There has been some funny this election. The right-wing meltdown has been fun to watch, SNL has been great, and the nice thing about the election is that after eight years of Bush, regardless who wins, there will be new material for the comedians. As such, this preview from the 2009 Dancing With the Stars:
I will be back later.
*** Update ***
An example of something that I find very funny. Over the past few years, we have watched major corporations dump their pensions and move hundreds of thousands of people off private health insurance on to medicare and medicaid at the government’s expense (Delta Airlines comes to mind, I believe United was another one from the 2005 PBGC mess), we have doubled the national debt and passed the MASSIVE prescription drug plan, we have watched the government nationalize several industries, the government is currently nationalizing the banks, the Republican party candidate is proposing spending near a half trillion dollars allowing the government to buy private mortgages, and the right wing is running around screaming “SOCIALISM” because Obama is proposing increasing the top tax rates a few percentage points.
That is funny. Sad and depressing, but funny.
Far Left American Hater Incertus
Something else that’s funny–Miami Dolphins owner Wayne Huizenga might have just given Florida to Obama. He’s selling his partnership in the team because Obama’s tax policies will be unfriendly to billionaires who are selling businesses.
Brian J
If I find myself with some time to kill later this week, I might try to make a video montage of John McCain to some ’80s song. Because that’s what this election needs more of, right?
On a semi serious note, I have to wonder if there will be as much good material for the comedians. Obama has devoted supporters like Bush, but they don’t appear to be as simpleminded. Obama himself doesn’t appear to be as steadfast in any particular belief, meaning it might be harder to mock him. Then again, if the right’s reaction to his presidency is anything like what we’ve seen over the last few weeks, we’ll be fine.
jake 4 that 1
@Brian J: I’m looking forward to The Daily Show interview with schmucks who claim the Obama landslide victory was engineered by Afrocentric radical gay Jewish IT specialists.
There’s no such group you say? Just wait, says me.
jake 4 that 1
My comment is stuck in moderation.
Tunch! Quit trying to get the hamsters out of the computer!
Far Left American Hater Incertus
Stewart has already started in on Obama a couple of times, mostly as part of a "pander-off" with McCain, but it will continue, no doubt. Obama, like any politician, speaks in abstracts and generalities, especially when reporters, etc. are looking for specifics, so he’ll get popped for that. And when you have a caucus as diverse as the Democratic one is, there’s always plenty of material for comedy.
PeakVT
Wingnut projection never fails to materialize. See the stories about the Republican arrested for voter registration fraud for the latest example.
The Other Steve
If you watch the Green Room piece from This week with George Snuffalupagus on the internet, I can’t remember if it was Friedman or Will but they said…
Bush in 2000 talked about Social Conservatism.
But what he really meant was Conservative Socialism.
jcricket
I’m not surprised that the ultra-rich and mega-corporations fight regulations and increased taxation. At least in the short-term, it’s in their raw economic interest to do so. Now, they could take a long-term/macro/unselfish view (a la Warren Buffet, Gates Sr.) as Obama recently articulated, but I understand why they don’t take that view. We’ve all been selfish at times.
What I don’t understand is anyone else going along with their view. Unless you believe in the fraud of trickle-down economics, or you’re basically Grover Norquist (where no revenue/no government is the goal), you are only hurting yourself by opposing progressive taxation.
I think the problem in this country is two fold: One, we can’t have a reasonable debate, and it’s because Republicans poison the discussion with their attacks and silly notions (e.g. socialism, welfare, trickle-down, deficits don’t matter); Two, because Democrats due a terrible job explaining why taxes are good and patriotic.
Investing in this country, paying for our infrastructure, teachers, social programs and our military – in amounts that actually don’t result in long-ignored problems festering – is the patriotic thing to do. Playing weak-kneed defense on the issue of taxation for 30 years is what got us into this mess. Thanks Dems!
Fulcanelli
Man, that pic is just wrong.
Judith Miller hooks up with FOX news.
That place really is turning into the last turd floating in the punch bowl for the intellectually and morally bankrupt right-wing pundits and pols as the apocalypse of sane, reasonable thinking and public policy fast approaches.
Now how do we get Buchannan and Scarborough over there, too. It will prove quite handy, having all the loonies in one bin.
Libby
I find it sadly funny too. I’m awestruck by the true believers ability to ignore reality and construct their own little world where everything the GOP tells them is true, no matter what the empirical evidence shows.
bedlam UK
Funny yet Sad?
The USA is a massive communist council house estate
Thought this was amusing from a Financial website I read in the UK.
Well done Rethugs, the world outside your borders can see that you have turned your country into a Communist council house estate.
And you have the cheek to call Obama a Socialist. How do their followers heads not explode??
Brachiator
Republicans are stuck. They can no longer rationally talk about small government or free markets, but they lack the ability to modify either their message or their core beliefs.
Worse, McCain is now desperately pulling his threadbare cloak of "honorable POW hero" tighter to his body so that he can fling outright lies about Obama’s tax plan. The two Big Lies are that Obama will tax small businesses on gross receipts, not net income, and that his tax cut will result in big rebates to poor people who have no taxable income at all. So Obama socialism will take money from hard working Americans (especially, obviously, all those "real" Americans in designated Palin Villages) and … wait for it… redistribute their wealth to lazy poor shiftless minorities. And maybe to a few terrorists.
And so, Seven Houses McCain now tries to re-invent himself as the only thing standing between the Middle Class and that revolutionary, Che Obama. It’s really despicable, but it is all that McCain’s got.
J.
I’ve laughed ’til I’ve cried.
Shouldn’t it be Karl Rove and Palin on "Dancing"? Now that would be must-see TV.
Fulcanelli
@jcricket:
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it" – Upton Sinclair
I’m no tax policy wonk, but I wonder what would happen if Obama left the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy, the Corporate tax rates and the capital gains tax rates alone, and just went after and went after cutting out all the loopholes, ridiculous write-offs and corporate welfare subsidies?
You know, all the socialistic, corporate welfare shit which enables some of the largest Fortune 500 companies to pat virtually nothing in taxes, year after year. WTF
mak
Worth noting that Palin didn’t even take questions at a FAKE news conference on SNL, and was otherwise largely wallpaper, but still managed to come off as snide.
As for the Daily Show, methinks there are dark days ahead for Jon since TDS’s few attempt to mock Obama have fallen pretty flat, IMHO. Colbert may fare better, but that remains to be seen.
Perhaps we’ll see a rise in Hee-Haw style humor from the opposition.
rob!
I wonder if that dingbat woman who kept yelling "SOCIALIST!" at Obama even knows what it means. Probably she just heard it on Fox News, was told It’s Bad, and that’s all the info she needed to yell it at Obama.
Later, she refused to shake his hand, after he tried to ask her what her concerns well.
I don’t get this older generation–they have no manners!
Zifnab
To quote Inigo Montoya – You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Fulcanelli
How’s this moderation thing work, anyway? Do comments get cleared and posted? Do we need catnip for Tunch?
Stuck in the Funhouse
The Republican party is like a dying star that has burned brighter than it should for the past 30 years, and has nearly reached Critical Mass the past eight. On November 5, or The Day After, it will become a full bore Supernova and we must all take precautions lest the resulting explosion doesn’t destroy the new order. And that new order is NOT that Obama and his liberal blackness will become President. It is that the concentrated noxious gaseous politics of false Conservatism, with all it’s imagery and bluster, will fly apart in a million angry pieces. **If Mccain wins, this will happen in slower motion, but happen it will.
It has already started with flares of rage and unmitigated stupidity, that is irrationally drawing a bead on the Obama "Afrocentric" "Socialist" KKkanard, It is the apex of delusion from the right, because they cannot face the truth. And that truth is that the cause of their demise is them, more specifically — It is the abject failure of their IDEAS on how America should operate. They have shot their ideological wad into into the void, and it is without common sense and workability under our Constitutional blueprint. And if you take away the wingnut credo of superior ideas, there is nothing left but resentment and projection, moving toward white hot anger.
The Funhouse is about to get more business than desired, and has requested Federal Funds for additional floorspace and staff. We plan to pay it back someday, when the cows come home.
Comrade Darkness
Wha? Did I miss a memo? Is Obama now a closet Jew instead of a closet Muslim?
Shygetz
History has taught those who care to pay attention to it that redistribution of wealth is inevitable, there is only the question of how. Will there be taxes, social programs, education credits, etc. or will there be torches, pitchforks, guillotines, and firing squads? Speaking as someone in the upper quintile for household income, I would greatly prefer the taxes, social programs, etc.
cleek
yeah. same here. they keep trying, but they only manage these weak little glancing blows.
Josh Hueco
I don’t know if this is getting any play on the Intertoobz, but Baylor University, where I’m currently working on my MA in History, has published another one of its studies on religion in America. The findings in this one are damning (if not surprising):
Heh. Indeed.
theturtlemoves
This country has an epidemic of people with absolutely no self-awareness. The idiots yelling about Obama being a socialist in diners while their beloved GOP takes over whole swaths of private industry are just one glaring example. The reason our esteemed host was able to finally realize his fellow travelers were morons was because he likely sat down one day and actually examined his own thoughts and beliefs, something we are trained NOT to do in this country. All the pundits do is analyze other people’s thoughts, never their own. Easy to keep up the "us" vs. "them" when you don’t really understand either.
Joshua
It’s because Americans have been suckered into thinking they aren’t too far off from becoming one of the richie rich themselves. Look at "Joe" the "Plumber" – he’s not licensed, he’s barely talked to his boss about taking over the business, he doesn’t even make 1/5th of what it would take to get taxed more under Obama’s plan – but he still somehow thinks he’s just a stone’s throw away from being one of the rich people.
Problem is, not only is it not gonna happen for about 95% of people (or more, since a lot of wealth is hereditary nowadays), this country is actually less upwardly mobile than other industralized nations, including Scandinavian countries, amazingly. So not only have the rich hoarded all the country’s success for themselves, but they are planning to keep it all to themselves moving forward.
As soon as people realize that, things will change and Norquist’s ideas will go into the dumpster where they belong. Problem is, I don’t know when people will.
Loneoak
He’s a closet black.
Ned Raggett
Next revelation — he is secretly a MAN!
jon
I thought the Republican view was that tax cuts for the wealthy will spur job growth, which I think is called "government-engineered social engineering" with a goal of letting the poor do better for themselves. I think they call it "free-market capitalism" for some reason.
The Democratic view is that the Republican attempt has largely failed, and their version of "government-engineered social engineering" is called "socialist" because it forces the wealthy to do what the Republicans say is a worthy goal.
It’s as if government and taxes are nothing but a redistribution scheme intended to take money from those who have it and put it towards people and things that don’t, isn’t it?
Stuck in the Funhouse
SOCIALIST is the wingnut code word LIBERAL PINKO COMMUNIST. Or the shorter COMMIE.
jake 4 that 1
I assume this is a function of the fact the neighborhood around the church is entirely white.
This is cool:
And the data for this study was gathered a year ago. Before people had time to confront the horror that is teh McPalin campaign.
Ash Can
You want funny? This CBN blog brings the funny. Apparently Sarah Palin actually sat down for another one-on-one press interview — this time with the Christian Broadcasting Network (surprise, surprise). Now, in general I do not give a tinker’s damn about what anyone else does or does not believe, although I reserve the right to drag my hand over my face and mutter to myself regarding any off-the-wall beliefs someone running for (high) public office may have. But when I see this bimbo whining about how her interview with Katie Couric went poorly because Katie didn’t ask her about things that matter, like the economy and the Constitution — when in fact, oh nevermind, Katie did ask her about those things and, waddya know, she was clueless about them — it makes me want to find a dictionary, open it to the page with the word "honesty" on it, and throw the damned thing at her.
Montysano (All Hail Marx & Lennon)
Speaking this morning, McCain says Obama wants to (oozing sarcasm, making air quotes) "Share the wealth".
boooooooo!! FuCkinG BOOOOO!@@!!1 says the crowd, probably 75% of which are professed Xtians.
As to "socialist": a couple of wingnuts work colleagues were tossing that around, so I asked: "Define socialism". Their answer had something to do with Jeremiah Wright and birth certificates. Big surprise there.
Brian J
Maybe I’m missing something obvious about this issue, but can someone explain to me what the big fucking deal is about Obama proposing tax credits? No, there’s a substantial portion of the country that doesn’t pay income taxes, but they do pay payroll taxes. In other words, even if their income isn’t above the threshold to pay income taxes, they do pay some taxes on their income. But besides that, we’ve had programs like the Earned Income Tax Credit for many decades. It’s been the sort of policy that’s received support from many on the far right, many on the far left, and even more in the middle. I’d venture to say that it’s one of the few policies where there’s almost universal agreement between the two parties and their many members. And yet, for using the same sort of idea as a basis for some of his tax proposals, Obama is decried as trying to lead a Socialist revolution. Even if McCain didn’t use the very same fucking idea in his health care proposal, why is Obama being criticized for employing the same sort of thinking that receives widespread support in Washington?
Jeff
Barack is attacking the socialism charge as well.
Comrade Darkness
So, if Jesus his Haloed Self were running for office, white church congregants would refuse to vote for him. You know, on principle.
Ha ha ha.
Brachiator
@Shygetz:
Wow! I sincerely hope not. You can redistribute wealth in about half an hour. But you cannot as easily redistribute the ability to generate wealth.
The US has succeeded in avoiding torches, pitchforks, guillotines and firing squads because it was able to create and sustain a large middle class and allow a substantial degree of upward mobility. Low taxes, high taxes, more social programs, no social programs, are largely irrelevant if the nation is not productive.
One guy’s loophole is another gal’s reasonable expense. There are fewer real "loopholes" than people think (just as McCain’s favorite target, earmarks, are really a small part of the federal budget), although corporate subsidies are a real problem area.
But the biggest problem is that Bush’s tax policy not only skews towards a narrow band of the wealthy investor class, but encourages job destruction. You can make more money selling a business off than running it and paying your employees well.
liberal
@Fulcanelli:
That’s kind of like Reagan’s 1986 tax reform, which cut marginal rates but also broadened the tax base.
Quoting marginal rates without discussing what’s taxable income isn’t very useful.
liberal
@Comrade Darkness:
Well, actually, I have it on pretty good authority (my boss, who was a rabbi’s son from central IL) that Michelle is related to an African-American rabbi—first cousins or something.
Comrade Darkness
Glad to hear it. As an atheist the best I can hope for is trans-religious dilution of craziness in my leaders.
Sigh.
necros
Proof that the real anti-Americans are Palin-McCain supporters…
McCain supporters heckle early voters, call them ‘cheaters’
Palin-McCain supporters protest Democracy, because everyone knows real Americans don’t vote.
I thought it was illegal to hold political protests at polling places.
Josh Hueco
@Montysano (All Hail Marx & Lennon):
Ditto. I’m having an online conversation with a wingnut friend who says he’s voting for McCain because of Obama’s "socialist" policies. I’ve asked him to name which industries Obama proposes to nationalize. Haven’t heard back yet.
Zifnab
@Stuck in the Funhouse:
It’s wingnut code for "I DON’T LIKE YOU!" and has absolutely nothing to do with a candidate’s liberalness, pinkoness, communistness, or any other opinion or ideology.
Wingnuts love themselves some Joe Lieberman, and he’s about as progressive as they come on social values and taxation schemes in the Senate. By contrast, Ron Paul gets regularly kicked for his refusal to buy into the government sponsored corporate socialism that the Mitt Romneys of the world adore.
Wingnuts just know "socialism" = "bad" and "bad" = "Democrats". That’s where their math begins and ends.
Zifnab
@Josh Hueco: Oh, that one is easy! At the very, very least he should be screaming about how Obama wants to nationalize the oil companies (extra points if he compares Obama to Hugo Chavez) and create Communist Health Insurance (extra points if he compares Obama to Fidel Castro or Michael Moore).
I mean, come on. As far as "challenging the wingnut paradigm" goes, that’s a softball he should be able to hit out of the park. Educations FAIL.
Josh Hueco
@Zifnab:
Haha…I forgot to mention he’s against Obama’s "socialist social policies" as well. I also asked him what that means. Haven’t heard back from him on that one either.
Comrade Darkness
Honestly, I wish he didn’t have to work from a defensive posture. There is role for capitalism and socialism in every well-functioning country. A few government functions have to be socialized when they are essential to life and limb. Trouble is, the U.S. doesn’t socialize these things, they cronyize them. That costs taxpayers a bundle more since it privatizes tax dollars to big business as profit.
Take the medicare drug plan as an example. Nothing more than a massive gift of tax payer money to big insurance and big pharma. The actual benefit to the constituent is an incidental excuse for the transfer of money. A real socialist would not have limited the program from negotiating lower drug prices. What kind of insanity is that? A real socialist would not let a pile of insurance companies siphon money out as shareholder profit. It’s nuts. If the plan really had been socialist the cost to the taxpayers, for the exact same service, would be much less.
The bank bailout is just the most recent version of this. Real socialists would have drained the bank accounts of the bank leadership on the ground that their bonuses the last two years were based on fraud. Instead they not only get to keep those, but this year’s as well, and we the tax payers get to make up the difference. I’m all for capitalism, but it will break if you take away the downside of risk. But the republicans have proven over and over that they don’t know what capitalism actually is, let alone socialism.
And it’s no wonder the republicans have to demonize socialism ahead of time; it will start looking mighty attractive to their middle-class base in another year or so.
Brick Oven Bill
This is all very predictable and natural. It is the very nature of a universal suffrage Democracy. Those who excel are outnumbered by those who don’t. Who in turn vote themselves a portion of the successful people’s money. These types of government always bankrupt themselves and end up poorly for all involved. In the final stages, they become widely corrupt.
The key to a stable and fair government is spreading the political power widely, but not too widely. I think the Founding Fathers had it just about right when they extended voting rights to about 12% of the population.
D. Mason
The reason they do a terrible job explaining this is because it’s not true. Taxes are not good or patriotic, they’re the necessary cost of a strong central government. Nothing more, nothing less. What they should be articulating is how the corporatist who advocate most vocally for strong central government should be willing to chip in their share of these costs yet refuse to do so. We the people, who generally want less government in our lives, are stuck paying the bill for the policies that benefit the very few. That’s what re-distribution of wealth looks like and it’s been going on for generations. Of course the news media doesn’t talk about it because they’re one of the benefactors. Calling taxes good and patriotic just helps continue the deception.
Josh Hueco
@Comrade Darkness:
He has to, I’m afraid. Most people in this country wouldn’t know what socialism is if Karl Marx’s zombie corpse bit them on the ass. They just assume it’s the gubmint taking their money and giving it to shiftless minorities, with some atheism, bra-burning and buttfucking on the side.
The Other Steve
Umm, yeah… Right, her statement was misread.
Might have something to do with…
Republican plans write-in campaign
sstarr
An Obama / Palin ticket could crush a McCain / Biden ticket. Mavricky change! It would be like the bad old days of dynastic European politics – you avoid wars though a diplomatic marriage of convenience.
Seanly
Obama is bad socialism because he wants the rich to pay a little bit more. The bailout is good socialism because they avoid calling it that. Duh…
For the record, as the years go by I get more & more socialist. What would be wrong with a little more socialism?
jrg
Right. I’ve worked my tail off to have a good job as an engineer. I’ve even learned about finance to protect my investments and to keep from getting ripped off… but now my tax dollars are subsidizing mortgage brokers and Wall Street fat-cats. Take your head out of your ass.
Hubris
(1) There needs to be an online tutorial on the difference between progressive taxation (the American norm, and supported by the vast majority of economists) and socialism.
(2) It’s interesting to look at historical top marginal tax rates. Was America socialist in the ’50s? I thought that was when everything was perfect.
kay
The point of the "socialism" charge is so that McCain can use the word "welfare".
This has nothing to do with the economy, or tax policy. It can’t. It’s ridiculous on its face. Conservatives invented and promoted the Earned Income Tax Credit, which McCain is now calling "welfare".
Not rational. Not tax policy. Not economy.
Excuse to couple the words "Obama " and "welfare".
Shygetz
@Brachiator:
No, you cannot. Add on top of that the fact that civil rebellion almost invariably occurs during times of shortage (for obvious reasons), and you end up with very unpleasant times for all involved, which is one reason (of many) why Revolutionary France and Revolutionary Russia weren’t nice places to live. However, the theme repeats itself throughout human history so many times that one would have to be blind to ignore it–if you tread on the peasants long enough, eventually they bite you in the heel.
Capitalism, left to its own devices, maximizes the potential for the rich to get richer, as the most efficient method for wealth generation is leverage of capital that you already have, which limits mobility and concentrates wealth. I am just pointing out the historical fact that, if you carry this out without artificial redistribution of the wealth generated, people will eventually redistribute the wealth the hard way. Do you deny this?
Unrepentent Dennis - SGMM
Inasmuch as 90% of the wealth in this country is in the hands of less than 5% of the population and has been for a few decades I have to ask you when this vote is going to take place. It hasn’t for over two hundred years.
Here’s a link to an NYT article from December, 2007.
And a quote from same:
The increase in income of those at the top exceeded the total income of those at the bottom. So far, the system hasn’t done a very good job of transferring the money from those who excel to those who don’t.
SGEW
Brick Oven Bill wrote:
Holy cow. I gotta hand it to ya, BOB, you are somethin’ special.
So, uh . . . your recommendation would be to repeal women’s suffrage, reinstate the poll tax and land requirements, and to overturn the 13th and 14th amendments? Really?
That is some grade-A wowzers.
Brick Oven Bill
jrg;
I too have worked my ass off to become an engineer and, like you, put in the hours to pay for this mess.
The corruption we are witnessing is commonplace in Central American democracies, where the political power is spread to everybody, and ends up in the hands of four businessmen, who cut a deal with whoever gets elected.
We are close to Central American levels of corruption. I believe that the Founder’s intent was to have the electorate consist of engaged stakeholders. Engaged stakeholders have the ability and will to hold elected officials accountable for their actions.
Our current electorate does not. Everybody should have the opportunity to vote, in my opinion. But they should be forced to prove that they are engaged stakeholders before being given a ballot.
lethargytartare
@rob!:
are we sure that wasn’t Jonah Goldberg in drag?
The Other Steve
The $700 billion bailout fits into your paradigm how?
Shygetz
@Brick Oven Bill: And how, pray tell, would they prove that? Literacy test? Poll tax? Shall we test them on the "right" answers to the issues of the day?
And most importantly, who gets to determine what the test is?
Sorry, that is a bad idea. Either suffrage is universal, or someone chooses who gets screwed, and I certainly don’t trust you to make that choice. I’ll take universal suffrage.
Unrepentent Dennis - SGMM
The shades of a few hundred Southern plantation owners nod in agreement. Of course the qualified would never vote to fuck over the unqualified.
Josh Hueco
Brick Oven Bill…back in the day.
TenguPhule
I honestly can think of nothing to say to this.
The Other Steve
Wheee! We’ve got a live one.
The Other Steve
My friends, this is a unique opportunity. Brick Oven Bill is not a spoof. He’s a real honest to goodness kool-aid drinker.
It’s been many years since we had a kool-aid drinker here. Not since the days of Darrell have we had such a grand opportunity.
Treat him well. Don’t go for the kill immediately. Toy with him, like a cat playing with a mouse.
ThymeZoneThePlumber
Any test applied at the polls is anti-democratic.
Any idea that only "stakeholders" should vote is completely anti-democratic. If you are a citizen of voting age and can get to the ballot and mark it, you are a stakeholder and anything that slows you down in your attempts to vote is anti-democratic.
Progressive taxation and progressive policy are the hallmarks of the Western world, whatever you think that is, for the last 100 years. They aren’t going away, so …
…. this kind of bullshit just has to be overcome by outvoting the proponents of such nonsense. Which is what we are about to do in about two weeks. We are about to demonstrate that the rich cannot always fool the middle class into thinking that its true interests are tied to those of the rich. Recent events have rather tarnished that idea, wouldn’t you say?
Brick Oven Bill
Universal suffrage always leads to bankruptcy, which, if you believe in Plato and guys like that, leads to tyranny. Which, I suspect, might be a bad outcome.
In my opinion, a voter should be required to demonstrate financial discipline by, say, $5k in domestic real estate equity. Voters should also be made to prove their engagement by means of being employed. These relatively low hurdles would be accessible to a frugal truck driver, and seem reasonable to me.
We need to recognize that the current system is not sustainable. People will simply stop loaning the government money. Currency deflation is next, and nothing good ever follows.
Unrepentent Dennis - SGMM
Didn’t Heinlein propose, in "Starship Troopers," that only veterans be allowed to vote? Now that stakeholder qualification would put the Republicans out of business overnight.
The Moar You Know
The memories! Last time I heard this was from a paramedic, who had just had blood spat all over him from an acquaintance of mine, who was suffering from alcohol poisoning and had just declared that he was, in fact, the Son of Satan.
Brick Oven Bill is functioning at about the same level as a blood-spewing alcohol poisoning victim, and as such is in the top 10% of Republicans. Let’s let him glory a moment in this fine achievement, shall we?
Montysano (All Hail Marx & Lennon)
@Brick Oven Bill:
While I certainly support universal suffrage, there are days (quite a few days recently) when Bill’s view is quite appealing.
Spare the flames, please. I’m not advocating that we go there; I’m just gobsmacked at what a nation of ignorant yokels we’ve become.
The Moar You Know
A ludicrous proposition, but hey, I’ll bite. I’d like an example, one that postdates the Roman Empire.
No argument there. I, too, frequently feel the same way – but then remember that the fate of those who lack the franchise is an ugly one. So I’ll keep on supporting universal suffrage, even for those manifestly unfit to exercise it, such as ou friend Brick Oven Bill.
Montysano (All Hail Marx & Lennon)
@Brick Oven Bill:
Disregard my comment above; this is just dumbassery.
SGEW
Point the First: Always? Sweden, Switzerland, Norway, and Japan are "bankrupt" because of universal suffrage? Explain.
Point the Second: Are you in favor of a Platonic city-state ruled by Scholar-Kings? With all the slavery, plutocracy, and subjugation of women and everything? Really?
Josh Hueco
I kinda agree with Montysano. There are times when I wonder if we should strike creationists, geocentrics, crystal worshippers, and people who think space aliens built the pyramids from the voting rolls.
BOB…Plato also thought that eugenics and government lies were the buildings blocks of an ideal society. FAIL
jrg
Brick Oven Bill, with all due respect… It takes a special kind of stupid to think that the poor are ripping us off when we’re faced with a trillion dollar war based on lies, and a trillion dollar Wall Street bailout package.
Even if bailouts and food stamps were in the same ballpark in terms of expense, I’d rather my tax dollars pay for food stamps to keep a hungry person from robbing me, than pay to bail out some psycho who’s got 1000 times more money than me, but robbed me already.
Doug H. (Comrade Fausto no more)
@Montysano (All Hail Marx & Lennon): Bill’s, um, peculiarities towards politics and the brown menace are well known to us ObWi lurkers.
The Other Steve
Wasn’t it de Tocqueville who noted that Democracy could never succeed as a form of government, once people realized they could vote money out of the treasury?
You are so smart, Brickoven bill. Glad to have you on board!
That One - Cain
@Brian J:
How about doing some canvassing and phone banking instead? Things are getting ugly, we need more people on the ground to stop the sleaze. Now is not the time to be complacent. We must stop the machine.
cain
Bey
@Brick Oven Bill: As one of the remaining 88% the Founding Fathers didn’t see fit to include in the democratic process, I disagree.
Zifnab
These types? Which types? The Democracies? The Republics? The Monarchies? The Oligarchies? The Triumverants? The Dictatorships? Which of these government styles don’t end in widely corrupt financially bankrupt institutions after a few hundred years?
You’ve got this notion of the "elect few" – the handful of true hard workers who build nations – and its absolute bullshit. We get to see this load of spew every few years when shit hits fan, and it largely revolves around demagoguery and scapegoating. Oh! If only we hadn’t let all those Mexicans in to pick our tomatoes, our economy would be fine! If only we hadn’t let all those black people own expensive homes, mortgages wouldn’t be in default! If only we hadn’t given rednecks voting rights, George Bush wouldn’t be in office! If only, if only, if only! Why didn’t you listen to the elect, the elite, the smart ones (–> ME!)?
We haven’t become any dumber than our ancestors. Fifty years ago, Andrew McCarthy was running the board with his Red Scare and telling everyone how the NAACP and the Jews were going to steal all your money and your white women. People were falling for the same bull then that they fall for today.
Eighty years before that, people were getting sold on the notion that keeping people in slavery – be they black people on plantations or white people in pre-union factories – was the only way to properly run an economy, and that anyone who tried to break free was a godless anti-American anarchist. Same tripe, different age.
God bless modernization in communication and education. We’re a hundred times better today than we were just a generation or two ago. I predict we’re going to recover from this catastro-fuck far quicker and more elegantly than anyone would predict specifically because such a high percentage of our population is a lot smarter than it gives itself credit for.
SGEW
Well, yes. But it’s a rather different crowd here, dontchathink?
I eagerly await the discussion.
The Moar You Know
First of all, your writing is appalling. One doesn’t "believe in" Plato, one subscribes to the ideas of Plato. Plato is not a supernatural being or a person whose existence is debatable.
Secondly, I’m surprised to hear any self-appointed "conservative" citing the Greeks these days, what with all of their homosexuality and pedophilia and all that. Although, on second thought, coming as it does from a card-carrying member of the double-wetsuit crowd, I guess I’m not that surprised after all.
The Other Steve
Clearly it is time we abandoned Democracy and elected John McCain to be our new King!
jake 4 that 1
I like B.O.B. because he proves wingnuttery is still hi-larious, even when shorn of K-Loadian style grammar.
Joshau Norton
Jesus wasn’t even a christian of of course they wouldn’t vote for him. I wonder how the snake handlers would react to their "lord and savior" attending temple on Saturday?
They’ve created a fantasy world with all kinds of rules and regulations that stopped being Christ-like eons ago.
Zifnab
Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate… to the Dark Side.
Rick Taylor
What’s realy funny is they expect it to work. They really think Obama made a fatal error talking about "spreading the wealth around", and that the electorate is going to rebel in righteou fury when they find out he’s increasing the taxes of those earning over $250,000.
Josh Hueco
FISH ON! I just baited my wingnut buddy into betting a bottle of Patrón Silver on the election. November 5 is Margarita Day on Balloon Juice!
gbear
This one is for Brick Outhouse Bill. I just scanned thru the previous comments so if anyone has posted this before, sorry for the double, but:
Obama Is A Terriost!
Joshua Norton
Only to those fantasy "millionaires" who are currently waiting for their wealth to start piling up while trolling the ailes at Walmart looking for marked down boxes of mac & cheese.
How dare Obama try to tax their imaginary money!
GSD
This place is a hotbed of anti-American socialism and nigra lovin’ homersexschuls.
-Joe the Racist
GSD
Zifnab,
Joe McCarthy.
Andrew McCarthy is pounding his flaccid noodle while blogging about Sarah Palin at NRO.
-GSD
Chuck
I get a kick out of all the TANNING Freaks who dislike blacks.
They why do they tan? She’s darker than Obama!
Zifnab
@Josh Hueco: *SALUTES* That’s Democracy in action. I’ll contact my ACORN buddies. Fear not, the Patron will be yours.
Zifnab
@GSD: Thank you for the correction.
John S.
Check out the Grand Inquisitor by Dostoevsky. He takes this idea one step further.
Bob
John-
I usually like to read opposing points of view including those who are voting for McCain. I want people to challenge my views in debate. The problem is I cannot find any rightward blogs that don’t just spew out hate, drivel and RNC talking points.
Are there any thoughtful right-leaning people left? If so, please point them out.
Comrade Darkness
Strike two, that. And strike three: didn’t speak English. I have a place of worship measure which is based on where on a scale of Teutonic to Middle Eastern do the race of Mary and Jesus appear to fall in the representations hanging on the wall. Jesus is generally middle European, with light brown hair. Mary way too often has her blonde on, which always makes me laugh.
One year, years ago, there was uproar over a black Jesus in a movie and I could get someone in the knee-jerk right-wing town I grew up in to shut up by pointing out that they had already changed Mary’s race their way, why can’t the blacks do the same?
SGEW
I first read The Brothers Karamazov when I was way too young to understand it. Years later, when I picked it up again and came across the Grand Inquisitor passage, I said to myself: "Oh yeah. No wonder I’m such a hardcore atheist."
Dostoevsky, ftw.
Zifnab
You’re talking to one. John Cole is far more conservative than he lets on at first blush.
Comrade Darkness
What we need is real universal suffrage, where everyone MUST vote. None of this namby pamby 40-50% of the population crap. Let’s do like Australia does and charge a fine (~30$) to anyone who doesn’t at least show up and spoil their ballot when they are supposed to.
added: "Dostoevsky, ftw." — I’ll second that. Great Rec.
Cyrus
@necros:
Wow. From that article:
Apparently, human cloning is a hot-button issue for some McCain supporters.
SGEW
Sure, lots. Check out Daniel Larison, Andrew Sullivan (ok, maybe "thoughtful" isn’t the best adjective), the Democracy in America blog at the Economist, David Kuo, Rod Dreher, Megan McArdle, etc. Hell, John Cole is "right-leaning."
Of course, none of these people are supporting McCain . . . which should tell you something, eh?
jake 4 that 1
@Joshau Norton: Not to mention the fact that he isn’t exactly the Aryan looking dude they all imagine.
"Lo, I am the Way and the Li-"
"Look out, it’s one of them Mooslim terrrists!"
"I said I am the Way and the Light."
"Get him!"
"You dumb schmucks."
[Pillars of salt.]
jon
Socialist: raising the top tax rate from 35% to 39%.
Free-Market: nationalizing the banks, massive investment in insurance agencies, limiting certain types of trades, raising the debt ceiling, and promoting government investment into stocks and bonds. And an emphasis on Red States.
It’s all so clear now!
sistermoon
And just when you thought you’d heard it all, the inmates over at the wingnut asylum that is Free Republic provide a new motherlode of comedy gold:
SGEW
OBEY THE HYPNOTOAD!
Chris Johnson
I just worry about anyone still talking about ‘building more wealth’ at this point, because they’re not actually talking about building business or industry or anything- nah, these days they cut out the middleman. No business, no jobs, no society, just infinite FAKE wealth that’s all on paper. That’s what ‘building more wealth’ means anymore, and it’s total bullshit.
They want to carry on doing that while the ‘wealth’ is what, 60 trillion dollars by now? How many times more than the total value of the world and everything in it? I’ve had it with these people.
KRK
Stewart wouldn’t have any trouble going at an Obama administration, whether the humor connects is another question. Stewart is a long-time McCain fan who was pulling his punches until lately regarding old John, and his preference for Clinton over Obama was pretty obvious to me during the primary.
Regardless, the whole raison d’etre of The Daily Show is to mock and skewer the media, especially political cable media, not the politicians directly. It’s a fake news show about the news. There’s ample material there and it would be nice if they got back to it.
bago
Ooh! do the one where they talk about the messages hidden in Obama’s speeches played backwards next!
KRK
I’m kind of sad GSD pointed out that it was really Joe McCarthy in the Red Scare, because it was amusing to imagine Brat Pack actor Andrew McCarthy time traveling back to the ’50s with his ’80s feathered hair and pastel wardrobe to rile up the weak of mind against communists, Jews, and miscegenators.
Brachiator
@Shygetz:
Well, no. Part of the roots of the French Revolution was that the church, the nobles and the monarchy were not taxed at all, and these groups in various ways usurped the nation’s productivity, especially that of the nascent middle class. There was no particular shortage of resources. And of course, the revolutionaries were more interested in redistributing heads than they were in redistributing wealth. The Russian situation was more complicated, but even here Russia was more like contemporary Mexico or Venezuela, an oligarchy with a small, patristic middle class and a large peasant or lower class population kept down at the heels.
Of course, I deny this, because it is patently false. With the exception of the Du Ponts and a few others, there is no family in America that has been able to maximize wealth across generations for a long period of time, and even the DuPonts are small cheese compared to Warren Buffet or Bill Gates. If you look at the top families in even as early as 1900, very few of them are still at the top today (Forbes Magazine had a good article a few years ago that pointed this out).
Equally false is the weird, primitive idea that there is a small, unchanging group of people who have “wealth,” and a large group of everybody else whose lives will be made better if you just give them a chunk of the wealth of the elite. Even the successful Nordic socialist countries understand that you have to mix a healthy economy with progressive taxation and a social programs that redistribute a portion of national income.
One thing I think that Obama understands is that a vibrant middle class is a necessary part of a healthy capitalist society, because it allows poor people to rise from dismal circumstances, and also allows for people to become fabulously wealthy. More people win here than under any purely redistributionist scheme.
Comrade Darkness
@jake 4 that 1: @Joshau Norton: Not to mention the fact that he isn’t exactly the Aryan looking dude they all imagine.
Just a quick nitpick. Aryan is not the most precise word to use there. It does not mean what the Nazis reduced the definition to: blue eyes and blond hair. The word you want for that is Teutonic. The Aryans are, in no particular order: the Iranians (where that word comes from, in fact, Ariya, a Persian word meaning Noble.), much of Iraq (including the Kurds, who are culturally Arab, but formerly Aryan), probably much of northern India (this is currently disputed in a fashionable retro-identity movement away from British Imperialism), the Baltics, Armenia, etc.
Mostly this grouping is based on language (having to do with who uses the same words for horse and chariot parts, on the theory that they are all descended from the same nomadic tribe if they do) and shared mythology but it will be interesting to see how it holds up with more genetic mapping.
At any rate. A broader word than you probably want there. But your amusing point is well-taken, Python style.
Shygetz
Always, huh? And how many replicates of this particular measurement do you base this generalization on?
I have a better idea–how about we let people buy votes? One vote for every one dollar you donate to the Federal government. That way, the more invested you are in this country, the more seriously we take your opinion.
Brian J
So, what…is it only the really queeny gay guys and their parades, drag shows, and so on that McCain opposes?
SGEW
re: Aryan
Words mean what we want them to mean, no more*. "Aryan," post WWII, means Nordic (more or less) in common usage. Passingly few people** think of "Proto-Indo-Aryan" and the Northern Invasion when they hear the word "Aryan."
Fight for the right for common usage of words! (Though I applaud didacticism when done well. Bravo!)
*Editor’s note: this is sarcasm.
**Ok, I do, but I’m weird.
Josh Hueco
@bago:
Maverick is dead…Maverick is dead…
Shygetz
Wait a second…you mean a society that has progressive taxation and active social programs redistributing wealth does not exhibit all of the problems I predicted would occur in a society that did NOT redistribute wealth through progressive taxation and social programs? Wow, that totally disproves my argument…ummm, only it doesn’t. The only reason we have as much SES mobility as we have is the fact that we do distribute wealth, because (as I wrote earlier) the most efficient way to generate wealth in a strict capitalist society is to leverage capital, and the most efficient way to get capital is to have it to begin with.
And I never said redistribution was sufficient; I said it was necessary. And I thank you for not putting words in my mouth to the contrary. You seem to imply that I am arguing that everybody would be happy if we just spread all the money equally, but I never said that. I said wealth will be redistributed the easy way or the hard way, and lassiez faire capitalism is not set up to do that redistribution. Apparently you agree with me, but just need to argue for some reason.
Also, I hate to tell you this, but Warren Buffet didn’t exactly rise from the underclass (son of a stockbroker and US Representative), and neither did Bill Gates (child of prominent lawyer and grandchild of the president of a national bank)–not exactly stunning examples of SES mobility in America. The number one predictor of a child’s earning ability remains not how smart or how industrious s/he is, but how much money his/her parents make. You name DuPont as the only family to perpetualize wealth; children from lower-income families had only a 1% chance of having an income that ranks in the top 5%, but children of wealthy families have a 22% chance of reaching the top 5%, and this is with the fairly active American redistribution scheme. Wealth perpetuation is going strong, which is why you hear Republicans bitching so much about the estate tax.
ThymeZoneThePlumber
Just as over the top and ill-informed spoofapalooza bullshit always leads to being completely tuned out.
Not unlike what is happening to the McPalin campaign right now.
Stuck in the Funhouse
Well, of course it means "they don’t like you". But why, just because they’re democrats. Maybe for the fully braindead faction wingnut. But most have some idea of what liberal is on a few basic issues, ie war/peace, taxes/no taxes/ abortion/no abortion. Their knowledge is limited ,but they know what about communist they don’t like, such as Soviet, dictatorships, Cuba North Korea etc… They don’t have enough brainpower to distinguish out liberal from socialist/communist in those examples though, except on the most primitive level. Just saying it’s because "they don’t like you" for no other reason is too simplistic IMO. And as far as Lieberman goes, I don’t think they "loves them some" is accurate. It’s precisely because Lieberman is a liberal THAT HAS SIDED WITH THEM, that they love him, and for no other reason. He is a tool, a sharp object they can poke at liberals with. Nothing more. And when he goes against their uno numero passion, which is war and more war, they will drop him like a hot rock.
Shaggy
@Comrade Darkness: Ha!!
I think, what he means, is that Obama likes to sing about candy. Which is strange, because Joe asked about taxes.
Brachiator
@Shygetz:
You see redistribution as an antidote to capitalism. You’re just wrong here. You also demonstrate a misunderstanding of history (with respect to the French and Russian Revolutions) and of the Nordic models.
Redistribution is not a necessary corrective to capitalism. And I never took you to be arguing that spreading money around would make people happy.
I never said that Buffet and Gates did not come from affluent families. But they obviously did not come from the wealthy elite. And because of decisions that they have made, it is unlikely that their children will be in the wealthy elite, despite their advantages.
Your statistics about SES are overblown, and oddly enough support my argument. If the number one predictor of a child’s earning ability is how much the parents make, then simply shoveling money to people as part of a redistribution scheme would be entirely irrelevant to their chidren’s economic outcome.
Conservatively Liberal
I have the tv on CNN (Dobbs) because I already saw Tweety and watching him twice is not an option, Dobbs says that we will not have a recession because dropping gas prices can save us. CNN reports that ‘dropping gas prices is the equivalent of a $125 to $150 billion dollar tax break for consumers, and if they invest the savings then our economy can be saved.
Can you believe that shit?! Fuck, I am sure that I killed brain cells trying to process that crap.