Comments Posted By jackson1234
Displaying 61 To 70 Of 190 Comments
IT'S GOOD TO BE A 'DOMESTIC TERRORIST'
Fair question, Chuck, so let us flip it.
Why did you left-wingers bitch and moan not only at Bush's actual outrages but at those you imagined and dredged from fever swamps, yet you not only support the most economically illiterate president in history but actively try to shut up those who point out that unpleasant little fact?
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 2.09.2009 @ 13:22
Political pathologies abound.
It could be worse. As an Obamacare opponent, you could be considered a racist. After all, America's normal terrorists, the eco kind who commit about 90 percent of all such acts each year, are good people and you could luck up and be confused with them.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 2.09.2009 @ 10:39
ANGRY IDEOLOGUES vs. THE STATISTS
The difference between Bush and his Big Government "conservative" critics is a matter of degree, and a minor one at that. I find that quite ironic. While I agree with much of what you wrote about civility, I simply would point out that Americans are much more conservative than perhaps Bartlett, to use an example, would like. Poll after poll confirms it, and the GOP does not need to become the Democratic Party-lite. We are in another period of upheaval, and this time the pendulum has started to swing sharply right again. The ability to govern is important, but if it devolves into Me-tooism the electorate simply will cast its lot with the bigger statists.
While at it, we use the word "statist" constantly although in a collective context. The Left accuses the Right of wanting a "National Security State," the Right accuses the Left of wanting a "Nanny State." Both terms have merit although they are used derisively and often accurately.
Finally, Barack Obama has been a gift. The perception that the American electorate had swung to the Left and wanted larger government has been torn to shreds as citizens from all walks of life have resisted this overreach. We can always debate where the line is drawn, but as polls and recent events bear out, Americans still resist too much government. The ability to manage is important, but we cannot ignore what has happened in the last few months.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 1.09.2009 @ 08:39
TRENDS FOR 2010 BEGINNING TO WORRY DEMOCRATS
Who would have thought as little as three months ago there would be a possibility the House majority could change hands? Charlie Cook, who has a good record, believes it is just as possible the GOP could pick up more than 20 seats than win less than 20 seats. Stu Rothenberg, who earlier this year claimed it impossible the GOP would retake the House in 2010, has started to do a walk back of sorts. His record is quite good, too.
A GOP-controlled House in 2010 is a long shot but possible now. The best result for the GOP, I think, would be a narrow Dem majority wehrein that party's brewing civil war between moderates and liberals would reach fever pitch.
As for the Senate, it likely ain't gonna happen. Then again, unlike the House, the Senate has frequently shifted parties in recent decades because this nation despite all the "Part X is Dead" bullshit remains split down the middle. Again, a few months ago most observers didn't think the GOP would gain Senate seats and that seems more than likely now.
It is a long way off, but one thing seems certain: Obama has done to his party in a matter of months what it took Bush eight years to accomplish---greatly (but certainly not permanently) weaken it. Perhaps that is the bright spot to this Administration.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 31.08.2009 @ 11:36
KOPECHNE AS MARTYR TO KENNEDY'S FAILED AMBITION
Well done, Rick.
While I hope Kopechne was unconscious, she likely did watch as water seeped into her last gasp of air. We can't grasp the enormity.
I initially thought Kennedy's legacy was the coarsening of political discourse via his tirade against Bork (whom I wouldn't have supported, either, due to ideological extremism but like any ratonal person would have done so respectfully due to the man's immense intellect). You have made me reconsider, though. Kennedy's legacy probably is the murder of Kopechne and his subsequent public acceptance.
Ignorant non-entities like Lafsky are a dime a dozen. A senator who murdered a woman and was re-elected time and time again--and came close to the presidency--are sui generis.
Again, this was a very thoughtful blog and one of the few I've read in a while that made me question something I believed.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 28.08.2009 @ 10:47
WHAT IF 'OBAMACARE' MORPHS INTO KENNEDYKARE?
tps: Thanks for the reality check. Although it bolsters the point I made, it also is another reason Kennedy's death won't be a factor. I'm getting too old to remember the Camelot mythology belongs to people who are mostly dead now. The percentage that does recall Teddy probably breaks down like lion speculated, particularly in the Blue Dog and swing districts: overwhelmingly negative. Coupled with a possible majority who don't even know who Kennedy is...well, my point stands.
The only Dems delusional enough to think the Blue Dogs and red state Dem senators will jump into the fire over Kennedy are those from the bluest of blue states, in other words, those most out of touch with reality. Those who face a looming bloodbath in 2010 harbor no such delusions.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 27.08.2009 @ 12:43
You are wrong. Dem MoC's in swing districts and Dem senators in red states know full well their constituents not only didn't give a shit about Kennedy, most viscerally hated him, including a substantial number of conservative Democrats. Those are the votes that matter, and the number of officals who will fall on their swords over Kennedy probably can be counted on one finger.
I don't know if lion's numbers can be verified, but they strike me as about right. Dems may have gotten totally out of touch with reality in the last few months, but those who face tough re-election campaigns next year are fully aware that Kennedy dead or alive was irrelevant as to how their constituents would treat them if they voted for this bill. Now, some who may know they are going down next year (Cook puts the Dem MoCs at plus 20 now) might--might--be swayed because they know it is over for them. But most pols never can admit to themselves they will be defeated.
I'll go out on a limb. Health care reform with a public option is dead, and all the publicity stunts in the world won't revive it.
This isn't a matter of propriety. It is a matter of reality.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 27.08.2009 @ 10:34
NO DOUBTING TED KENNEDY'S IMPACT ON HISTORY
Sure, he was a morally despicable man and a great senator, and that represents a great contradiction. But what has damned Kennedy and his legacy forever is that more than any one individual, he is responsible for the total loss of civility in public life. The day Kennedy took to the Senate floor to launch a largely ad hominem attack on Robert Bork marked the day our politics became poisonous. Sure, he did the same thing with Thomas, but the Bork assassination was the moment our politics changed forever and for the worse. I understand among opposition senators he was quite admired. Nonetheless, his poisonous rather than principled attack on a distinguished jurist will be his legacy because it led us to the ugliness of today's public life.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 26.08.2009 @ 11:59
YES, BUT DON'T CALL THEM UNPATRIOTIC
Is this parody, farce or true? If the latter, I defy any liberal to come here and defend it.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 24.08.2009 @ 12:47
Beautiful post.
Comment Posted By jackson1234 On 21.08.2009 @ 11:11
