticks at the press and another Palin supporter shouted a "racial epithet at an African American sound man for a network and told him, 'Sit down, boy.'"
Democracy is quite a dangerous game when your opponent is not a colleague but your enemy and the proper course of action does not involve compromise but death. If this election concerns without outbursts of violence, I will be mildly surprised.
Thanks to A.S. for finding this above photo.
Monday, October 06, 2008
Talk About Dirty Politics
For a country that does not take its politics seriously, cutting the brake lines of the "Liberal" parties supporters is just down right wrong. I guess that is what those hockey mom's do!
Rules for Tomorow's Debate
Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow....
According to Ben Smith and Lynn Sweet, here are the rules for the debate tomorrow.
From this description, no one can ask a follow up. Pander Fest USA!!!
Why should the candidates agree to this? This is even bad television as there will little chance for conflict or disagreement. At most, one can have a "I feel your pain" moment, which no one could possibly believe; one candidate could avoid providing a substantive answer to any question deemed remotely objectionable and where have we seen that; or maybe, for entertainment's sake, a candidate will look bored and stare down at his watch. What substance?
Knowing the rules, my initial take will be this will only be one ad hominem after another. Maybe McCain will call Obama a terrorist to his face.
Update: if you read Sweet's blog, you'll find out that the candidates agreed to a process that prohibited notes. Now, in the VP debate, Palin stared at notes, which means she violated the rules and brought notes or, to answer Harrogate's question, while Biden was speaking, she wrote as many topoi as possible, which means she was not listening to Biden speak. What class!!!
According to Ben Smith and Lynn Sweet, here are the rules for the debate tomorrow.
Under the deal, the moderator may not ask followups or make comments. The person who asks the question will not be allowed a follow-up either, and his or her microphone will be turned off after the question is read. A camera shot will only be shown of the person asking -- not reacting.
While there will be director's chairs (with backs and foot rests), McCain and Obama will be allowed to stand -- but they can't roam past their "designated area" to be marked on the stage. McCain and Obama are not supposed to ask each other direct questions.
[T]he candidates are banned during the debates from moving to the other side -- and from wielding proposed pledges.
From this description, no one can ask a follow up. Pander Fest USA!!!
Why should the candidates agree to this? This is even bad television as there will little chance for conflict or disagreement. At most, one can have a "I feel your pain" moment, which no one could possibly believe; one candidate could avoid providing a substantive answer to any question deemed remotely objectionable and where have we seen that; or maybe, for entertainment's sake, a candidate will look bored and stare down at his watch. What substance?
Knowing the rules, my initial take will be this will only be one ad hominem after another. Maybe McCain will call Obama a terrorist to his face.
Update: if you read Sweet's blog, you'll find out that the candidates agreed to a process that prohibited notes. Now, in the VP debate, Palin stared at notes, which means she violated the rules and brought notes or, to answer Harrogate's question, while Biden was speaking, she wrote as many topoi as possible, which means she was not listening to Biden speak. What class!!!
Say what you will about Elizabeth Hasselbeck
but she lacks the basic intelligence to be on television. And ideology is not a good replacement.
She reminds me of William Kristol....and that cannot be a good mental connection.
Today on The View, the hosts discussed political smears, especially guilt by association tactics. Conservatives are making the argument that Obama is a terrorist because he knowns William Ayers. But for some reason, Conservatives do not argue that McCain is war criminal because he signed a bill authorizing torture or hangs out with President Bush, but I digress...
Yet, displaying her intelligence like she has never has before, Hasselbeck declared that she does not like Obama because unlike Palin, Obama is not open and has not declared his connections to political radicals. I forget, what happened during the Democratic Primary? Oh.
Seriously. If Hillary Clinton could not use this information to her advantage, how could McCain? It is not if this information has just been revealed.
But as for Hasselbeck, rather than discuss all of her lies, let's just focus on her standard of Palin. To Hasselbeck, Palin is the paragon of openness; Obama just hides his radical connections. I imagine that, because of Palin's openness, we know so much about her medical health and Troopergate, as well as her basic world-view because she consistently answers questions and holds press conferences on a regular basis.
Elizabeth- please, try harder. Because you look like a damn fool every day on The View.
She reminds me of William Kristol....and that cannot be a good mental connection.
Today on The View, the hosts discussed political smears, especially guilt by association tactics. Conservatives are making the argument that Obama is a terrorist because he knowns William Ayers. But for some reason, Conservatives do not argue that McCain is war criminal because he signed a bill authorizing torture or hangs out with President Bush, but I digress...
Yet, displaying her intelligence like she has never has before, Hasselbeck declared that she does not like Obama because unlike Palin, Obama is not open and has not declared his connections to political radicals. I forget, what happened during the Democratic Primary? Oh.
Seriously. If Hillary Clinton could not use this information to her advantage, how could McCain? It is not if this information has just been revealed.
But as for Hasselbeck, rather than discuss all of her lies, let's just focus on her standard of Palin. To Hasselbeck, Palin is the paragon of openness; Obama just hides his radical connections. I imagine that, because of Palin's openness, we know so much about her medical health and Troopergate, as well as her basic world-view because she consistently answers questions and holds press conferences on a regular basis.
Elizabeth- please, try harder. Because you look like a damn fool every day on The View.
A Response to a Recent Comment by Oxymoron, a Monday Musical Tribute to Led Zeppelin, and a Visual Rhetoric Open Thread
Comes courtesy of Barry Blitt, the same artist who brought us the famous New Yorker cover art of Barack and Michelle Obama. The image accompanies yesterday's New York Times installment by Frank Rich, provocatively entitled "Pitbull Palin Mauls McCain"Meanwhile, click play on the video below, and ye shall experience a great performance by Led Zeppelin, of one of their hottest and, in terms of the almighty jam, most underrated songs ever, "Trampled Under Foot." Damn, those fellas could tear it up!
Say it Ain't So Joe
Joe Lieberman introduced Sarah Palin at a rally today in Florida. During his introduction, TNR reports that he stated:
While I should attack Lieberman and Palin for arguing thaqt this election concerns the choices of G-d rather than human agency and the colossal mistakes by humans, maybe they are right in understanding that it will take divine intervention at this point.
In addition: Earlier, I discussed Kristol's column in which he argues that Palin/ McCain need to tar and feather their opponents. In this piece, Kristol quotes Palin discussing tomorrow's debate, saying McCain should "take the gloves off." TNR makes a good point: "Wouldn't a real hockey mom recommend that McCain "drop the gloves"?"
You betcha!!!
"She's so strong, she's so capable, she's so competent," Lieberman told the cheering crowd. Emphasizing her "faith," he added that she is someone who "with your help--and God's help--will be the next vice president of the United States."
The religiousity continued when Palin bounded onstage. She commented right away on the number of American flags in the crowd, declaring: "God bless America--you guys get it!"
While I should attack Lieberman and Palin for arguing thaqt this election concerns the choices of G-d rather than human agency and the colossal mistakes by humans, maybe they are right in understanding that it will take divine intervention at this point.
In addition: Earlier, I discussed Kristol's column in which he argues that Palin/ McCain need to tar and feather their opponents. In this piece, Kristol quotes Palin discussing tomorrow's debate, saying McCain should "take the gloves off." TNR makes a good point: "Wouldn't a real hockey mom recommend that McCain "drop the gloves"?"
You betcha!!!
Sarah Palin, A Governor Devoid of Irony
William "They Will Greet Us as Liberators" Kristol, a writer who possesses no knowledge of reality-- just "forms", insults the American people once again in his Times column. Writing with the assumption that the American people are stupid and what should move the people is Culture rather than a real discussion of any issues, Kristol argues that McCain/ Palin should bring up the good Rev. Wright, especially during tomorrow night's debate.
When Kristol asks Palin, Palin states:
This quote reveals nothing but contempt for the American people. Why would it be okay for McCain/ Palin to attack Obama because of his religious associations? Are McCain and Palin that stupid to take this route, especially with the religious associations of McCain (Hagee) and Palin (Jews for Jesus, speaking in tongues, Alaska as a place of salvation for the end times).
I would prefer Palin to actually read and then explain the comments by Rev. Wright and then explain how her religious "beliefs" and "practices" provide a better moral foundation for an individual.
For Kristol, this just reveals more pure, conservative, anti-intellectualism. For Palin, this just reveals pure stupidity.
Should we expect anything less? When you cannot offer the American people any substance, you must look to tar and feather... I hope no Wiccans will be burned at the stake.
When Kristol asks Palin, Palin states:
“To tell you the truth, Bill, I don’t know why that association isn’t discussed more, because those were appalling things that that pastor had said about our great country, and to have sat in the pews for 20 years and listened to that — with, I don’t know, a sense of condoning it, I guess, because he didn’t get up and leave — to me, that does say something about character. But, you know, I guess that would be a John McCain call on whether he wants to bring that up.”
This quote reveals nothing but contempt for the American people. Why would it be okay for McCain/ Palin to attack Obama because of his religious associations? Are McCain and Palin that stupid to take this route, especially with the religious associations of McCain (Hagee) and Palin (Jews for Jesus, speaking in tongues, Alaska as a place of salvation for the end times).
I would prefer Palin to actually read and then explain the comments by Rev. Wright and then explain how her religious "beliefs" and "practices" provide a better moral foundation for an individual.
For Kristol, this just reveals more pure, conservative, anti-intellectualism. For Palin, this just reveals pure stupidity.
Should we expect anything less? When you cannot offer the American people any substance, you must look to tar and feather... I hope no Wiccans will be burned at the stake.
Real Government Begins
While this presidential race is exciting, and all that, the real branch of government, the Supreme Court, begins it term today.
The New York Times argues that it will be a quiet year for the Kennedy, er, I mean Robert's Court. The Justices will hear cases on free speech (Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations), redistricting (Bartlett v. Strickland), and the ten commandments (Pleasant Grove City v. Summum).
Today's arguments concern the rights of individuals to being forth claims against cigarette companies that advertised "light" cigarettes as being "healthier."
The guiding principle for the Robert's Court has been to reduce standing and limit the people who can bring forth claims through the judiciary. The 2008 Presidential election may alter the way in which the Robert's Court can continue to do this.
During the next four years, there should be substantial shifts to the Supreme Court as Stevens and Ginsburg will most likely step down. Five other Justice may step down in the next 6 - 10 years as two Justices will have served for almost twenty years.
The New York Times argues that it will be a quiet year for the Kennedy, er, I mean Robert's Court. The Justices will hear cases on free speech (Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations), redistricting (Bartlett v. Strickland), and the ten commandments (Pleasant Grove City v. Summum).
Today's arguments concern the rights of individuals to being forth claims against cigarette companies that advertised "light" cigarettes as being "healthier."
The guiding principle for the Robert's Court has been to reduce standing and limit the people who can bring forth claims through the judiciary. The 2008 Presidential election may alter the way in which the Robert's Court can continue to do this.
During the next four years, there should be substantial shifts to the Supreme Court as Stevens and Ginsburg will most likely step down. Five other Justice may step down in the next 6 - 10 years as two Justices will have served for almost twenty years.
Sunday, October 05, 2008
Nailed them both
Proving it is indeed a non-partisan show, SNL nailed both Biden and Palin in its parody of the VP Debate. I especially like how Queen Latifah imitated Gwen Ifill's obvious preference for the Obama-Biden ticket.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)