We had server issues over the weekend- I will start posting again tomorrow.
Archives for 2004
Dean & Rosemary
My evil twin and Rosemary need your help. Go help.
THe Bible and Homosexuality
Ezra Klein has up a long post about the bible and homosexuality. As I am no biblical scholar (I might even turn into a pillar of salt if I went into achurch), I have no comments. Go check it out though.
Rep. Corrine Brown Lott?
Looks like the Democrats are having another one of their own bigot eruptions:
U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown verbally attacked a top Bush administration official during a briefing on the Haiti crisis Wednesday, calling the President’s policy on the beleaguered nation “racist” and his representatives “a bunch of white men.”
Her outburst was directed at Assistant Secretary of State Roger Noriega during a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill. Noriega, a Mexican-American, is the State Department’s top official for Latin America.
“I think it was an emotional response of her frustration with the administration,” said David Simon, a spokesman for the Jacksonville Democrat. He noted that Brown, who is black, is “very passionate about Haiti.”
Brown sat directly across the table from Noriega and yelled into a microphone. Her comments sent a hush over the hourlong meeting, which was attended by about 30 people, including several members of Congress and Bush administration officials.
Noriega later told Brown: “As a Mexican-American, I deeply resent being called a racist and branded a white man,” according to three participants.
Brown then told him “you all look alike to me,” the participants said.
As usual, I doubt the Democrats will be outraged. Remember, only Republicans can be racist.
*** Update ***
As usual, I am so jaded by the political climate that I fail to give Democrats enough credit when they deserve it. Kudos to the Calpundit and Matt Yglesias. I do take issue with one aspect of his comment denouncing Ms. Brown’s statement:
Calling our policy racist is OK
FMA and The Democrats
Atrios rightly notes that many Democrats are waffling on the FMA issue, and getting a free pass:
I’m quite disappointed in the response of many of the Democrats on the issue of marriage rights and the Hate Amendment. I recognize that politics is always to some degree local, and at the end of the day of people can’t get elected there isn’t too much point in fighting courageous but self-defeating fights. On the other hand, people respond to leaders, and leaders are people who can get people to follow them despite disagreements. We need a few more leaders.
As I’ve said many times, I’m not a fan of the “I’m personally against same-sex marriage but we should leave it up to the states and I’m for this civil union thing which is just like marriage under a different name” position. I’m against it in principle and perhaps more importantly I’m against it in practice — I don’t for the most part think it’s sensible practical politics either. But, I recognize that it is the default position of the Democratic party and it’s sadly the best we’re going to do.
Which is precisely theposition of Kerry and Edwards. Atrios continues:
The Herseth campaign should sit down with Daschle’s people and come out with a position which is consistent with the principles of the Democratic party.
Waffling on the issues and slandering the opposition are key Democratic principles, Atrios.
See also, Iraq war, the War on Drugs, and today, the indecency hearings.
The Passion
After reading Sullivan’s review of the Passion, there is no chance in hell I will go see the movie. I have found that as I age, I simply can not handle horror movies or movies with a great deal of graphicviolence. I just won’t sleep for weeks.
At any rate, Iam not much on the blogger triumphalism, but I did want to point out that I find it amusing that the only two movie critics I listen to are Andrew Sullivan and Oliver Willis.
Here We Go Again
I hate arguments like this:
When castigating Democrats for attacking Bush’s jobs record, Robert Samuelson seems to have conveniently forgotten that Bush has been predicting job growth specifically tied to his economic policies for the past three years, and Democrats are reacting to his promises.
One would think that you could remember that the President promised job creation based his policies when complaining about Democrats attacking the President’s policies for not creating jobs.
I think it is fair to make a criticism of Bush’s policies in regards to them not living up to the lofty predictions this administration made regarding rising employment. But that is not what Jesse and the Democrats are doing. Instead, they are essentially engaging in a dishonest argument that can not be disproven.
Because we do not know what the employment rate (and, conversely, the unemployment rate) would be if Bush’s tax cuts HAD NOT BEEN PASSED, there is simply no way to refute the argument the Democrats are advancing. No one with half a brain would argue that the employment rate would be lower if the tax cuts had NOT BEEN PASSED, and Jesse, as one of the smarter people out there, knows this.
As it is inarguable that the recession started prior to Bush’s policies took place, there is no way to avoid the fact that the economy itself and the impact of 9/11 caused the job losses. However, the Democrats are not content to state that Bush has not done enough to help job creation, and instead they rely on arguments such as the previous one which state either that Bush has done nothing or, when they are feeling really pluckish, to state that Bush’s policies have caused or added to the job loss.
Either way, it is a lie.
*** Update ***
Steve Verdon has a great post in response (in addition?) to this post, and it is based on research rather than the rhetorical devices and election-year sloganeering that Jesse and others seem to rely on with recurring frequency.