Comments Posted By shaun
Displaying 41 To 50 Of 93 Comments
NO, AMERICA -- YOU CAN'T KEEP THE HEALTH INSURANCE YOU HAVE NOW
Rick:
This post should have taken the "I’m a Liar -- But Don't Hold That Against Me." It brings out the worst in a blogger who more often than not is deeply thoughtful and . . . well, accurate.
You rely on a single source -- a single freaking source -- to go bonkers, and that source is none other than that pillar of malicious misinformation, the New York Post.
I covered HillaryCare in 1993 and have closely followed ObamaCare in 2009. Simply put: You, like the Post, are making stuff up out of thin air.
If you don't have the guts to delete this demonstrably false pile of excrement, then I suggest you consider blogging on:
* Pat Buchanan's overarching racism and why people even listen to him anymore.
* Why John Ensign and Mark Sanford should quit.
* Anything about baseball. Please!
Comment Posted By Shaun On 17.07.2009 @ 09:29
Having brought up the religion "issue" in the first place, let me jump back in:
I do not believe that Romney's faith should be an issue but as other commenters have noted, it certainly will be.
Comment Posted By shaun On 10.07.2009 @ 12:14
Interesting and instructive that Romney's religion was not mentioned.
Romney would run to win and not run to merely run, so the question should be asked:
Was America ready for an African-American as president? Yes. Is America ready for a Mormon as president. I really don't know.
Comment Posted By shaun On 9.07.2009 @ 12:24
"Palin will do better if she runs again."
"No human being I know is as bad as the portrait painted of Palin in that article."
Let go, Rick, let go.
Politicians who came before Palin and will come after her are and will be narcissistic, lie when they don't event have to, be willfully stupid and use their good looks as a cudgel.
It's just that she is all those things and more.
Comment Posted By Shaun On 1.07.2009 @ 11:32
What to do you mean "taking a giant step?"
Am I to suppose that Rick Moran runs stop signs, doesn't pay taxes, harbors illegal immigrants, doesn't care where the crap goes when he flushes his toilet, keeps his children out of school because he can't be bothered, beats his basset hound . . . you get the idea.
To argue that a carcinogen and killer of millions -- including my father, who began smoking when he was 13 -- should be free of the regulation that this long-overdue legislation calls for is somehow Orwellian is plain silly.
And the bunch o' hypocrites name calling is sillier still. Tobacco and alcohol are not comparables. And, of course, neither is marijuana.
You offer no evidence whatsoever to dispute the fact that alcohol related disease and social problems causes states to spend several times what they spend on smokers thus making booze a much bigger drain on the taxpayer's purse - one the the primary justifications for excessive taxes and over regulation. And where in God's name do I argue that smoking should be free of regulation? You just made that up.
And yes - anyone who looks with satisfaction on these actions without advocating a ban is a hypocrite.
ed.
Comment Posted By Shaun On 12.06.2009 @ 10:37
Rick:
Blogs may indeed help one discover their humanity, but seldom their humility. I can say quite sincerely that beyond the fact that I sometimes vehemently disagree with you, Rightwing Nuthouse has helped you do both.
Comment Posted By Shaun On 9.06.2009 @ 10:51
THE OUTING OF PUBLIUS AND THE COMFORT OF ANONYMITY
A-L-L-A-H-P-U-N-D-I-T
Comment Posted By Shaun On 8.06.2009 @ 09:08
OBAMA'S CAIRO ADDRESS: DID IT LIVE UP TO THE HYPE?
Probably the niftiest phrase ever turned by George Bush (even if a speechwriter spoon fed him) was "the soft bigotry of low expectations."
That is at work with the overall reaction from the punditocracy to the Cairo speech and while I knew you slipped the usual grenade or two into your analysis, it is one of the better ones.
Comment Posted By Shaun On 5.06.2009 @ 09:30
DEALERGATE: STATISTICAL COINCIDENCE OR POLITICAL BIAS? (IMPORTANT UPDATE BELOW)
I've read your post and all of the links twice and as a longtime onetime investigative editor I conclude that there are a few wisps of smoke but no fire.
That isn't likely to change for the simple reason that more than a mere handful of people would have to be involved in cherry picking dealers based on their political bona fides, and by this point one or more would have blabbed to someone who could give the conspiracy real legs.
Conspiracy? Not hardly. Politics played to the hilt, yes. There is nothing illegal (contractual violations may be a different story). But voters are funny about fair play and something like this could redound in favor of Republicans politically.
ed.
Comment Posted By shaun On 28.05.2009 @ 11:43
PRINCIPLE SHOULD TRUMP PRAGMATISM IN SOTOMAYOR VOTE
The sound you hear is Henry Clay spinning in his grave.
Comment Posted By Shaun On 27.05.2009 @ 10:01
