Comments Posted By EBJ
Displaying 1 To 10 Of 29 Comments
'THIS CAN'T BE HAPPENING HERE'
I'm going to have to go with the 'no big deal' crowd. After the MSM's whoring of themselves in the election run up everything else seems pretty marginal.
However, I've got to say that 42 and 44 read like modified press conferences and 43 seems to be a defense of Bush - he could have asked for Fox or others to help with Amnesty in the same fashion as Obama did with ABC but declined to do so. Maybe one more MR reference pushes me to the 'it's a big and highly unusual deal' side.
Comment Posted By EBJ On 16.06.2009 @ 21:12
MUSEUM SHOOTER INFLUENCED BY RIGHT WING RHETORIC?
#22
Have you paying any attention to the last 8 years? You think one of Olberman's rants served "to get constant barrage of subtle criticisms and attacks on President Obama/Bush and the ruling Democrats/Republicans".
Unless you were jumping up and down complaining about the left's unhinged attacks on Bush you've got nothing to say of any importance now.
As to the guy being a Dem, I don't see how that makes a difference one way or the other. Don't the Dems have a former Kleagle in the Senate? I believe they do. If you can spin THAT away who thinks that von Bunn being a Dem is going to dissuade the left from blaming it on the right?
Comment Posted By EBJ On 12.06.2009 @ 11:15
DEALERGATE: STATISTICAL COINCIDENCE OR POLITICAL BIAS? (IMPORTANT UPDATE BELOW)
"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"
Oh, please. Isn't this how politics is done? You think the people in the room red lining dealerships have some problem with the morality of awarding their friends and punishing their enemies? The folks in that room have probably done worse so I wouldn't assume anybody is going to all of a sudden develop a conscience.
Jeepers, why are there earmarks at all if not to reward your friends? Rewards to friends are common. But punishment comes up to in the form of IRS audits or provoking groups you don't like (Waco). So this is nothing new, though it's awkward for politicians when the rubes are reminded.
Comment Posted By EBJ On 28.05.2009 @ 11:55
I wonder how many regional dealers with six or more franchises kept every dealership? I think the odds suggest that they would lose 1 or 2. In fact, isn't the fairest thing to do, though fairness doesn't necessarily enter into this, to make the regional dealerships give up most of the franchises? For the ones and twos owners, that's probably their livelihood. But for the regionals, it's probably more like an investment amongst a sea of other investments.
Interesting that Open Secrets would show a 3-1 ratio vs an 8-1 ratio by Nate Silver. There's got to be a methodology different there. If it's 8-1 it seems to me the only focus should be on the unscathed six dealership group with prominent Democratic ties. But if it's 3-1 it seems to me there needs to be a full scrub of just Chrysler information across a number of parameters. Put some math folks on it to slice and dice probabilities and relative impacts.
Comment Posted By EBJ On 28.05.2009 @ 11:45
OBAMA OUTFLANKS GOP WITH SOTOMAYOR PICK
So, Michael Reynolds, you've called out two people with different POVs as forwarding "talking points". One says the Repubs should attack on the line that it's an obvious PC pick (the public is sick of the PC stuff so this line of attack works per anon. in #5). The other says attack on her abilities and positions. These are 180, or close to 180 approaches - race is either in the talking points or not. It can't be both.
So which is it? I'm, seriously, just trying to find out what the left is calling the Repub. talking points? Because if there are two diametrically opposed sets, as MR seems to say, then there are no talking points at all since the purpose of talking points is to have a single focused script vs a muddled, multiple message approach.
Comment Posted By EBJ On 27.05.2009 @ 10:53
GOP MORE POPULAR THAN AT ANY TIME SINCE YESTERDAY
The Dems are with the Republicans on guns and defense? Or did you mean to say that via their media enablers the Dems can fool the sheeple enough to convince them that their positions are the same?
It's the same dynamic that allows media lefties to beat up on Miss Cali for the same view that their hero, The One, holds. The sheeple don't even recognize this as an issue. Andie Sullivan has only just realized this and who will be surprised if he turns on The One just as he did to Bush for the single issue that trumps all others?
Comment Posted By EBJ On 19.05.2009 @ 14:55
IS THE GOP ANTI-SCIENCE? OR JUST ANTI-RATIONALIST?
The right should take respect science lessons from the left? No thanks. I'm interested in nuclear energy and protecting African children from malaria.
Comment Posted By EBJ On 12.05.2009 @ 11:58
If you're going to equate Trig Trutherism with Birth Certificate Trutherism I'd like to see the prominent rightie that is pushing the former. I see this all the time: Reid calls Bush a liar but Rush said something bad about Pelosi so it's okay.
And when did EVERYONE become a Keynesian? I took Economics in grad school and undergrad (80s and 90s) and Keynesian economic theory was treated as crazy talk across a number of professors. And now the most recent experience with Keynesian theory (after my course work), Japan, has been a disaster. Of course that's all explained away because they didn't do it right. Sound familiar? Yup, same way Stalin and Mao didn't 'spoil' socialism for the masses. They didn't do it right! We can make it work!
Finally, our cumulative deficit is about 40% of the size of our economy (maybe a little higher now). I think that means, roughly, that if we shut down the government for a year and charged a 40% flat tax we'd be debt free (not that this is possible, just detailing the concept) a year later. Japan's borrowing is 180% of their annual GDP. The US paying off all its debt is absurd. But Japan's situation is impossible. Based on Obama's own budget, our total debt it projected to be at about 80% of the economy in ten years. I bet Japan made a similar projection. But they, Japan and now Obama, build in rosy assumptions - low interest rates, the return of high growth - that effectively disguise the real impact. This is why the people love Obama but not so much his plans. They intuitively understand that a chicken in every pot paid for by someone else will eventually run out of someone elses. Obama may be flying high (or highish) right now but can he really bamboozle the people for four years? We'll see.
Comment Posted By EBJ On 6.05.2009 @ 17:33
Sad that I would put what I read on a corporate bathroom stall wall above the NY Times and Newsweek. At least my bathroom stall wall was written on by professionals. Can you say the same for the NY Times and Newsweek?
Comment Posted By EBJ On 23.04.2009 @ 12:52
WHY DO CONSERVATIVES SEE RED WHEN OBAMA TALKS GREEN?
"I’ve read that the air and water in this country is cleaner than it was 20 years ago"
After Bush? Oh noes! That can't be!
"a march of common sense"
So when did a march of common sense turn into a crawl through inanity? Because I'm thinking that common sense would say that a ball hurdling through the universe at 35,000 mph with a 5 mile high atmosphere who's outer crust is constantly being broken off and replaced isn't much affected by car exhaust. Not the climate. Not the trajectory of the planet. Not much of anything except the people in the immediate area that have to breath the fumes. To think we're changing the climate requires uncommon sense, and the latest polling I saw seems to finally agree with that assessment i.e. the majority of Americans are now AGW skeptics.
Comment Posted By EBJ On 21.04.2009 @ 16:41
