Election 2010: Teabaggin' the Ds & Rs

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

you equate "fun" with inebriation far too often. i think you would be healthier, both mentally and physcically, if you made an effort to begin to distinguish the two.

This is too absurdist even from you.

(Or perhaps "particularly" from you.)

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

It was understood for a long time that Fanny and Freddie had implicit government guarantees -- it's not like that's something that Obama (or Bush) invented when things went south.

Understood.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Yes, Fannie and Freddie have monstrous bailout costs, but just as TARP led to paybacks, over time, a lot of that bailout money will be recouped. You can't freeze the music now and call the request for additional funding a loss any more than you could call a business asking for expansion of its credit line a loss.

I'm not so sure about this. How are all of those mortgages going to be repaid? Certainly not at face.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

This is too absurdist even from you.

(Or perhaps "particularly" from you.)

be careful.

this board is stronger than our economy, but there are still things that can kill it. you, me, penske or thurgreed whiffing- that'll potentially be the singularity that results in the big bang.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

be careful.

this board is stronger than our economy, but there are still things that can kill it. you, me, penske or thurgreed whiffing- that'll potentially be the singularity that results in the big bang.

Bad physics makes Eva Silverstein cry.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

Bad physics makes Eva Silverstein cry.

i was going to make the obvious "atticus's sister" joke here. then i realized you will likely someday hold elected office and I could take advantage of that- so i didn't make the joke, so you will someday send me work.

you owe me. remember.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Adder

I can't tell if you are meaning to imply that you disagree with Prof. Volokh, whose analysis seems to me to be rather irrefutable.

I cannot help you if you do not understand my (in this case) non-nuanced English.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Putting aside what you may think are "similar legal systems", you have a surprising ally - http://volokh.com/2010/03/19/oklahom...lahoma-courts/

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Putting aside its motivation, do you disagree with the Bill?

Originally Posted by LessinSF

I cannot help you if you do not understand my (in this case) non-nuanced English.

Totally non-nuanced, indeed.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Penske 2.0

Growing up the child of a single mom, (i) in part in Hawaii, which has a tangibly distinctive culture from the mainland US, and is in some part almost third worldish, and yet where he went to the most exclusive independent school in the Islands (and fairly exclusive by standards of independent schools, excepting the east coast, which has an intensified flavor of exclusivity), and (ii) in part in Indonesia, which is a third world country and, I'll go out on a limb here, definitely has a distinctive culture as compared with the US or other "western" countries; seems sort of unusual to me as compared with the average american born in the US and even in comparison to the fancy backgrounds of the presidents of the last 60 years or so.

I'm good with celebrating diversity, and in order to do that you have to acknowledge that it exists, and it seems to me that Obama had a diverse upbringing. No?

More diverse than average kid in Peoria, but no more diverse than the average army brat. But apparently being abroad with the US military doesn't count. I'm sure being abroad in support of American corporate expansion doesn't count either.

Let's see. I grew up near FDR. He was world traveled from an early age, albeit on the grand tour. Most of the family money came from Chinese tea and opium, and they maintained holdings there. Next closest Presidential home to me was Kinderhook, where van Buren grew up speaking Dutch. The other Roosevelt had the same history of going abroad for a year or more at a time to Europe and the Middle East. Those are three president's where I have some knowledge of their personal history. They all have fairly interesting and uncommon backgrounds.

That is not to say Obama doesn't have an interesting background. But our President's often have interesting histories. I think you could attempt to defend Brooks by saying he's deeply biased by class (the grand tour with a french tutor isn't exotic, but a public school in Indonesia, well...) rather than race, but then you've also got to dismiss those army brats... I'm sure you can do it.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

True. Still, objectively, he is not an exotic person.

Exactly right. It may be that he looks a bit exotic next to the Bushes who, despite their wealth and privilege, seem to have always aspired to being no more interesting or sophisticated than your average high school janitor. But Bill Clinton's life has a lot more color to it.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

It was understood for a long time that Fanny and Freddie had implicit government guarantees -- it's not like that's something that Obama (or Bush) invented when things went south.

Indeed. The banks also had been underpaying for FDIC insurance going back at least to Bush I. Of course, now the banks without problems have jacked up rates and the screw-up mega-banks are looking for favors.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

More diverse than average kid in Peoria, but no more diverse than the average army brat. But apparently being abroad with the US military doesn't count. I'm sure being abroad in support of American corporate expansion doesn't count either.

Let's see. I grew up near FDR. He was world traveled from an early age, albeit on the grand tour. Most of the family money came from Chinese tea and opium, and they maintained holdings there. Next closest Presidential home to me was Kinderhook, where van Buren grew up speaking Dutch. The other Roosevelt had the same history of going abroad for a year or more at a time to Europe and the Middle East. Those are three president's where I have some knowledge of their personal history. They all have fairly interesting and uncommon backgrounds.

That is not to say Obama doesn't have an interesting background. But our President's often have interesting histories. I think you could attempt to defend Brooks by saying he's deeply biased by class (the grand tour with a french tutor isn't exotic, but a public school in Indonesia, well...) rather than race, but then you've also got to dismiss those army brats... I'm sure you can do it.

so in march or so we were in little rock and went to the clinton museum/center. it was busy with tourists.

driving home last weekend through ohio I see the exit off US 90 for the Rutherford Hayes center. what do you think attendance at the old guy's places are? how are they paid for?

we should sell everyone pre-Johnson to Taco Bell. you want to know about them go to orlando's hall of presidents, you know?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

It may be that he looks a bit exotic next to the Bushes

huh? I know several mixed race people who have lived in different places.

I do not know 1 texas oil millionaire.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

This is the kind of self-referential hokum that makes the news so hard to watch. The polls put Obama and the Democrats exactly where you would expect, given the circumstance (the economy, two years into a presidency). As Adder said yesterday, Obama polls where Reagan did at this point. But a lot of people have something invested in needing to ignore this -- the media need to sell ads, conservatives want to believe that Obama's platform is unpopular -- so they do.

eta: or maybe it was Gatti

This is too optimistic a view.

Part of what's been going on is that there is a split on Obama within the party - some want the freedom to run against him this cycle, a la W. Virginia, while others want him to set the theme and tone for the election. In hindsight, I think his people will realize they needed to set the theme and tone and haven't been as active politically as they needed to be the last nine months. This was a chance to really defend their considerable legisltative accomplishments, and they didn't, and that will hurt for years.

On the good side, the Republican party hasn't framed the discussion either - the Tea Party has, and at some point there's got to be some tension emerging within the Rs. If no tension emerges, they'll run so far to the right that they'll cede the center, which is where the Dems need to focus for the next few years. Without the Tea Party, next Tuesday could be even worse, with Castle winning Delaware, for example, and Reid not even being competitive, and probably a much stronger candidate in Colorado.

If Obama wins over the center in the next two years, and the Rs continue their hard rightward tack, the Dems can have a good election two years hence and get the upper hand back. If the tea party figures out how to dial down the looniness and push aside the true wackos (that means you, Senators Miller, Lee, and DeMint, and your former Governor Palin, too), or the Republicans find some grown ups to lead, and Obama doesn't start defining the discussion, well, that could be bad.

But to suggest this last six months is anything other than painful -- no, doesn't work for me.