Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

December 21, 2006
By: Kevin Drum

HILLARY WATCH....Steve Benen digs around and finds an extremely compelling reason to support Hillary Clinton for president.

On a more serious note, M.J. Rosenberg notices something about Hillary that I've noticed too:

I just watched Hillary Clinton on "the View." And I realized something. Every time she lets go a little (like when she jogged into the room), she is very appealing. And every time she discusses things like engaging in "a national conversation" about whatever the hell it was, she is terrible.

Hillary Clinton can be very appealing. Surprisingly so, given her reputation. If she loosens up a little, I think an awful lot of people (i.e., non-political junkie people who haven't really seen her much since 2000) are going to be surprised by how much they like her.

But will she loosen up?

Kevin Drum 1:40 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (222)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

If Bill couldn't loosen her up, what chance do we have?

Posted by: craigie on December 21, 2006 at 1:49 PM | PERMALINK

I wonder if anyone ever said exactly the same thing about Gore? Or even Kerry?

Posted by: SomeCallMeTim on December 21, 2006 at 1:51 PM | PERMALINK

Well I am not even going to try for the initial zinger any more today. First MsN got to the obvious joke on the Berger thread one comment before me, and then craigie scooped me here.

Great minds and all, but you guys are just quicker on the draw, I guess.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 1:52 PM | PERMALINK

I think she just needs laid.

Posted by: steve duncan on December 21, 2006 at 1:53 PM | PERMALINK

Can we get her drinking? Worked for Bush.

Posted by: anonymous on December 21, 2006 at 1:54 PM | PERMALINK

You men always prescribe that first.

Of course, when you hear hoofbeats...

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 1:55 PM | PERMALINK

Props to craigie.

Apparently he's here all week, and if he could just help me decide between the rib eye and the pork loin...

Posted by: cyntax on December 21, 2006 at 1:56 PM | PERMALINK

Oh, pish posh. I liked her at 1 minute 13-17 seconds, disliked her at 3 minutes 42-52, found her vaguely ingratiating at 5:12-17. Knock it off! What is wrong with you people? Let's face it. On a personal level, she is very appealing. Period. Maybe all her sniping observers are the ones who need to relax.

Posted by: bobbo on December 21, 2006 at 1:59 PM | PERMALINK

yeah, maybe laura could give her lessons in hanging loose ... or better yet, outsource it to jenna/notjenna

Posted by: linda on December 21, 2006 at 1:59 PM | PERMALINK

Regardless whether she loosens up, the perception will be whatever the MSM decides to say it is.

Global Citizen: You men always prescribe that first.

Were you replying to Anonymous (drinking) or Steve Duncan (getting laid)?

Posted by: anandine on December 21, 2006 at 2:00 PM | PERMALINK

Hilary may get nominated but she'll never win. She's too divisive a character. Bill Clinton will always be lurking in the background and the American people are sick and tired of Bill Clinton after his adulterous affair with Monica. That's why they elected George W Bush to restore honor and integrity to the White House. The American people won't trust her any more than they trust the lying adulterer Bill Clinton. Also she's far too liberal to win.

Posted by: Al on December 21, 2006 at 2:01 PM | PERMALINK
Steve Benen digs around finds an extemely compelling reason to support Hillary Clinton for president.

Come on, Kevin, you're a pro, not a commenter, proofread!

Steve Benen digs around and finds an extremely compelling reason to support Hillary Clinton for president.
Posted by: cmdicely on December 21, 2006 at 2:02 PM | PERMALINK

I heard Ms. Clinton on NPR Tues or Wed morning. When she laughs at herself and makes honest assessments about herself and the nation, I think she has an attractive personality and style.

When she mentioned that we need to incorporate insurance companies into a national healthcare plan and that this was a lesson she learned from when Mr. Clinton was president, she lost me.

Posted by: Hostile on December 21, 2006 at 2:06 PM | PERMALINK

If Bill couldn't loosen her up, what chance do we have?

Been my experience that an adulterous husband makes for a very, very cranky wife.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on December 21, 2006 at 2:07 PM | PERMALINK

Hillary? Obama? Oh well, I thought maybe the Dems were going to field a real candidate in '08.

Who'll be running on the Green ticket?

Posted by: alex on December 21, 2006 at 2:09 PM | PERMALINK

Pam & I felt the same way when some of us met with John Kerry earlier this year.

In a small group, he's a cool dude.

In front of a large group, he's stiff as C-3PO. Without the gold skin and funny British accent.

Posted by: SteveAudio on December 21, 2006 at 2:25 PM | PERMALINK

When Hillary cuts off my testicles, makes me get an abortion and marry a man, can I have Al?

Posted by: not me on December 21, 2006 at 2:28 PM | PERMALINK

Rosenberg has noticed something about Rosenberg more than he has about Hilary. And when he says "I have to concede, however, that his [Obama's] WTF [unscripted spontaneity] could be calculated," I imagine Bob Sommerby's head finally exploding.

Really, Kevin: do you consider Rosenberg's incoherent speculation about Clinton's and Obama's motives "more serious" than publicly embarassing smarmy Morris? Priorities, please!

Posted by: brent on December 21, 2006 at 2:30 PM | PERMALINK

I dont know, Hillary has a public speaking style that hearkens back to high school president campaigns. She cant be relaxed all the time -- to be "presidential" she will revert to previous form. Its all surface, but that's the sad truth about electability.

Too bad Howard Dean is damaged goods now. He seems a smart guy once in charge of a leadership task.

Posted by: troglodyte on December 21, 2006 at 2:32 PM | PERMALINK

Apparently he's here all week, and if he could just help me decide between the rib eye and the pork loin...
Posted by: cyntax

He usually recommends the veal.

Posted by: MsNThrope on December 21, 2006 at 2:32 PM | PERMALINK

Been my experience that an adulterous husband makes for a very, very cranky wife.

Posted by: Apollo 13

Well that certainly explains the tension around the klyde household. Thanks for tip ;).

Posted by: klyde on December 21, 2006 at 2:32 PM | PERMALINK

Answer to Kevin's question: No.

Answer to SomeCallMe Tim's question ("I wonder if anyone ever said exactly the same thing about Gore? Or even Kerry?): Yes

How come the party of the up-tight, Republican'ts, get the friendly, good-guy candidates and the party of the loosey-goosey get such stick-up-the-butt candidates as Gore, Kerry, and hopefully NOT HRC?

Posted by: Cal Gal on December 21, 2006 at 2:33 PM | PERMALINK

kyoto, john kerry, cambodia, reagan, suburbs, europe, wsj, kyoto, john kerry, cambodia, reagan, suburbs, europe, wsj, kyoto, john kerry, cambodia, reagan, suburbs, europe, wsj, kyoto, john kerry, cambodia, reagan, suburbs, europe, wsj, kyoto, john kerry, cambodia, reagan, suburbs, europe, wsj

Posted by: rdw's feedback loop on December 21, 2006 at 2:33 PM | PERMALINK

Good God!

I am all for Hillary for President, but please don't ask her to losen up by going for duck hunting in Ohio in combat fatigue or even windsurfing. Whatever chance the previous Dem candidate had were killed by those sorry spectacles.

Posted by: gregor on December 21, 2006 at 2:36 PM | PERMALINK

but, is she the kinda broad, you can sit around a bar and knock back shots with?

Now, good ol' boy Georgie, he and I closed many a watering hole down there in Birmingham - Just the kinda guy, you could chug-a-lug and upchuck with.

Posted by: J Obnoxious Barfly on December 21, 2006 at 2:37 PM | PERMALINK

I doubt she will loosen up. Because she is a 1) Democrat and 2) a woman, she will feel the pressure to act "manly". I expect she will go on Monday Night Football soon and user her teeth to bend rebar into sculptures of naked women with big hooters.

She needs to resist this impulse and just act like a leader. We don't need anymore fake "American Man" presidents anymore. Reagan can kiss my ass. Hillary should be what she is deep down: a leader who happens to be a woman.

Posted by: InvadeIranForChrist on December 21, 2006 at 2:40 PM | PERMALINK

I wonder if anyone ever said exactly the same thing about Gore? Or even Kerry?

Yes. Continuously. Though, I don't know if Kerry has ever been spotted "letting go a little."

Posted by: Disputo on December 21, 2006 at 2:42 PM | PERMALINK

Every time she lets go a little (like when she jogged into the room), she is very appealing.

Lots of people wrote and said the same about Richard Nixon.

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 2:45 PM | PERMALINK

The bottom line on Hillary is;
She is the PERFECT conservative pundit strawman.

I don't know if she'd be a good president or a bad one. But I don't want to sit through 4-8 years of listening to the O'Rielly's of the world bitch and moan about "Billary".

AND

There are other, better candidates, who are less unappealing to conservatives out there. Even some women. (ie. Pelosi 2007).

Posted by: Extradite Rumsfeld on December 21, 2006 at 2:47 PM | PERMALINK

Who knows, Americans might realize the truth about Hillary, that she is not an evil, cold bitch (as the Republicans claim) but that she is also not a visionary nor principled leader (as her camp would likely claim). I have no doubt Hillary really is a good person but with good intentions. But like many politicians, she believes the means justifies the ends. Her means to setting herself up to run for President, voting for the Iraq War, have backfired. Now, like many Democrats and Republicans alike, she claimed that Bush did not use her vote "as she would have expected him to". Well, she, along with many others, should have asked Bush the questions about Iraq that are being asked now (What do we do about the Sunnis and Shiites? What do we do about Iran?) before she voted for the war, not after.

Posted by: brian on December 21, 2006 at 2:48 PM | PERMALINK

Let's back up to: I just watched Hillary Clinton on "the View."

I'm really supposed to give a damn about the opinion of someone who admits to watching the View?

Nope.

Posted by: MsNThrope on December 21, 2006 at 2:49 PM | PERMALINK

Right, and what this nation really needs is a Hail Fellow Well Met George Babbitt type, who the average "joe or jill" can knock back a few rounds with at the bar.

Let Hillary "loosen up" and Maureen Dowd and Elizabeth Bumiller will have a field day showing their claws and hissing fits.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on December 21, 2006 at 2:51 PM | PERMALINK

I think HRC would make an excellent VP.

Posted by: EmmaAnne on December 21, 2006 at 2:58 PM | PERMALINK

Drum:

Every time she lets go a little (like when she jogged into the room), she is very appealing.

Marler:

Lots of people wrote and said the same about Richard Nixon.

Ah, you should have been there in the bunker with Adolf. Now that man could tell a knopf-knopf joke that would have you laughing so hard you'd want to shoot your brains out.

Posted by: Heinrich on December 21, 2006 at 3:05 PM | PERMALINK

I'm really supposed to give a damn about the opinion of someone who admits to watching the View?
Posted by: MsNThrope on December 21, 2006 at 2:49 PM | PERMALINK

MsNThrope nails it!

Posted by: Extradite Rumsfeld on December 21, 2006 at 3:07 PM | PERMALINK

As Steve Audio suggested with his comment about Kerry, most politicians are pretty decent one on one/loosened up -- it isn't exactly a profession for the introverted. Hell, I've seen Dukakis interviewed and thought, Jeez, he's a likable guy. For six months of campaigning, however, he resembled a dead mackerel.

They key thing about a high level campaign -- esp. a presidental one -- is, you don't get much chance to loosen up. The super-hot glare keeps you on edge, and cruelly separates the merely pleasant from the truly gregarious. Gore and Kerry, whatever their other qualities, fell into the first category; Bill Clinton clearly the second. Indications are that, of the current group, Hillary defaults to the first category, and, at least I'd argue, Edwards and Obama reach the second. It's obviously not the only thing to consider when picking a presidential candidate, but you might as well be clear-eyed about it and not expect a category one to suddenly blossom into a category two under the most stressful of circumstances.

Posted by: demtom on December 21, 2006 at 3:08 PM | PERMALINK

So this idiotic "likeability" piffle is what will decide the 2008 presidential election. Why am I not surprised.

Posted by: SecularAnimist on December 21, 2006 at 3:10 PM | PERMALINK

Given Hilary's penchant for lecturing everybody on how they ought to think and live their lives, I can't imagine her every loosening up.
Posted by: Frequency Kenneth

Maybe not, but that seems to be a penchant that the opposite side of the aisle has no difficulty channeling either...

Posted by: cyntax on December 21, 2006 at 3:14 PM | PERMALINK

Oh g'wan KDrum, next you'll be telling me politicians would be more salable if they'd stop giving mindless process answers about some national conversation we're supposed to be having and actually you know, say something about whatever it is we're supposed to be having a conversation about.

Posted by: Dan on December 21, 2006 at 3:14 PM | PERMALINK

I'd hit it!

Posted by: R.L. on December 21, 2006 at 3:20 PM | PERMALINK

Where the hell is Vincent to bitch about Hillary?

And whoever said this (like I don't know): Ah, you should have been there in the bunker with Adolf. Now that man could tell a knopf-knopf joke that would have you laughing so hard you'd want to shoot your brains out.

Bwa!

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 3:33 PM | PERMALINK

I saw Hillary in person once. She was relaxed, charming, and slick as owlshit when interacting with a small group. She's got the Big Dog's charisma, she just doesn't project it well in front of a huge audience. Don't know if that makes her Presidential timber or not. I've found that I've grown to like her a lot on a personal level in the past six years, even if I don't agree with her "triangulation" politics.

Posted by: Andrew Wyatt on December 21, 2006 at 3:37 PM | PERMALINK

Every time she lets go a little (like when she jogged into the room), she is very appealing.

Lots of people wrote and said the same about Richard Nixon.

How jealous that must make you, Marler.

Posted by: Gregory on December 21, 2006 at 3:40 PM | PERMALINK

Gregory, knock it off. The peppermint hot chocolate is now up my nose.

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 3:43 PM | PERMALINK

Lots of people wrote and said the same about Richard Nixon.

What? That he was uncomfortable, insecure, self-loathing and awkward around men who went to better schools and had more money than he did? You know, if you actually knew anything about American history and the people you purport to have insight and knowledge about, perhaps the vast majority of us wouldn't laugh our asses off every time you hit the POST button without having that brief moment of introspection and consideration that would save you the embarrassment of being humiliated in public.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 3:47 PM | PERMALINK

The peppermint hot chocolate is now up my nose.

Those were Tony Montana's last words in Scarface, by the way...

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 3:49 PM | PERMALINK

Wrong! It went like this: "The peppermint hot chocolate is now up my nose! DON'T FOCK WIT ME!!!!!"

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 3:51 PM | PERMALINK

Andrew Wyatt: I've grown to like her a lot on a personal level in the past six years

So have a beer with her.

even if I don't agree with her "triangulation" politics.

Just what we need - Ronald Reagan Redux. Great guy. Really had a way with a joke or a story. Rotten politics.

Posted by: alex on December 21, 2006 at 3:53 PM | PERMALINK

Nasty little liberals once again slandering a great president and foreign policy master for a few trifling personal weaknesses. I knew Richard Milhous Nixon, sirs, and except for her five o'clock shadow, Hillary is no Dick Nixon.

It is unfortunately correct that the man had a bit of an insecurity around those of us with family connections and Ivy League educations, but biggish contributions to CRP on the down low normally put a stop to his interminable whines about his hardscrabble grocer pere and self-made success blah blah blah. Sadly, even a blank check couldn't get him to shut up about Alger Hiss, and for that I could never forgive him, open China or not.

Posted by: Norman Rogers on December 21, 2006 at 4:01 PM | PERMALINK

Gregor, I think that idea would actually work for her.

The comic relief of seeing Hillary stump in a duck hunt, fall flat on a sailboard, grimacing while tasting ocra at a county fair, crashing a mountain bike or segway, etc. could warm many an icy attitude.

Posted by: wishIwuz2 on December 21, 2006 at 4:07 PM | PERMALINK

While I sort of like Hillary Clinton as a political leader, when I watched the YouTube's of the "Mother-in-Chief", I wanted to gag. But then I've never bothered with things like The View for a reason.

Posted by: pgl on December 21, 2006 at 4:16 PM | PERMALINK

After this W tour is over anybody and I mean anybody could run for the Dem side and beat any Rightwing nincompoop.The Right is going to slither into the abyess for another forty years.I mean really what chances do you think any righty could win ever again.Even Jeb says it's over for him too.

Posted by: Thomas3.6 1/2 on December 21, 2006 at 4:17 PM | PERMALINK

Norman,

Yes, indeed, Marler is incorrect as usual - Nixon abhorred small talk - However, it appears that you still a bit miffed about Checkers pissing on your leg. Any chance that swift kick of yours led to the cocker's trip to Bide-A-Wee?

Posted by: thethirdPaul on December 21, 2006 at 4:23 PM | PERMALINK

The Hot new drink of Miami - The Adios, Tony special

Peppermint, hot chocolate and coke.

If it's hot, you don't blow on it; the blow goes in it. The Ultimate drink, amigos.

Posted by: Tony M's Ghost on December 21, 2006 at 4:39 PM | PERMALINK

When I've seen her on TV in a none Political context, like on David Letterman, eg, I've found her quite pleasant and funny.

You know? She's just the kind of lady I'd like to have a beer with!

.

Posted by: agave on December 21, 2006 at 4:47 PM | PERMALINK

Why don't you get her to set up Hugh Rodham as chairman of an independent ethics commission to investigate Congressional hankypanky?

Posted by: minion of rove on December 21, 2006 at 4:49 PM | PERMALINK

an alternative opinion about Sen. Clinton:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/12/hillarys_pelosi_problem.html

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 4:51 PM | PERMALINK

Any chance that swift kick of yours led to the cocker's trip to Bide-A-Wee?

Ah, Mr. Manure the Organic Gardener weighs in. No, I never touched that silly spaniel, but I suppose there's no harm in revealing now that I encouraged King Timahoe to make the special deposit Tricia stepped in on her way down the aisle. I was quite angry at the time at Dick's refusal to hear my arguments against his ridiculous "environmental protection agency." Fortunately, a man less hysterical about a little smog and a few "endangered" species--have you noticed how they're always icky animals no one would miss?--now occupies the White House, so we've put that sentimental nonsense away for good. Yes.

Posted by: Norman Rogers on December 21, 2006 at 4:53 PM | PERMALINK

an alternative opinion about Sen. Clinton

I think I may say without fear of contradition that any opinion offered up by Marler -- even in his tbrosz-esque context-free drive-by link posting -- isn't worht a bucket of piss.

Posted by: Gregory on December 21, 2006 at 4:55 PM | PERMALINK

linda: "yeah, maybe laura could give her lessons in hanging loose ... or better yet, outsource it to jenna/notjenna"

Yeah, that's it -- Sen. Clinton could learn to depend upon medication and alcohol to deaden emotional turmoil and avoid dealing with personal problems. Good advice.

Frequency Kenneth: "Given Hilary's penchant for lecturing everybody on how they ought to think and live their lives, I can't imagine her every loosening up."

Unlike, say, the laissez-faire, live-and-let-live attitude publicly proffered by your good friend William Bennett, from whom Sen. Clinton could probably learn to roll a good game of craps or properly play the slots.

Posted by: Donald from Hawaii on December 21, 2006 at 5:01 PM | PERMALINK

If she lets her husband get away with things what kinds of things will let slide as president?

More secrets to China?
More access for Sandy Burgler?
Will Monica be under her desk too?

Maybe Craig Livingston will get to stop selling stuff on eBay and return to working at the Whitehouse.

Look out America, if she is elected Big Sister will be watching.

Posted by: Orwell on December 21, 2006 at 5:01 PM | PERMALINK

"Get used to being held accountable, Republicans--it's what's known as living in the adult world." - Frail Rider
(this is from an earlier thread, but bares repeating)

And now that the shoe is on the other foot, this is what I will hold the Dems accountable for:

-Impeach George Bush (don't just talk it, walk it)

-Raise taxes - without damaging the economy

-Complete withdrawal from Iraq (this is what has been demanded for the last three years, do it)

-Approve Gay Marriage on the Federal Level (it's what the left stands for, right?)

-Press charges against Cheney for compromising NS in the Plamegate or apologize (that's what adults do)

-Pass UHC legislation, I expect full coverage.

-End terrorism through compromise and dialogue (this will be fun to watch)

This is just a short list of promises made to me by the Democrats. I will give them until July 2007 to deliver and then will issue the second phase of demands that stem from their zeal to please.

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 5:02 PM | PERMALINK

For God's sake I hope she doesn't hire consultants to advise her on how to appear more casual.

Posted by: birdie on December 21, 2006 at 5:03 PM | PERMALINK

Heinrich: Ah, you should have been there in the bunker with Adolf. Now that man could tell a knopf-knopf joke that would have you laughing so hard you'd want to shoot your brains out.

that's pretty funny.

However, Hitler tended to talk nonstop with his guests, great long speeches encompassing everything in German history and his views on music and culture and what he knew of other nations. the comments about his humanity usually were based on episodes where he played with his dogs.

I think Sen Clinton is a credible candidate, with considerable intellect. How well she does as a candidate will depend in part on how much she has learned about politicking as a senator. As with Margaret Thatcher, she can be business-like and goal-oriented all the time, with these little glimpses of personality flashing from time to time. John Kerry nearly won on the strength of his debate performance; he'd have probably done better without the skiing and wind-surfing.

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 5:09 PM | PERMALINK

Norman Rogers: "I knew Richard Milhous Nixon, sirs, and except for her five o'clock shadow, Hillary is no Dick Nixon."

The late U.S. Rep. Helen Gahagan Douglas (D-CA) also knew Nixon. After he smeared her as "The Pink Lady" in 1950 for both her and her husband Melvyn Douglas' non-existent pro-Communist sympathies, she tagged him with the monicker "Tricky Dick".

Guess whose nickname actually stuck for posterity?

Posted by: Donald from Hawaii on December 21, 2006 at 5:10 PM | PERMALINK

Gregory: I think I may say without fear of contradition that any opinion offered up by Marler -- even in his tbrosz-esque context-free drive-by link posting -- isn't worht a bucket of piss.

I seem to be a stone in your shoe or a burr under your saddle or some such. Don't you know you aren't supposed to FEED the trolls?

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 5:14 PM | PERMALINK

MatthewRMarler: an alternative opinion about Sen. Clinton:

From the 1st paragraph: "The cloak was so tightly-woven and the media so compliant that no matter what Clinton did ... he escaped scrutiny."

Whatever you, or the article's author, think of Bill Clinton, the idea that he "escaped scrutiny" is from an alternate reality.

Posted by: alex on December 21, 2006 at 5:17 PM | PERMALINK

End terrorism through compromise and dialogue

It is end terrorism with police action, not military warfare. Germany ended Bader-Meinhoff terror with arrests. Italy ended Red Brigade terror with arrests. England never did end IRA terror with warfare, but compromise and dialogue finally did. That is for ending terror against a known terrorist.

The way to prevent terror from future antagonists is to not kill their children with wars for natural resources or interfere with their nation's self-determination.

Stifling fingers. Must not use epithets.

Posted by: Hostile on December 21, 2006 at 5:20 PM | PERMALINK

".....isn't worht a bucket of piss." - Greggy


I am still wondering how he knows what a bucket of piss is worth. (oh yeah, he knows Howard Dean)

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 5:20 PM | PERMALINK

Orwell: "If she lets her husband get away with things what kinds of things will let slide as president? More secrets to China?"

Yeah! You tell 'em!

We prefer presidents like Ronald Reagan, whose administration managed to support both sides in the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988), arming Saddam Hussein with WMD to use on his own people, and while at the same time selling missiles and other advanced technology to the Ayatollah Khoumeini's Iran and then spending the profits to arm the die-hard Somozistas (AKA The Contras) in Nicaragua, in flagrant violation of an expressed congressional mandate.

Just look at how that worked out!

Posted by: Donald from Hawaii on December 21, 2006 at 5:20 PM | PERMALINK

"It is end terrorism with police action, not military warfare." - Hostile

Clinton/Sudan
Clinton/Somalia
Clinton/Bosnia (albeit not so much terrorism as genocide)
Kerry: "I would have gone in with a stronger force"
Democrats/Afghanistan


"The way to prevent terror from future antagonists is to not kill their children..." - Hostile

But killing their own children via car bombs is successful in driving the Democrats away.


"...for natural resources or interfere with their nation's self-determination." - Hostile


Do you mean oil? Then why am I still paying $2.39/gallon?

And the self-dtermination? Do you mean Saddam or the freely elected gov't now in place because of our military (read: not police action)?

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 5:36 PM | PERMALINK

"Stifling fingers. Must not use epithets" - Hostile


I am proud of you. You're learning tolerance, after years of preaching it, you decided to practice it. All grown up.

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 5:39 PM | PERMALINK

It's hard to lighten up when half the people you meet have long knives in their hands.

Posted by: Hilary on December 21, 2006 at 5:40 PM | PERMALINK

The trouble is, the right wing base really hate her, with an irrational passion. I've had conversations with people down in the red states where they will happily discuss gay marriage, even if they'll vote against it, but mention Hillary and it's outright, no need for reasons, hatred. They can't even say why.

Posted by: royalblue_tom on December 21, 2006 at 5:42 PM | PERMALINK

Sorry, premature post button fever ...

And if the base really hate her, the moderate right are going to catch this and feel a little uneasy about her regardless. It's enough of a negative to bring all those who might and will vote R together in a "make sure she doesn't get in, even if our guy is satan himself.

She's been out-FOX'ed, before she even gets to start.

Posted by: royalblue_tom on December 21, 2006 at 5:47 PM | PERMALINK

As a Red-Stater, I can tell you my only apprehension with Hillary (aside from being a far left loon) is that NO self-respecting woman stays with a man that cheats on her every single chance he gets. Could it be that she enjoyed her position of power too much to let someone else walk all over her? Geez, I wonder who she would let walk over her if she was President? hmmmm...........

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 5:52 PM | PERMALINK

...is that NO self-respecting woman stays with a man that cheats on her every single chance he gets.
Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 5:52 PM | PERMALINK

Or perhaps she applies Christian principles to her personal life, and forgives, swallows her pride, and puts her FAMILY FIRST.

Maybe Bill apologized, and maybe she believes him. Maybe Bill promised to be a good boy from now on, and she trusts him.

Maybe these kinds of thoughts are beyond a partisan Irrational Clinton Hater like yourself.

Posted by: Extradite Rumsfeld on December 21, 2006 at 6:01 PM | PERMALINK

Look out America, if she is elected Big Sister will be watching.
Posted by: Orwell

Well shee-it. If that's the case, she'll be using all the mechanisms the current administration put in place.

Yeah, now we see how it is. When Dubya does it, it's for the good of the country, but don't let Hillary go snooping...

Posted by: cyntax on December 21, 2006 at 6:01 PM | PERMALINK

This from one who wishes Hillary Clinton well.

First, smart aleckness. In a film clip MSNBC delightedly features several times a day, though the event is long past, we see Mrs. Clinton strut onstage, wooden smile on her face, clapping her hands. She struts across the stage, turns and stuts back: strut, strut, clap-clap-clap, wooden smile. Lesson: No one, dear lady, likes the appearance of a smart aleck.

Second, schoolgirlshness. In an appearance at the Senate committee hearing on the appointment of Robert Gates as defense secretary, Mrs. Clinton shocks us with a series of puerile, schoolgirlish questions, the answers to which are obvious and which Gates obligingly renders as he might have were he facing his Ninth Grade civics teacher, which he most certainly was not. Lesson: No one wants a woman-as-schoolgirl as president of the United States and Commander in Chief of the Armed Services.

Let me give an example of the latter. A few years ago a woman ran for a seat on the Louisiana State Supreme Court. She had lots of money and lots of political support until, until her campaign put up a highway billboard with a photo of the candidate in which she appeared no more than 16 years of age or so. As voters drove past the billboards day in and day out her political stock plummeted and she was defeated by an old curmudgeon who no one had given a chance. No one wanted a schoolgirl on the State Supreme Court.

Nuff said?

Posted by: earnest on December 21, 2006 at 6:02 PM | PERMALINK

Do you mean oil? Then why am I still paying $2.39/gallon?Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 5:36 PM | PERMALINK

It's the Invisible Hand.
Clenched into a fist.
Shoved up your rectum.

Posted by: Extradite Rumsfeld on December 21, 2006 at 6:03 PM | PERMALINK

It's the Invisible Hand.
Clenched into a fist.
Shoved up your rectum.
Posted by: Extradite Rumsfeld

Ouch.

Here's to hoping it was dipped in a barrel of crude first.

Posted by: cyntax on December 21, 2006 at 6:06 PM | PERMALINK

"Maybe Bill promised to be a good boy from now on, and she trusts him." - Extradite


So then if Kim Jung promises to not develop nukes, she'll trust him? Oh wait, Bill already did.

So then if Ahmendijad promises to not wipe Israel off of the map, she'll trust him?

And if Assad promises to help out with Iraq, she'll trust him?

I hope not.

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 6:09 PM | PERMALINK

Okay, there's a Santorum joke in there somewhere...

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 6:09 PM | PERMALINK

Yes, GC, there is.

And if you can work a pony into the mix too, then you get this week's Chaucer award for most creative scatology in a PA thread.

Posted by: cyntax on December 21, 2006 at 6:15 PM | PERMALINK

So then if Kim Jung promises to not develop nukes, she'll trust him? Oh wait, Bill already did.Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 6:09 PM | PERMALINK

Bill didn't have Kim Jong's penis in his purse.
Apparently George W Bush didn't have ANYONE'S penis in his purse.

But then again, Bill's agreement was to not develop Uranium-based nukes. Kim Jong lived up to that until Bush broke the agreement. Or is that too much nuance for your tiny little brain?

So then if Ahmendijad promises to not wipe Israel off of the map, she'll trust him?

Again - Hillary has Bill's penis in her purse. Plenty of reason to trust him. No reason to trust "I'm a dinner jacket". Then again, Bush has done so spectacularly with Ahmadinijad so far . .

And if Assad promises to help out with Iraq, she'll trust him?
I hope not.

Yes - let's not trust Assad, because Bush's plan is working out so well.

Dumbass.

Posted by: Extradite Rumsfeld on December 21, 2006 at 6:16 PM | PERMALINK

I appreciate the support I have received thus far, but I have decided not to run.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 6:18 PM | PERMALINK

As a Red-Stater

I am under the impression Red Staters frown upon divorce more than they frown upon male adultry. If one were to ask Dobson or Robertson or Falwell, I think they would advise women to stick with their husbands despite their infidelities. Mention Hillary, though, and they change their attitude.

I haven't seen any of the Red State evangelical leaders calling for Mrs. Haggard to divorce Ted, whose behavior would seem to be worse than President Clinton's, cheating with men instead of women. The reason must be political.

Posted by: Hostile on December 21, 2006 at 6:22 PM | PERMALINK

Reminds me of 1985 when a very drunk John Riggins loudly proclaimed to Sandra Day O'Connor, who was sitting at his table at a formal press corps dinner, "C'mon, Sandy baby, loosen up! You're too tight!" Riggins proceeded to fall asleep on the floor and snore loudly during a speecy by George Bush.

Maybe Riggo & Hillary should be seated together at the next Press Club event.? He sounds like a barrel of laughs.

Posted by: pj in jesusland on December 21, 2006 at 6:24 PM | PERMALINK

"But then again, Bill's agreement was to not develop Uranium-based nukes. Kim Jong lived up to that until Bush broke the agreement. Or is that too much nuance for your tiny little brain?" - Extradite


COPYRIGHT 2004 Asia Pulse Pte Ltd

TOKYO, Feb. 8 (Yonhap) -- North Korea has been secretly working on a uranium-based nuclear weapons program since 1996, when it worked out an agreement with Pakistan, a high-level defector from Pyongyang said Sunday in an interview with the Tokyo Shimbun. Hwang Jang-yop, the former secretary of North Korea's Workers' Party, said he had heard directly from Jon Pyong-ho, a party secretary in charge of logistics industries, that Pyongyang needed to buy plutonium to be used in making nuclear weapons. Jon had said then that the North wanted to make more nuclear bombs, Hwang told the daily. Jon later went to Pakistan for a month, and after returning said North Korea no longer needs plutonium because it can now make nuclear weapons with uranium-235.

The communist state had ignited the nuclear tension on the Korean Peninsula in October 2002 when its leaders told a visiting U.S. delegation that it had been enriching uranium, a critical process to developing nuclear weapons. Pyongyang later denied making such remarks, and denied the existence of such a program to a team of U.S. congressional officials and nuclear experts who went to the North last month. But suspicions about Pyongyang's uranium program escalated earlier this month when Pakistan's famed nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan confessed to leaking nuclear technology secrets to groups working for North Korea, Iran and Libya. Six nations -- the two Koreas, Japan, China, Russia and the United States -- are trying to diffuse the tension by inducing North Korea to abandon its nuclear activities with a package of incentives. The first such multilateral talks last August ended without meaningful progress, and a second session is scheduled for later this month.


http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-4252747_ITM


Well, that promise worked out well.

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 6:25 PM | PERMALINK

"I am under the impression Red Staters frown upon divorce more than they frown upon male adultry. If one were to ask Dobson or Robertson or Falwell,...." - Hostile


Well first of all Red-Stater does not equal evangelical. Just FYI

Secondly, why would someone from the left condone a woman staying with a cheater? Wouldn't that set back woman's rights a few decades?

What does that say to other women in similar situations?

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 6:30 PM | PERMALINK

I noticed that a while ago. She is personally fascinating and politically boring. Think anyone who has her ear will notice … and will she listen?

Posted by: Jerri Pries on December 21, 2006 at 6:34 PM | PERMALINK

Don't you know you aren't supposed to FEED the trolls?

Nice to see you admit it. But that's just the thing, Matt -- your pretense of reasonableness while posting right-wing bullshit fools no one. You're far from a bother, Matt, with your piss-poor argumentation and transparently false assertions, but it is amusing to puncture your inflated self of self-importance.

Posted by: Gregory on December 21, 2006 at 6:34 PM | PERMALINK

Red State Jay, do you think Mrs. Haggard should divorce her nondenominational Christian pastor husband who has 'sex' with male prostitutes?

Posted by: Hostile on December 21, 2006 at 6:45 PM | PERMALINK

Secondly, why would someone from the left condone a woman staying with a cheater? Wouldn't that set back woman's rights a few decades?
What does that say to other women in similar situations?
Posted by: Jay

Oh, for Pete's sake. Hostile didn't say anything of the kind. I gotta say I see it as a personal issue for her to work out for herself. If it were someone I knew well (man or woman) I might volunteer my opinion, but in my experience people usually have to work these things out themselves.

What hasn't been addressed by your answer is whether there the double standard that was posited in the first post exists: do social conservatives expect faithful women to make a relationship with a cheating husband work?

Posted by: cyntax on December 21, 2006 at 6:47 PM | PERMALINK

Of course, you don't?

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 6:47 PM | PERMALINK
Secondly, why would someone from the left condone a woman staying with a cheater?

Because its her choice. Us lefties are big on supporting choice.

Wouldn't that set back woman's rights a few decades?

No, contrary to handful of extremists, a woman choosing to exercise her right to leave or stay as she chooses doesn't set back women's rights at all, no matter which choice is made.

What would set women's rights back would be a woman being denied that choice.

What does that say to other women in similar situations?

That they should make a decision based on their personal values, priorities, and perception of the situation?

Posted by: cmdicely on December 21, 2006 at 6:49 PM | PERMALINK

"...do social conservatives expect faithful women to make a relationship with a cheating husband work?" - cyntax

Again a personal thing and on a case-by-case basis, however, my opinion is that they should have the self respect to LEAVE the relationship either temporarily (unless and until they feel vindicated)or permanently.

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 6:51 PM | PERMALINK

"Us lefties are big on supporting choice." - cmdicely


Unless you christian and pro-life.

Unless your 18 and want to join the military.

Unless you a parent of a pregnant teen and want information.

Unless your nervous about an Islamic cleric acting strangely before a flight and don't want them on the flight.

Unless your a Christian and want to celebrate Christmas at your childs school

Unless you want to offer prayer at school

and on and on and on.......

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 6:54 PM | PERMALINK

Jay wrote: Unless you christian and pro-life. Unless your 18 and want to join the military. Unless you a parent of a pregnant teen and want information. Unless your nervous about an Islamic cleric acting strangely before a flight and don't want them on the flight. Unless your a Christian and want to celebrate Christmas at your childs school Unless you want to offer prayer at school

You are free to both practice Christianity and carry pregnancies to term. No one is forcing abortions on anyone.

Anyone 17 or older can enlist in the military and while we encourage people to make deliberate choices, we care deeply about the armed services. Some of us actually walked into a recruiters office and didn't have to be waivered.

Pregnant teens are not restricted from obtaining information. In some cases, girls with reason to feaear their parents are able to get judicial action taken on their behalf but these cases are, to my knowledge, rare.

Am I free to feel threatened if a catholic crosses themself, since I'm a member of a minority religion?

I have yet to actually see Christmas cancelled, but if it is, there is always the option of Christian schools.

As long as there are math tests, there will be prayer in schools.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 7:03 PM | PERMALINK

Yes because all conservative men cheat,That was quite obvious when Clinton was being harrassed by this crowd.Larry Flint had everyone of them conservatives praying it wasn't there name that larry had.(Bob Barr)

Posted by: Thomas3.6 1/2 on December 21, 2006 at 7:05 PM | PERMALINK


Unless you christian and pro-life.

If you don't like abortions, don't have one. If you want to be Christian, you're free to practice your religion - but not on MY dime.

Unless your 18 and want to join the military.

?

Unless you a parent of a pregnant teen and want information.

Unless you're a pregnant teen and "uncle-daddy" wants to force you to bear his spawn of incestual union.

Unless your nervous about an Islamic cleric acting strangely before a flight and don't want them on the flight.

My right to bar an Islamic cleric from a flight ends where an Islamic Cleric's right to fly begins.

Unless your a Christian and want to celebrate Christmas at your childs school

You have the right to send your kid to a Christian private school. What's your beef?

Unless you want to offer prayer at school

As long as there are math tests, there will be prayer at school.

and on and on and on.......
Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 6:54 PM | PERMALINK

Yes, you *do* tend to ramble.

Posted by: Extradite Rumsfeld on December 21, 2006 at 7:07 PM | PERMALINK

"As long as there are math tests, there will be prayer in schools." - GC


Now that's funny.

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 7:08 PM | PERMALINK

Just let's not go down the "I'd like to have a beer with her" road.

Posted by: Hedley Lamarr on December 21, 2006 at 7:13 PM | PERMALINK

Well, that promise worked out well.
Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 6:25 PM | PERMALINK

Yes - considering that their successful nuclear test (on Bush's watch) was a Plutonium bomb, and there is still no hard evidence to support a "defector's" assertion that there was a uranium program.

Just as there's no hard evidence to support Iraqi-defector Ahmed Chalabi's assertion that there was an Iraqi nuclear weapons program.

Bush is batting .000 so far.

I can't wait until the Iranian nuclear test.
Can't you?

Again a personal thing and on a case-by-case basis, however, my opinion is that they should have the self respect to LEAVE the relationship either temporarily (unless and until they feel vindicated)or permanently.
Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 6:51 PM | PERMALINK

How do you know she did not?

Maybe after the public spectacle and humiliation he suffered, she felt vindicated.

Or maybe he said or did something to make her feel vindicated.

You don't know this, of course, because it's a private matter, and no matter how badly you right wing voyeurs want to get your eyes and ears into everybody else's pants, we still live in a relatively free country.

That is - until Bush's incompetence allows Iran to get the bomb, and they take us over, and accomplish what the Rethuglicans have been trying to do for the past 60 years: establish a brutal and repressive theocracy in America.

Posted by: Extradite Rumsfeld on December 21, 2006 at 7:17 PM | PERMALINK

Just let's not go down the "I'd like to have a beer with her" road.
Posted by: Hedley Lamarr on December 21, 2006 at 7:13 PM | PERMALINK

I've always thought that maybe she'd loosen up a bit if Bush gave her a back rub?

Posted by: Extradite Rumsfeld on December 21, 2006 at 7:22 PM | PERMALINK

I would not think that Hillary Clinton would be a particularly good choice as the Democratic nominee becuase I don't see much evidence that she would be able to roll into, say, Ohio, and run the table on some reasonably competent Republican nominee.

I think basically whomever the Democrats would have put up, barring someone certifiably crazy, would have won the elections Hilary won. As the lawyer wife of the most popular Democratic ex-president alive, her current Senate position was pretty much handed to her.

Beating whoever the Republicans throw up in 2008 is an entirely different story.

Posted by: hank on December 21, 2006 at 7:24 PM | PERMALINK

I've always thought that maybe she'd loosen up a bit if Bush gave her a back rub?
Posted by: Extradite Rumsfeld

Yikes! That beats anything we had going up-thread with the pony and the barrel of crude oil.

Think I'm gonna go take a handi-wipe to my frontal lobe.

Posted by: cyntax on December 21, 2006 at 7:28 PM | PERMALINK

And I thought Jay was doing so well in English as a 2nd language - Having a wee problem with your contractions, kiddo? You really must polish an apple and ask you Head Start teacher about using you're for you are and your as in a possessive.

Geez, I was over 18 when I walked into an Army recruiting office and joined. Do not recall any problems, except for not listening to him advising me to go into ASA instead of a line outfit.

And how did they advise you, Jay, old chum?

Posted by: stupid git on December 21, 2006 at 7:29 PM | PERMALINK

And how did they advise you, Jay, old chum?
Posted by: stupid git

probably to not ask and not tell, and it would all be fine.

Posted by: Nads on December 21, 2006 at 7:30 PM | PERMALINK

If she stops stabbing me in the back on progressive issues I might be surprised by how much I like her.

Posted by: MNPundit on December 21, 2006 at 7:30 PM | PERMALINK

Unless your 18 and want to join the military.

I'm still trying to figure out how the bad, old liberals are keeping minors out of the military and why I would want a 16 year old toting an M-16 around a combat zone...

Naw, don't get it.

Posted by: cyntax on December 21, 2006 at 7:33 PM | PERMALINK

"I'm still trying to figure out how the bad, old liberals are keeping minors out of the military and why I would want a 16 year old toting an M-16 around a combat zone..." - cyntax


um.....18 years of age is not a minor. Just FYI. The far left is opposed to military recruitment on college campuses, denying campus access to many 18 yr olds. It's that choice thing.


"Geez, I was over 18 when I walked into an Army recruiting office and joined." - stupid

Charlie Rangel and John Kerry think you're an idiot.

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 7:49 PM | PERMALINK

And I thought Jay was doing so well in English as a 2nd language -
Posted by: stupid git on December 21, 2006 at 7:29 PM | PERMALINK

Apparently, he spent all his time angsting over whether or not he was allowed to pray, or whether the other kids were compelled to say ". . . under God. . " in their Daily Loyalty Oath to worry about what the teacher was saying.

Posted by: Extradite Rumsfeld on December 21, 2006 at 7:51 PM | PERMALINK

I'm still trying to figure out how the bad, old liberals are keeping minors out of the military and why I would want a 16 year old toting an M-16 around a combat zone...

Never having served himself, Jay feels that today's utes' joy in enlisting is being compromised by their having to listen to almost every single person in America deride the venality and idiocy of the "commander in chief."

Jay, you're divorced. I'd guess the old girl left you after you cheated on her, but that would require me to entertain the idea that two women agreed to have sex with you, and that beggars belief.

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 7:52 PM | PERMALINK

A 17 year old can enlist in the military and go to a war zone to be shot at and possible killed, but they can't commit to purchase three more CD's at regular club prices.

Which has the greatest impact on their life afgain?

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 7:52 PM | PERMALINK

Global! I know! I know! Call on me!

Ah, but unless someone comes to campus and sells them the CDs, they'd be too stupid to figure out how to buy them anyway. According to Mental Giant Jay.

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 7:54 PM | PERMALINK

Shortest of Stops,

We have rules here - We never, never, discuss anyone's concubines.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on December 21, 2006 at 7:55 PM | PERMALINK

And snaps to Extradite Rumsfeld, who's on fire today.

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 7:56 PM | PERMALINK

Paul--We weren't. It's Jay, remember. The first woman left. If there was a second woman, the exchange of cash was involved.

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 7:57 PM | PERMALINK

Jay, you're divorced. I'd guess the old girl left you after you cheated on her, but that would require me to entertain the idea that two women agreed to have sex with you, and that beggars belief.
Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 7:52 PM | PERMALINK

That's because he cheated with his dog.

Posted by: Extradite Rumsfeld on December 21, 2006 at 7:58 PM | PERMALINK

um.....18 years of age is not a minor. Just FYI. The far left is opposed to military recruitment on college campuses, denying campus access to many 18 yr olds. It's that choice thing.

Well no. The problem I, and apparently a few others had, unpacking your statement is that when you specify one single age, the issue seems to be the age at which you're allowed to join the military. If you're talking about keeping recruiters off college campuses, that affects anyone on a college campus, which isn't only 18 year olds.

You should have written if you're a college student who wants to join the military. Though the keeping recruiters off-campus still would have been a bit hard to ferret out. Maybe we're not as interested in that as you think?

Posted by: cyntax on December 21, 2006 at 8:00 PM | PERMALINK

As a Red-Stater, I can tell you my only apprehension with Hillary (aside from being a far left loon) is that NO self-respecting woman stays with a man that cheats on her every single chance he gets.

There's a Newt Gingrich/Rudy Guiliani/Rush Limbaugh/Henry Hyde joke in there, but who's paying attention?

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 8:03 PM | PERMALINK

Extradite Rumsfeld,

Was that when he was herding sheep in the high country? Hope that old ewe didn't get a wee jealous.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on December 21, 2006 at 8:03 PM | PERMALINK

PR may have caused my demise, but did you hear the one about Bob Livingston of New Orleans? Geez, that Speaker's position got so bad, they had to get someone who could wrassle boys instead.

Posted by: Stockburn on December 21, 2006 at 8:07 PM | PERMALINK
Us lefties are big on supporting choice." - cmdicely


Unless you christian and pro-life.

I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean: if it is supposed to mean we oppose choice for people who are Christian and pro-life, that's not true.

We don't think anyone should be compelled not to be Christian, or compelled to have an abortion, so we support choice both for Christians (which most of us lefties are) and pro-lifers.

Unless your 18 and want to join the military.

No, us lefties generally think that 18 year olds should be free to choose whether or not to join the military. And whether or not to talk to recruiters. OTOH, many of us don't think they should be compelled to deal with recruiters just because they chose to go to school (high school or college), so we don't compel rules compelling schools to provide access to recruiters to get education funding.

Unless you a parent of a pregnant teen and want information.

"Choice" is not access to others personal information without consent. Now, there are certainly reasonable grounds for debate on the issue of protecting minor's personal information from their legal guardians, but "choice" isn't one of them.

Unless your nervous about an Islamic cleric acting strangely before a flight and don't want them on the flight.

If you are subjectively concerned without any objective reason about a flight, you have the choice not to get on it (unless you are a prisoner being transported, and we certainly don't support choice for them!)

Unless your a Christian and want to celebrate Christmas at your childs school

Yes, well, the school isn't exclusively yours. If you want to celebrate a religious holiday (as I usually do!), we support your choice to do so. That does not mean that we support granting your particular holiday special support by the state.

Unless you want to offer prayer at school

Actually, no, we lefties support any private person's right to offer any prayer they want so long as they are acting in a private capacity, to whatever deity or force they chose.

We don't support putting a public imprimatur on any prayer, though.

Posted by: cmdicely on December 21, 2006 at 8:11 PM | PERMALINK

Don't forget Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bob Barr, Bob Dole, Strom Thurmond, Dan Burton...pretty much the whole Bush clan...

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 8:20 PM | PERMALINK

"A 17 year old can enlist in the military and go to a war zone....." - GC


um.....a 17 yr old can only enlist with parental permission, however, thanks to the left, a pregnant teen can now get an abortion without parental permission.

I also thoroughly enjoy watching the lefties spiral out control spewing hatred to those they disagree with demonstrating the tolerance they preach daily.

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 8:29 PM | PERMALINK

What Jay Says: "I also thoroughly enjoy watching the lefties spiral out control spewing hatred to those they disagree with demonstrating the tolerance they preach daily."

What Jay Means: "I made a fool of myself saying stupid shit and got my bottom spanked for it. It stings now. A lot."

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 8:34 PM | PERMALINK

I spewed hatred? On this thread? Where?

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 8:35 PM | PERMALINK

I think Kevin is right about Hillary lightening up. I was happy to see that Al Gore has lightened up. I saw him live in Seattle, giving the "Inconvenient Truths" powerpoint presentation and was impressed with how loose and humorous he was, even when talking about global warming.

But I have one demur about lightening up for Dems. Maybe, given our national situation, the time has come to get serious. Maybe even, gasp, act like adults. I'm not sure this wouldn't resonate with the mood of the people. After all, we're in deep doo doo on many fronts. It is time to let loose the adults, especially the people who have studied the issues for a long time and published in peer reviewed journals.

Having said two contradictory things, now, I'll add a third, just to show how decisive I am: Let's recommend to our pols that the be themselves, putting themselves in what they think is their best light. And if they're going to use jokes, have some exerts help out.

Posted by: frank logan on December 21, 2006 at 8:37 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah, Kerry and Rangel probably do think that I was an idiot for not going Army Security Agency - First Ft Devon, then some cushing posting, drawing per diem, living on the economy.

But, noooo - I got to listen to the Boom Boom of 105s at Ft Sill and 8 inchers going BOOM BOOM at Graf and Vilseck - But, hey "Over Hill, Over Dale was not all that bad.

How about you Jay? Any merit badges you want to discuss? How were your Den meetings and summer camp?

You really do not know anything about the Honorable Rep Rangel and Senator Kerry -

Posted by: thethirdPaul on December 21, 2006 at 8:40 PM | PERMALINK

Hillary Clinton may be one of those rare people who has been so totally defined by the media, that people are startled when they see the "real person". David Brock, who penned the hatchet job book, The Seduction of Hillary Rodham, without ever having met her, said that he was startled by how funny and refreshing Hillary was when he finally met her in person. The woman is wonkishly smart and has an incredible work ethic, two reasons conservatives hate her so much - since most of them are lazy dullards (see George W. Bush, for example).

Of course, I'm reminded of a Nancy Griffith lyric, from the song Grand Hotel:

'Maybe you were thinking,
that you thought you knew me well.'

'But no one ever knows,
the heart of anyone else.'

Posted by: The Conservative Deflator on December 21, 2006 at 8:46 PM | PERMALINK

"What Jay Means: "I made a fool of myself saying stupid shit and got my bottom spanked for it. It stings now. A lot." - shorty

Just FYI shorty, I put things out there just to fire some people up here. It's easy and really fun. But I should get a life, huh?

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 8:59 PM | PERMALINK

"How about you Jay? Any merit badges you want to discuss?" - thethird


I actually do think you were stupid for going into the military. I had nice corporate job waiting.

Hope you're not suffering from any post mental distress syndrome. Oh what am I saying, you're a liberal. Nevermind.

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 9:02 PM | PERMALINK

"That does not mean that we support granting your particular holiday special support by the state." - cmdicely


You are aware that Christmas is a federal holiday, right?

Not just some "particular" holiday.

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 9:06 PM | PERMALINK

"you're a liberal"

Thank you, Jay - That's the best damn compliment I've received in quite a while.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on December 21, 2006 at 9:09 PM | PERMALINK

Hope you're not suffering from any post mental distress syndrome. Oh what am I saying, you're a liberal. Nevermind.

Holy shit.

Did the uber-Republican, Jay Shaver, just make a "post traumatic stress disorder" joke?

Did Jay just make a little "funny" about veterans with PTSD?

What the fuck, Jay? This is comedy to you? Making jokes about people who come back from serving their country in a time of war? Making jokes about people who are in more pain than a tub of cowardly guts like you could ever imagine? Or tolerate? Or deal with?

Poor Jay - he was born to denigrate anyone who makes sure he can live the good life. Standard Republican for you right there-- "Jokes" about looking under the desk in the White House for WMDs, "jokes" about killing liberals, "jokes" about genocide and nuclear war, and now we can add "jokes" about PTSD.

Pretty fucking hilarious, Jay. Pretty fucking hilarious for a bucket of shit like you.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 9:13 PM | PERMALINK

Typical compassionate conservatism.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 9:17 PM | PERMALINK

Well, to be fair, Pale Rider, during the period that Jay was making jokes about the agony suffered by our soldiers and veterans, he wasn't advocating the murder of every Muslim on earth.

Yeah, you put stuff like this out there to get people going, Jay.

But you never seem to realize just how fucked up that is.

Nice life you've built for yourself there. Nice collection of physical, mental and emotional diseases and dysfunctions. There isn't a single part of you that works right.

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 9:22 PM | PERMALINK

It's only a joke if you're a Republican.

It's okay to joke about veterans and PTSD if you're a Republican.

Hey, lighten up--Jay's a Republican. He can say or do whatever he wants--including telling people that it's perfectly OK to have sex with 13 year olds--and, what? What's your deal, man? Don't harsh Jay's buzz--

It's ok!

He's a Republican. He do fuck-all that he wants. Don't like it? Don't think it's legal? Don't CARE! He's a Republican.

Here's what a REPUBLICAN thinks of our laws:

Bush Pardoned 16 people today. Here are some of their offenses--

--conspiracy to possess marijuana. Sentenced October 27, 1981, to six years' imprisonment.

--possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. Sentenced July 9, 1982, to three years' imprisonment and three years' special parole.

--conspiracy to defraud the United States by impeding, impairing and obstructing the assessment of taxes by the Internal Revenue Service and making false declarations to the grand jury. Sentenced February 1, 1985, as amended April 23, 1986, to two years' imprisonment.

--aiding and abetting the distribution of cocaine. Sentenced November 30, 1984, to nine years' imprisonment and five years' special parole.

--conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute cocaine and other controlled substances. Sentenced October 28, 1985, to one year of imprisonment.

--conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute, possession with intent to distribute, possession, and use of hashish. Sentenced February 21, 1984, by an Army general court-martial to confinement at hard labor for one year, reduction in pay grade, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and a bad conduct discharge.

Shhhh! It's OK if you are a Republican to break the law, sell drugs, commit fraud.

The laws don't apply to Republicans, dude. And making fun of veterans who might have PTSD? Par for the fucking course.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 9:22 PM | PERMALINK

Don't worry kids! Jay will get a pardon when they catch him with someone else's kids under the bridge by the Interstate! All he has to do is write a letter that says how sorry he is and give five grand to the GOP!

Woo hoo!

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 9:25 PM | PERMALINK

I still say she just needs laid.

Posted by: steve duncan on December 21, 2006 at 9:30 PM | PERMALINK

Pardons to drug dealers - Hmmm - Anyone that Shrub or Larry Krudlow knew?

Posted by: thethirdPaul on December 21, 2006 at 9:31 PM | PERMALINK

hank: As the lawyer wife of the most popular Democratic ex-president alive, her current Senate position was pretty much handed to her.

Representatives of the New York State Democratic Party asked her to run. She toured the state, meeting all the local party chairs and learning all the important local and state-wide issues. When she announced her candidacy, she gave a very good speech including a lot of funny jokes at her own expense, including photoshopped photos of herself wearing NY Yankees caps at all stages of her life.

It was all well and thoroughly done. She earned her senate seat. People tend to forget how well-connected she was nation-wide before Bill was elected president. She didn't just coast; she built on the opportunities that his governorship presented to her.

She is worth serious consideration as a candidate. If she were to get elected, I have no doubt that she would make everyone feel that she was President, not Bill. But Bill would make an excellent ambassador for her ideas, as Eleanor did for Franklin.

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 9:38 PM | PERMALINK

I have been active on different fronts for years, and a joke in feminist circles when Bill decided to run was that he was riding on her coattails.

She was one of the top lawyers in the country. People forget that she was quite accomplished in her own right before he got that job that pales all others.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 9:42 PM | PERMALINK

Remember now, it's not the persons fault, it's the drugs fault. So of course they should be pardoned. No one should be personally responsible for their choices, that's the liberal, tolerant way. So I am shocked at your dismay of pardoning helpless drug dealers.

"But you never seem to realize just how fucked up that is." - shorty


Oh I do........but you guys (I say that loosely) get your panties in such a bunch, so quickly, it's just damn entertaining.


Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 9:42 PM | PERMALINK

PaleRider: That he was uncomfortable, insecure, self-loathing and awkward around men who went to better schools and had more money than he did?

You wrote that, not I. Other people did say that about Nixon. But it is also true that people wrote that he could be affable in small group settings, quite unlike the public personna.

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 9:42 PM | PERMALINK

Oh I do........but you guys (I say that loosely) get your panties in such a bunch, so quickly, it's just damn entertaining.

Yeah, it's as hilarious as having a wannabe child molester make jokes about veterans with PTSD!

Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

So funny I forgot to laugh.

Thank God Jay's bringing the funny tonight.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 9:45 PM | PERMALINK

Hey Kevin, quit deleting comments.

That's censorship. Aren't you the one championing free speech?

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 9:46 PM | PERMALINK

Someone has to say something abotu the assumption of undergarments...We are liberals, you know.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 9:46 PM | PERMALINK

Hillary has more balls than any Republican.

Posted by: Video Man on December 21, 2006 at 9:47 PM | PERMALINK

Hey Kevin, quit deleting comments.

Look at him squeal like the bitch he is! Just as soon as someone kicks poor little Jay in the nards he cries and cries and cries and it's just not fair!

Boo hoo hoo hoo!

Stamp your little feet, Republican shitheel. Your time is up.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 9:48 PM | PERMALINK

Matter of fact, the moderators can just delete the posts I made where I "quoted" Jay so his shit can go in the toilet.

Y'all have my blessing--delete all my posts so it looks like Jay was never here, never participated in the discussion--hell, make it look like he was never born for all I care.

I welcome the moderation...

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 9:50 PM | PERMALINK

alex: Whatever you, or the article's author, think of Bill Clinton, the idea that he "escaped scrutiny" is from an alternate reality.

That was a stupid line, and there were a few others. But I thought that the basic conflict was worth reading about.

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 9:51 PM | PERMALINK

Hillary has several sets bronzed on the mantle that she took from Republicans.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 9:52 PM | PERMALINK

As I said earlier, Nixon abhorred small talk - But, then he was quite "affable" with small groups in the Oval House, as the tapes clearly portrayed.

And, as to the drug dealers, they are "helpless"? They had to deal because there was no way out? They were helpless against their "addiction" to dealing. Those addicts out there were demanding that they become dealers? Those crack babies were screaming for them to become dealers? Their Ferrari dealers were forcing them to deal?

Boy, you are the one suffering from the PTSD caused by November 7.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on December 21, 2006 at 9:53 PM | PERMALINK

MRM: Representatives of the New York State Democratic Party asked her to run. She toured the state, meeting all the local party chairs and learning all the important local and state-wide issues. When she announced her candidacy, she gave a very good speech including a lot of funny jokes at her own expense, including photoshopped photos of herself wearing NY Yankees caps at all stages of her life. It was all well and thoroughly done. She earned her senate seat.

She did. Lazio thought he had a lock and ran his campaign accordingly. Clinton, on the other hand, went to every single town in NY and talked about education, roads, jobs, healthcare...the things that matter to people.

That, by the way, is the same way Rahm Emanuel--whom I now despise, but I give him credit for this campaign--won the Illinois 5th. It wasn't fun to hit every Northwest Side bingo hall and polka party and ask for every vote after having been in Bill Clinton's inner circle for years, but Emanuel did it, and beat out a popular Democratic primary challenger.

Whatever one thinks about the Clintons, they have demonstrated they know how to win elections. As one of their circle, Rahm used to know, too, but these days he too frequently gets caught thinking it's still the 1990s.

Aw, I don't want her. But I think we're going to get her.

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 9:55 PM | PERMALINK

royalblue_tom: The trouble is, the right wing base really hate her, with an irrational passion.

True, but they hated FDR even more, and he won 4 elections. No doubt getting elected will be a hard slog, but it will be a hard slog for the other contenders as well.

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 9:55 PM | PERMALINK

"Boy, you are the one suffering from the PTSD caused by November 7." - the third

Now that is valid. I may be and will look into it. I just hope somebody doesn't make fun of my possible disorder, because that could cause me more emotional pain and would not be politically correct.

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 9:57 PM | PERMALINK

The Washington Monthly supports censorship.

Good to know.

Posted by: Jay on December 21, 2006 at 9:59 PM | PERMALINK

If Hillary promises to throw wingnuts into detention centers without bothering to find out if there's any evidence that they may or may not want to commit a crime, promises to let our allies torture people who give money to the Republican Party, and if she promises to use the resources of our intelligence gathering agencies against her political enemies, hey--

She's got my vote. Can't wait for that show to start...

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 10:00 PM | PERMALINK

But, then he was quite "affable" with small groups in the Oval House, as the tapes clearly portrayed.

Uh huh. And most of the people who talked publicly about how "affable" and "natural" he could be were named Haldeman, Ehrlichman, Colson, Kissinger, Buchanan, Ziegler or Major Campaign Donor.

Despite the White House staff's constant line to reporters about what a regular guy Nixon was, rarely did a Girl Scout or a Better Business Bureau representative or a major league ballplayer comment on Nixon's ease of manner--it was usually the opposite. Elvis may have liked him, come to think of it, but then Elvis was drugged to the gills during his WH visit. Bang bang.

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 10:00 PM | PERMALINK

The Washington Monthly supports censorship.

Actually, just deleting the offensive comments of assholes.

But what's a little moderation to you, Jay? Don't have any more jokes about vets with PTSD? What? Can't think of a good amputee joke? Maybe you've got a joke about a 19 year-old kid who's in a coma because an IED caused him a massive brain injury and the gear that he was wearing failed to protect him because it was substandard.

Fucking hilarious...

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 10:05 PM | PERMALINK

Jay, it goes beyond politically incorrect to make jokes at the expense of veterans who put it on the line so you can live your life and sleep sound at nioght, knowing they are there to stand in the gap.

It's beyond crass. It is beyond cold-blooded and heartless. Hell it surpasses juvenile.

Good job representing your party.

And if you think political blogging is about those few of us who comment, you are deluded. It is about the thousands of lurkers who consider the opinions they read in comments as they form their own.

So please, continue to make those jokes, because you show your party for what it is: full of petty, vapid, soulless, insipid and trite small-minded individuals who think nothing of anyone but themselves.

So do carry on. No comment of yours should ever be deleted for that very purpose.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 10:05 PM | PERMALINK

Good job representing your party.

That's the heart and soul of the Republican Party, circa 2006--encompassed by a President who jokes about people who are blind, people who are trying to do their job, people who haven't had everything handed to them in life.

Thank God the American people are waking up from the nightmare.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 10:08 PM | PERMALINK

Global Citizen: I have been active on different fronts for years, and a joke in feminist circles when Bill decided to run was that he was riding on her coattails.
...
She was one of the top lawyers in the country. People forget that she was quite accomplished in her own right before he got that job that pales all others.

I remember that joke. And she IS quite accomplished in her own right.

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 10:12 PM | PERMALINK

The Washington Monthly supports censorship.

Quit whining. WM has an editorial policy.

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 10:14 PM | PERMALINK

Global Citizen: Hillary has several sets bronzed on the mantle that she took from Republicans.

that's a pretty good line.

She had a good tv personna when she was presenting the health care plan before the Senate -- at least in the few snips that I saw.

GC, is it possible that we agree on something here? That Sen. Clinton is a credible candidate?

the issue of Bill's philandering will be raised all the time, but I think it won't hurt her if she doesn't let it get under her skin. The song "Stand by Your Man" did very well in the Red States. And I think that Blue State women would be willing to vote for her to punish Bill -- so close to power it will hurt him in his bones, but she'll be Commander-in-chief.

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 10:27 PM | PERMALINK

I don't know how I feel about a President Hillary. I think I would rather see her stay in the Senate and be appointed to the Supreme Court by the next Democratic president.

Now talk about Bill being close to power! Lifetime power!

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 10:38 PM | PERMALINK

Good one for Marler.

Thank you for standing up to Jay, Marler. We may disagree, but you have ethics and that means something.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 10:39 PM | PERMALINK

Matthew, you crack me up. I think you're really overestimating the number of blue-state women who want to "punish Bill." Really.

Red-state men (and, to a lesser degree, red-state women), yeah, we can talk about that.

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 10:41 PM | PERMALINK

I think I would rather see her stay in the Senate and be appointed to the Supreme Court by the next Democratic president.

very smart.

Democrats lately have been requiring a lot of judicial experience, but they might overlook that in her case.

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 10:41 PM | PERMALINK

By the way, Matthew, I don't jump on the bandwagon and get abusive when we disagree precisely because you will take a principled stand against someone like Jay. You have character, and that goes a ways in my book.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 10:47 PM | PERMALINK

shortstop: Matthew, you crack me up. I think you're really overestimating the number of blue-state women who want to "punish Bill." Really.

Oh, yeah. But I was thinking of the likely effects of excessive repetition of the philandering theme if repeated often by Republican opponents. As with John Kerry, she may end up in the position of needing just 3% more of the voters. If she keeps her cool, then late in the campaign nobody will buy that stupid refrain: "If she couldn't control her husband, how can she negotiate with Kim Jong-il?" He'll be as irrelevant as LBJ's younger brother, TR's younger brother, Nixon's younger brother, Carter's younger brother (Jeb Bush's younger brother is more of a problem.)

That's if she doesn't let it get under her skin. If she gets annoyed, she'll never hear about anything else.

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 10:50 PM | PERMALINK

Global Citizen: You have character, and that goes a ways in my book.

boy, another sharp and well-written insight. You are on a roll tonight. Do you suppose you might have a word with Gregory about this?

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 10:52 PM | PERMALINK

Red-state men (and, to a lesser degree, red-state women), yeah, we can talk about that.

So much of the hatred for Clinton boils down to one thing--southern Men have a homoerotic attraction to him and want to be him, want to have that confidence and swagger and that "big dawg on the porch" thing going on.

Then, they remember--they're bald, fat, stupid and can't get it up because they've repressed every honest emotion they've ever had...and that's where the hate boils up out of them.

Or not. But that's my take on it.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 10:56 PM | PERMALINK

As we are all presumably adults here, and I am decidedly anti-authoritarian, all I can do is set a standard for my own behavior and try to live up to it. Sometimes I can be a catty bitch, and I don't mind a good snap-fight. I just don't like flame-wars.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 10:57 PM | PERMALINK

No Clintons before 2050. No Bushes before 2075. Maybe never.

Posted by: tomeck on December 21, 2006 at 10:58 PM | PERMALINK

I just don't like flame-wars.

You wound me, dear lady.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 11:00 PM | PERMALINK

Sorry to offend. It's an over-40 thing, perhaps?

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 11:03 PM | PERMALINK

Yes, that must be it. The over-40 crowd never flames. WTF?

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 11:05 PM | PERMALINK

Maybe because we have figured out that old age and trechery will overcome youth and vigor most every time?

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 11:09 PM | PERMALINK

"Never trust anyone over forty."

Man, it's good to be 38. Technically, I'm still, like, ohmigod, a kid or something.

Totally awesome...

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 11:09 PM | PERMALINK

All I can think of is how these guys at my college used to put on this side splitting live action spoof of pop culture called Serial (or was it Cereal...who can remember?).

There was this amalgamated creation mixing Tori Spelling and several other singularly intolerable women enchanting America at the time, and one of her lines was:

Hi, I'm a bitch, and I play one on TV.

That's all I can think of...

Posted by: Linus on December 21, 2006 at 11:11 PM | PERMALINK

Maybe because we have figured out that old age and trechery will overcome youth and vigor most every time?

No, not going to happen. Youth a vigor overcomes all treachery because young people are idealistic and enthusiastic, despite having old people fuck with them and pull bullshit on them.

So long as you hang on to your idealism, well, treachery means nothing.

So, you see, that's why I hate people who are in their twenties.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 11:12 PM | PERMALINK

Well, how would I know? I'm only 19.

I'm also cold and tired and dizzy, and I have a bitching book to read, so I'll take myself off to bed. G'night, all.

Posted by: shortstop on December 21, 2006 at 11:12 PM | PERMALINK

My younger sister is 38 - well, she will be in a few days. I used to pummell the piss out of that kid. By the way, she's still as obnoxious as she was when she was eight, and I'll still pummell her if she gives me half a chance. (We play tackle football. We aren't big, just mean.)

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 11:14 PM | PERMALINK

G'night shortstop. Pleasant dreams, sugarplums and all that.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 11:16 PM | PERMALINK

Good night all. See you around.

Posted by: MatthewRMarler on December 21, 2006 at 11:20 PM | PERMALINK

See, I think that between 35 and 50 we have enough idealism left to drive us, but we've been knocked sown enough times to know how things work and play the game effectively.

I hate catch-phrases, but a couple of years ago wasn't 40 the new 20? I know that in our case, we have the kids raised and now we are doing things that are usually done by younger people - Like medical school and grad school and if we decide today we want to see Magic Slim and the Teardrops at the Kingston Mines, and they are playing tomorrow, we take a cab to the airport and buy a ticket and go.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 11:21 PM | PERMALINK

Sugarplums to you too, Matthew.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 11:22 PM | PERMALINK

i think the question is not will she, but can she?

Posted by: Jim on December 21, 2006 at 11:23 PM | PERMALINK

PR,

You put me in my grave, Preacher, but I must know one thing - Where did you find the time to study Tennessee Williams? - Next, you'll be spouting, "Mendacity" ala Big Daddy

Posted by: Stockburn on December 21, 2006 at 11:34 PM | PERMALINK

Huh? I just spent five minutes trying to figure out what you just said.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 11:39 PM | PERMALINK

I have a cute mimeograph story: I taught middleschool science one year at one of the schools I had attended as a child. One day I needed to make handouts and the copier was broken. I took a student to the office and got out the old mimeo machine and we made the copies I needed and as we were going back to class she said "That was so cool! Pretty soon we won't need copiers!"

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 21, 2006 at 11:44 PM | PERMALINK

Tennessee Williams? Whaaa?

Paul can't leave til he diagrams this one like a sentence from English class.

I am not as well-read as our good man Paul, so he has to esssplain his recent bon mot because I'm sitting here, totally confused, and with egg on my face.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 21, 2006 at 11:46 PM | PERMALINK

Hillary is Hillary. She tries once in awhile but, she cannot pull it off for long. Her natural personality is not engaging like her husband.
Hillary will not last the primaries. She is disliked as much on the left as on the right.
I'm in agreement with Tomeck. No Bushes or clintons for the better part of this century. They are the past and thier time is over. let it go and move on.

Posted by: vwcat on December 21, 2006 at 11:59 PM | PERMALINK

sorry for double post. I forgot to say that I'm from Illinois and supporting my Senator for prez.

Posted by: vwcat on December 22, 2006 at 12:02 AM | PERMALINK

PR,

Your 10:56 post - Shades of TW - Remember Cat on a Hot Tin Roof - with Big Daddy, played by Burl Ives spouting, "Mendacity".

You were capturing a bit of Williams.

And now back to my tomb.

Posted by: Stockburn on December 22, 2006 at 12:04 AM | PERMALINK

Still drawing a blank. I don't think I've ever seen Cat on a hot tin roof.

Burl Ives?

Dude, I'm even more confused now than I was twenty minutes ago. And that's saying a lot.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 22, 2006 at 12:14 AM | PERMALINK

Pale,

Let me see if I can help out with a reference from Wikipedia on Cat On A Hot Tin Roof:

The central theme of the play is mendacity, a word Brick uses to describe his disgust with the world. Moreover it revolves around the lies in the aging and decaying Southern society. With one exception, the entire family lies to Big Daddy and Big Mama, as do the doctors. Big Daddy lies to his wife. Will Maggie be willing to lie to her father-in-law in order to gain his favor? Brick will not lie to his father, but is he lying about the nature of his relationship with or his feelings for his deceased friend?
The play alludes to the presence of homosexuality in Southern society and examines the complicated rules of social conduct in this culture. The Hays Code required that the film could not be clear that Brick had sexual desire for his buddy [Skipper], and thus toned down the original play's critique of homophobia and sexism.
Brick, Big Daddy's son, is estranged from his wife, Maggie and she's jealous of Brick's "special" relationship with Skipper who had committed suicide. In the film version, Paul Newman played football hero, Brick, Liz Taylor played Maggie (the cat), and Burl Ives played Big Daddy.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on December 22, 2006 at 12:33 AM | PERMALINK

Big Daddy is dying of cancer, and everyone knows but him and Big Mama. Toward the end, when everything is unraveling and Big Daddy is about to take to hiis deathbed, and the pain is terrible and pervasive, Big Mama fervently wants to believe the lies. 'Did you hear that? It's just a little ole spastic colon!'

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 22, 2006 at 12:40 AM | PERMALINK

Let's play the metaphore game! Big Daddy is the Republican party. It is diseased and dying, but in denial.

Big Mama is the chorus of neocon cheerleaders and the 30% of the True Believers.

Maggie is the youth vote.

Brick is played by Reverend Haggard, former Congressman Foley, Ken Mehlman and all manner of closeted Republicans.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 22, 2006 at 12:44 AM | PERMALINK

Pretty good, Globe.

I guess Goober the son and Brick's rival sibling, who was plotting to take over Big Daddy's fortune, represents the Repub contenders for '08 like Sen. George Allen who lost.

Posted by: Apollo 13 on December 22, 2006 at 1:03 AM | PERMALINK

Apollo a compliment from you is high praise in my book, so thank you from the bottom of my heart.

And thank you for finishing the metaphore. We should get together and share a thesis.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 22, 2006 at 1:22 AM | PERMALINK

Sounds like fun, Globe.

I met Tennessee Williams when Tiger Trail premiered in Atlanta back in the '70s. I was surprised at how short he was. High as a kite on cocaine he was too.

BTW, off topic, but you should be proud of Ike Skelton. I read where he has called for a subcommittee to investigate contractor abuses in Iraq when the new Congress convenes. Good man!

Posted by: Apollo 13 on December 22, 2006 at 1:32 AM | PERMALINK

you should be proud of Ike Skelton. I read where he has called for a subcommittee to investigate contractor abuses in Iraq when the new Congress convenes. Good man!

I am indeed proud of Ike. I met him when his wife was a patient in the hospital where I used to work. I was devastated for him when Susie passed away.

I had a feeling a couple of months ago that he might be doing something like this. I have an email dialogue with one of his staffers. I have been screaming Truman Committee at the top of my lungs for a year now. Glad I haven't been just shouting in the wind.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 22, 2006 at 1:57 AM | PERMALINK
I think I would rather see her stay in the Senate and be appointed to the Supreme Court by the next Democratic president.

What is there in Hillary Clinton's record that suggests she'd even be tolerable as a Justice?

Posted by: cmdicely on December 22, 2006 at 3:17 AM | PERMALINK

Ouch.

Here's to hoping it was dipped in a barrel of crude first.
Posted by: cyntax

I suppose I shouldn't share with you the oil patch lingo for a secret test drilling site. But I wasn't in Crude Oil Accounting all those years ago for nothing.

It's termed 'a tight hole'.

And you probably don't want to dip any tender portions of your anatomy in crude without first ascertaining whether it's 'sweet' or not. High corrosive stuff, crude oil.

Posted by: MsNThrope on December 22, 2006 at 8:14 AM | PERMALINK

Didn't Rep. Bob Livingston's wife stick with her disgraced successor to that other disgraced Republican Speaker/Wife Cheater (whose spouse stuck with him)? Hell, the entire GOP appeared to support fornicators back in 1998. Who can forget:

"Livingston's confession Thursday that he had been unfaithful to his wife drew first gasps, and then a standing ovation and declarations of support from Republicans at a closed-door caucus."

So, Hillary's commitment to her husband falls along the same very, very long lines as the commitment by GOP wives to their cheatin' men.

And Hillary probably has bigger cohones than any them.

Posted by: pj in jesusland on December 22, 2006 at 9:31 AM | PERMALINK

MsNT: And you probably don't want to dip any tender portions of your anatomy in crude without first ascertaining whether it's 'sweet' or not. High corrosive stuff, crude oil.

That's a lot of wasted concern you're showing there. Remember whose ass is in question, please.

Posted by: shortstop on December 22, 2006 at 9:53 AM | PERMALINK

Shorty, stop thinking of my ass, it demonstrates your latent homoerotic tendencies and creeps me out.

Posted by: Jay on December 22, 2006 at 10:29 AM | PERMALINK

I just can't help it, Jay--men fascinate me. Do you know any?

Posted by: shortstop on December 22, 2006 at 10:54 AM | PERMALINK

Kudos to Apollo 13 and GC for the fine work on "Cat".

Remember, Jay, sodomy is legal in Iceland; But, U-Turns are not. So, while driving in their capitol, no ah the U-Turns, no ah way. Enjoy their other rights, though.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on December 22, 2006 at 11:30 AM | PERMALINK

and that's where the hate boils up out of them." - Frail Rider


It must take a lot of courage to call other people names with whom you disagree. Now that's ETHICS!

Thank you for another glaring example of your hypocricy. You alter someone's screen name in a feeble attempt to feign cleverness...Then go on to complain about name calling.

Priceless!!!

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 22, 2006 at 11:41 AM | PERMALINK

As another Advent Door opens, three more US troops killed in Iraq.

Thanks for mentioning them, Jay.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on December 22, 2006 at 12:58 PM | PERMALINK

Poor Jay.

The next few years are going to blow what little is left of his mind.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 22, 2006 at 6:53 PM | PERMALINK

You know what I said last night about flame-wars? Well I am not feeling nearly so magnanimous tonight, so if the opportunity arises, flame away...

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 22, 2006 at 7:02 PM | PERMALINK

Oh, so now it's okay to have a flame war?

Well, dilettante that I am, no, I refuse.

Everyone loves you when the fit has hit the shan and everyone applauds when you flame some asshole into oblivion, but when the war is over and the warriors are left over, well...no one wants you anymore. They just put you out to pasture and leave you there, and you're lucky if someone fills up your bucket with oats once in a while.

I think I'll just sit here in my rec room and go boo hoo into my sleeve until I feel better.

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 22, 2006 at 7:25 PM | PERMALINK

Nothin that dramatic. I have PMS today.

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 22, 2006 at 7:27 PM | PERMALINK

Me too. And I don't even have the plumbing, darlin'

Posted by: Pale Rider on December 22, 2006 at 7:28 PM | PERMALINK

Are you Pissed-off at Miserable Shitheads? (Or is that shitbags now?)

Posted by: Global Citizen on December 22, 2006 at 7:36 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly