LawTalkers

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Know new taxes! (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=819)

Cletus Miller 01-07-2009 12:21 PM

Re: Guess who
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) (Post 376528)
I agree with your first paragraph, but doesn't your second undermine it? If she wanted insiders, why wouldn't she object to Goss for the same (underlying) reason?

She wasn't the chair when Goss was nominated? And it was '04, when every Dem was running scared from the label "soft on terror"?

Adder 01-07-2009 12:23 PM

Re: Guess who
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller (Post 376529)
I think that Burris has Coleman beat on the primary qualification for the Senate--being a Self-Important Twit.

I don't know about that. How well do you know Norm? Did Burris ever switch parties only so he would have a shot at getting the nomination for governor (only to lose to a wrestler)?

Cletus Miller 01-07-2009 12:34 PM

Re: Guess who
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 376534)
I don't know about that. How well do you know Norm? Did Burris ever switch parties only so he would have a shot at getting the nomination for governor (only to lose to a wrestler)?

I didn't know that Norm had named his kids Norm II and Norma (Burris' kids are Roland II and Rolanda).

I know of Norm reasonable well. I doubt he ever did an Ali impression at a press conference--including boxing shorts and gloves and saying "I'm the greatest". Or that he has a mausoleum citing among his accomplishments First A-A in Illinois to be an SIU exchange student to the University of Hamburg and calling himself "Trail Blazer".

Tyrone Slothrop 01-07-2009 12:36 PM

Re: Guess who
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) (Post 376528)
I agree with your first paragraph, but doesn't your second undermine it? If she wanted insiders, why wouldn't she object to Goss for the same (underlying) reason?

IIRC, the Democrats were not in the majority yet, so it's not like she would have had the same clout in any event. And Rockefeller was the ranking Democrat on the committee. He lacks a spine, but trying to oppose Bush on that appointment would have turned into a partisan affair, and a loser.

I'm not at all clear that Feinstein would really oppose Panetta -- it seems to me that she is more trying to remind everyone that they ought not take her for granted. Once the pick is leaked, it becomes very hard for Obama to back off it just because Feinstein says "boo."

Tyrone Slothrop 01-07-2009 12:45 PM

Re: Guess who
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 376534)
How well do you know Norm?

Thank you for giving me an excuse to repost Garrison Keillor's 2002 slam on Coleman:

Quote:

Norm Coleman won Minnesota because he was well-financed and well-packaged. Norm is a slick retail campaigner, the grabbiest and touchingest and feelingest politician in Minnesota history, a hugger and baby-kisser, and he's a genuine boomer candidate who reinvents himself at will. The guy is a Brooklyn boy who became a left-wing student radical at Hofstra University with hair down to his shoulders, organized antiwar marches, said vile things about Richard Nixon, etc. Then he came west, went to law school, changed his look, went to work in the attorney general's office in Minnesota. Was elected mayor of St. Paul as a moderate Democrat, then swung comfortably over to the Republican side. There was no dazzling light on the road to Damascus, no soul-searching: Norm switched parties as you'd change sport coats.

Norm is glib. I once organized a dinner at the Minnesota Club to celebrate F. Scott Fitzgerald's birthday and Norm came, at the suggestion of his office, and spoke, at some length and with quite some fervor, about how much Fitzgerald means to all of us in St. Paul, and it was soon clear to anyone who has ever graded 9th grade book reports that the mayor had never read Fitzgerald. Nonetheless, he spoke at great length, with great feeling. Last month, when Bush came to sprinkle water on his campaign, Norm introduced him by saying, "God bless America is a prayer, and I believe that this man is God's answer to that prayer." Same guy.

(Jesse Ventura, of course, wouldn't have been caught dead blathering at an F. Scott Fitzgerald dinner about how proud we are of the Great Whoever-He-Was and his vision and his dream blah-blah-blah, and that was the refreshing thing about Jesse. The sort of unctuous hooey that comes naturally and easily to Norm Coleman Jesse would be ashamed to utter in public. Give the man his due. He spoke English. He didn't open his mouth and emit soap bubbles. He was no suck up. He had more dignity than to kiss the president's shoe.)

Norm got a free ride from the press. St. Paul is a small town and anybody who hangs around the St. Paul Grill knows about Norm's habits. Everyone knows that his family situation is, shall we say, very interesting, but nobody bothered to ask about it, least of all the religious people in the Republican Party. They made their peace with hypocrisy long ago. So this false knight made his way as an all-purpose feel-good candidate, standing for vaguely Republican values, supporting the president.

He was 9 points down to Wellstone when the senator's plane went down. But the tide was swinging toward the president in those last 10 days. And Norm rode the tide. Mondale took a little while to get a campaign going. And Norm finessed Wellstone's death beautifully. The Democrats stood up in raw grief and yelled and shook their fists and offended people. Norm played his violin. He sorrowed well in public, he was expertly nuanced. The mostly negative campaign he ran against Wellstone was forgotten immediately. He backpedalled in the one debate, cruised home a victor. It was a dreadful low moment for the Minnesota voters. To choose Coleman over Walter Mondale is one of those dumb low-rent mistakes, like going to a great steakhouse and ordering the tuna sandwich. But I don't envy someone who's sold his soul. He's condemned to a life of small arrangements. There will be no passion, no joy, no heroism, for him. He is a hollow man. The next six years are not going to be kind to Norm.

Adder 01-07-2009 12:49 PM

Re: Guess who
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 376539)
Thank you for giving me an excuse to repost Garrison Keillor's 2002 slam on Coleman:

I am not sure I have seen that before, but it is a great piece.

Hank Chinaski 01-07-2009 12:56 PM

Re: Guess who
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 376541)
I am not sure I have seen that before, but it is a great piece.

great piece? I could give a shit about the guy, but how is that anything other than some disappointed dem moaning about an election?

Tyrone Slothrop 01-07-2009 01:31 PM

Re: Guess who
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 376543)
great piece? I could give a shit about the guy, but how is that anything other than some disappointed dem moaning about an election?

Most disappointed Dems don't write that well when they moan. Sorry you didn't like it.

Spanky 01-07-2009 02:36 PM

Re: Guess who
 
Hey - I am back.

This is going to make me sound like a Sap, but I like both of them. I have met Norm Coleman on many occasions and helped raise money for him. That Keeler piece was well written but was vacuous. It really didn't say anything of substance. I really like Coleman and I think he did good things for St. Paul.

I have never met Al Franken, and don't agree with a lot of his politics, but I love his books. I have read all of them. I also liked him on Saturday Night Live.

In politics, people find reasons to hate politicians who disagree with them politically because it is easier to wish for the demise of someone if you don't like them. It is much easier to work against somebody if you find a reason to hate them personally. It’s OK if your friends disagree with you politically, but a politician who disagrees with you; you look for reasons to hate them.

I am guilty of it myself. I used to hate Pelosi. Every time I heard her speak it was like fingernails on a chalkboard. I thought she was pompous, condescending and not all that bright. However, I met her in person and had a long talk with her about politics. I walked away really liking and respecting her. But I still am going to do whatever I can to knock her out of the speaker's chair.

Anyway, that is my two cents.

Tyrone Slothrop 01-07-2009 03:10 PM

Re: Guess who
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Spanky (Post 376589)
Hey - I am back.

This is going to make me sound like a Sap, but I like both of them. I have met Norm Coleman on many occasions and helped raise money for him. That Keeler piece was well written but was vacuous. It really didn't say anything of substance. I really like Coleman and I think he did good things for St. Paul.

I have never met Al Franken, and don't agree with a lot of his politics, but I love his books. I have read all of them. I also liked him on Saturday Night Live.

In politics, people find reasons to hate politicians who disagree with them politically because it is easier to wish for the demise of someone if you don't like them. It is much easier to work against somebody if you find a reason to hate them personally. It’s OK if your friends disagree with you politically, but a politician who disagrees with you; you look for reasons to hate them.

I am guilty of it myself. I used to hate Pelosi. Every time I heard her speak it was like fingernails on a chalkboard. I thought she was pompous, condescending and not all that bright. However, I met her in person and had a long talk with her about politics. I walked away really liking and respecting her. But I still am going to do whatever I can to knock her out of the speaker's chair.

Anyway, that is my two cents.


My view of Coleman is largely informed by a family member who is active in DFL politics, and who has particular scorn for him as an empty suit, consistent with Keillor's view. I am happy to hear that he makes a better impression on other people.

Adder 01-07-2009 03:12 PM

Re: Guess who
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Spanky (Post 376589)
Hey - I am back.

This is going to make me sound like a Sap, but I like both of them. I have met Norm Coleman on many occasions and helped raise money for him. That Keeler piece was well written but was vacuous. It really didn't say anything of substance. I really like Coleman and I think he did good things for St. Paul.

I have never met Al Franken, and don't agree with a lot of his politics, but I love his books. I have read all of them. I also liked him on Saturday Night Live.

In politics, people find reasons to hate politicians who disagree with them politically because it is easier to wish for the demise of someone if you don't like them. It is much easier to work against somebody if you find a reason to hate them personally. It’s OK if your friends disagree with you politically, but a politician who disagrees with you; you look for reasons to hate them.

I am guilty of it myself. I used to hate Pelosi. Every time I heard her speak it was like fingernails on a chalkboard. I thought she was pompous, condescending and not all that bright. However, I met her in person and had a long talk with her about politics. I walked away really liking and respecting her. But I still am going to do whatever I can to knock her out of the speaker's chair.

Anyway, that is my two cents.

It is hard to say anyone disagrees with Norm politically, because the only underlying principles for the man seem to be whatever he thinks will win him the next election. I don't disagree with him politically. I think he is empty and slimy.

That said he was a moderate mayor and deserves much of the credit for bringing back pro hockey (and getting an arena built with government money) and getting Lawson Software to move to downtown St. Paul.

But he switched parties for exactly one reason: he thought he would have a better shot at getting elected governor (and wouldn't have to complete with a Mondale, a Humphrey and a Freeman in the primary).

He could be a respectable moderate again some day, but he chose to take a hard turn to the right rhetorically to try to gain favor in the Bush administration. The pay off for him is he couldn't even pull off a clear win against Al Franken. When it comes down to it, the voters of Minnesota haven't shown much enthusiasm for the guy since he switched parties (lost governor, would have lost the senate race if Wellstone hadn't died, and now may lose to Franken).

Adder 01-07-2009 03:13 PM

Re: Guess who
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 376624)
My view of Coleman is largely informed by a family member who is active in DFL politics, and who has particular scorn for him as an empty suit, consistent with Keillor's view. I am happy to hear that he makes a better impression on other people.

I have met him too. He made an okay impression, but he was talking to a group of politically involved college students and playing up his radical roots. That was before the switch, of course, which only made his more recent attitude seem all the more phoney.

Penske_Account 01-07-2009 03:28 PM

Re: Guess who
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 376516)
How strange is that dispute? And what is wrong with Feinstein and Rockafeller to pick a fight over the appointment of a proven administrator and long time insider? It isn't like the director does any spying himself.

Hah! We agree, another sign of the apocalypse.

Penske_Account 01-07-2009 03:32 PM

Re: telling it like it is
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 376525)
Scott Johnson from Powerline (needless to say, not a lefty) (via a post from conservative Randy Barnett at Volokh) thinks you are off-base:

I'm not convinced. The WSJ has more credibility, in any objective world, than this hack blogger, although, I see, even in his analysis, that this thing may actually be Coleman's. I want the will of the people done. Count the votes!

Penske_Account 01-07-2009 03:40 PM

Re: Guess who
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 376541)
I am not sure I have seen that before, but it is a great piece.

What's so great about it? He took some broad based pot shots, mostly at the guy's character, without any real substantiation with facts. Further, do intelligent critical thinking people really take their political cues from Garrison Keillor? If so, this country is in worse shape than it appears.

ps: what is his family situation that everyone knows about and he gets a pass on? If it was such a great piece Keillor wouldn't have let that implied slur pass without definition.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:24 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com