Amazon.com Widgets

« McCain "Unpresidential" | Main | Links With Your Coffee - Monday »

McCain - Palin /Bill Maher

John McCain is the elitist, and Sarah Palin is "Bush in drag."




Quicktime Video 3.3 MB | Duration: 02'19
Quicktime 7 required
This file is available for download here.
Ctrl-Click and 'Download Linked File' (Mac)
or Rt-Click and 'Save Target As' (PC) the link above.




Quicktime Video 3 MB | Duration: 02'06
Quicktime 7 required
This file is available for download here.
Ctrl-Click and 'Download Linked File' (Mac)
or Rt-Click and 'Save Target As' (PC) the link above.

Real Time w/Bill Maher
More Bill Maher video here
And don't forget Bill Maher's new show Religilous is coming in October

 

Comments

Why are we listening to Andrew Sullivan, the man who, in those halcyon days of “Mission Accomplished,” was demanding that liberals apologize for our opposition to the Iraq invasion? He seems to change his political stripe as if it is some sort of fashion accessory. How can Sullivan be so outraged about Palin yet he was a cheerleader for Bush in the war, at least he was until everyone with half a brain could see that everything had gone completely to shit in Iraq. Palin is no dumber or any less qualified than W. Sullivan reminds me of the guy in The Outlaw Jose Wales who whistles both The Battle Hymn of the Republic and Dixie with equal gusto depending on current company.

The Atlantic Monthly—once one of the best, if not the best American magazine—seems to have gone through several years of schizophrenia and has lost its bearing. How else can you explain why they hired on creeps like Sullivan and P.J. O'Rourke?

As you know, I share your strong anti-war position. However, I like Sullivan, and believe he represents the conservative view far better than Hannity and other, more popular talking heads. He was dead wrong on Iraq, but one of the few to consider Ron Paul critically and fairly.

Sorry for the excess Paul-spam in this thread, I just feel extremely vindicated by last week's events. Ron Paul's track record on economic prediction has been second to none so far.

He may change his stripes with the weather, but I agree with everything he said here.

I also agree with his outrage. I'm personally mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore.

We have a houseguest from Asia and at dinner tonight I laid out Palin's qualifications and the odds of her becomming president. Our guest was appauled. How could the U.S. be so irresponsible? And where is the outrage?

I also mentioned that Palin had only had a passport for a year, and had only been to Kuwait with a refuel in Ireland (Canada excepted). Our guest, who has been in a dozen or so countries this year, was speachless.

And everyone says "don't attack Palin, attack McCain!" And I simply CANNOT understand that. She is WEAK. She illustrates his HORRIBLY WEAK decision making.

This, and the inability of the Democratic party to utterly destroy McCain this year has me looking for other leaders. They have EVERYTHING to thier advantage and they can't stop a single-parent welfare kid from being painted as an elite by a guy that owns 9 houses and 12 cars.

Yes, Sullivan might be correct in the claims he makes in these two clips, but he was so dead wrong (if you watch the rest of the show) about the current financial crisis...

I really don't get it, how can anyone look at the mess of the financial market now and still claim that a deregulated free market capitalism works, and that the solution to this crisis is not to impose more regulations, but to deregulate further???

how can anyone look at the mess of the financial market now and still claim that a deregulated free market capitalism works

That's easy - we don't look. Granted, it is a little more difficult to ignore than the Panics of 1873, 1893, 1907, and financial collapse of 1929, but put enough moron conservatives in charge and it can be done.

...they can't stop a single-parent welfare kid from being painted as an elite by a guy that owns 9 houses and 12 cars

.. and that is because "elite" is not about wealth and privilege. It is about anti-intellectualism. Read the comments in Sam Harris's Newsweek editorial - you'll find plenty who not only hate the atheism (and Newsweek's editor made sure to title the article as "when atheists attack). but they hate his Harris's argument of r competence and intelligence. The core of right-wing populist politics is the politics of resentment - pandering to the stupid kids in the class by telling them that a vote for Obama (this year) is a vote for the smart kid they always resented.

oops, that should have read

...it is a little more difficult to ignore the present than it is tho ignore the Panics...

As our resident Paulian, I would like to chime-in and respectfully disagree with the always brilliant Tim.

http://mises.org/story/2936

Our economy is current centrally planned by the Federal Reserve. To call this a "free market" is a gross perversion of the word "free".

I understand that regulation is the hot topic du jour, and I'm not so hardcore as to suggest that all regulation is bad and should be removed.

However, this current crisis was CREATED by what is in essence (at least in theory) a regulatory agency (the Fed).

Your argument is thus a fallacy: we need more regulation to repair a crisis created by the wreckless actions of a regulatory agency.

There is enough blame here to go around: predatory lending, wall st crooks, Bush-o-nomics, etc all contributed, are all worthy of scorn.

But please, save some of this wrath for the Federal Reserve. We may disagree about the exact apportionment of blame, but I hope we will agree that the Fed is at least partially responsible.

I believe this was Sullivan's point, although it was made poorly in light of the wonderful Naomi Kline (who is also totally correct in her "Shock Doctrine" theory)

As radical as it sounds: both side are right. Put the pieces together for a clearer picture.

Oh and Ron Paul, blah blah, hope for America. Er, I mean go Obama, go!

Also, Tim: please stop calling the current RepubliCONS "conservative". I know you don't mean to, but it makes me angry. Imagine if Dick Cheney started calling himself an "environmentalist" but stayed exactly the same; would you still refer to Al Gore as being from the same ideology? Ron Paul is a conservative. George Bush, and most modern-day RepubliCONS are authoritarian Federalists.

Zaphod,

I get tired of adding scare quotes, as in "conservative" - don't take it personally, these guys are thieves, nothing less.

I think we have some disagreement, but I doubt that we actually disagree on all that much. As you've seen me say in posts running back for a long time, I do indeed blame the Fed for creating the conditions for "free money" - we are pretty much in complete agreement on that.

The repeal of Glass-Steagall however, set the table for the Fed's easy money policy to spread throughout the financial system. I think that if, even with ridiculously low interest rates, mortgage institutions had been unable to wrap up their bad loans and sell them as "securities", they would rather quickly stopped making the loans on overpriced houses because I think they knew very well they would be stuck with a lot collateral that were soon going to be worth a lot less than the loan principal.

Tim:

Having just read through the Wiki on the Glass-Steagall Act, I see yet again why America is doomed. I agree with half of it, and hate the other half. Such is the world of compromise, eh?

Without going on for hours, two quick examples:

I agree with you 100% that allowing mortgages to be re-branded as securities is total insanity, as we apparently already learned during the Great Depression. What's that they say about those who fail to learn from the mistakes of history?

On the other hand, I don't see why anyone would want the Fed to regulate savings rates. Also, it seems somewhat unnecessary. Case in point: each time the Fed drops the prime rate, ING and HSBC drop my online savings rate a few days later anyway.

Thanks for pointing me to the info.

Can someone explain (in general terms, please don't link to an in depth economic article full of jargon) how the Fed Reserve helped create this problem? i haven't heard this yet and would like to know what you mean.

I always get the impression that Bill Maher is an idiot who wants to sound smart...

Yeah, If I hear one more ass blame homeowners for taking loans they can't afford...

Hey guess, what.

  1. someone will always take "free" money

  2. When gas prices double in the same time that you lose your job an the value of your home drops 50% defaulting is actually a good idea for many people. They're not being stupid in many cases.

  3. Taking advantage of stupid people is not excused by saying, "But they were stupid"

Taking advantage of stupid people is not excused by saying, "But they were stupid"

I certainly agree with that.

Heh, can I say this? "God bless Bill Maher."

Well, I shouldn't. But fuck it, he's good.

Thank you for posting this Norm....

As far as Sullivan, I am very interested in what he says lately but I think he is a little too self-serving to be truly ethical. I don't think he stopped supporting Bush and the war because he saw how it was going south - I think he stopped when he saw gays being thrown under the bus for the 2004 election. He was enjoying a lot of status and making a lot of money as a smart conservative commentator, and I do think he IS an elitist - what did he say about soldiers, again? At the time I thought it was kind of revealing...people were discussing an immoral war that people were dying over and he said soldiers were doing what they were paid for or something like that. I could remember it completely wrong or in the wrong context but sometimes people say something that sounds pretty shocking to me and it's hard to get over that feeling (like when McCain talked about gooks)

Zaphod I'm not even a conservative and I agree that calling Bush one is just offensive --- but neocon doesn't pack enough punch and your title would be a little cumbersome. I really think a crook and a liar is the best option.

And, I'm sorry but I think Ron Paul is the conservative version of Dennis Kucinich - they're just not going to happen....

"However, I like Sullivan, and believe he represents the conservative view far better than Hannity and other, more popular talking heads."

I have to admit that Sullivan is where I get my daily fill of Sarah Palin bashing. But he's really a lame talking head who is mainly known for furious and frequent blog posts and always being available for cable commentary.

I don't think he's a conservative. There are smart conservatives, and he's neither. At the very least he's the kind of intellectual voice-crying-in-the-wilderness conservative who claims to be keeping the fires buring for some long neglected traditionalist, be it Russell Kirk or Michael Oakeshott. It's really self-indulgent and lame. It's just lame as if I were to parade around announcing my devotion to the true liberalism of TH Green, which is opposed to the liberalism of the contemporary American left. I'm a contrarian you see, which in practice means that people should start a new political movement based on whatever odd mix of policies I happen to favor right now!

PJ O'Rourke is actually funny, the kind of conservative the Atlantic should be hiring. But their stable of bloggers is pretty weak. Yglesias was great, but he's gone now. Megan McArdle is a libertarian economist type who routinely makes elementary errors in economics. Marc Ambinder is good. Ta-Nehisi Coates wrote a book, but he's about as itneresting as an above average commenter, and he's blogging the NFL half the time.

I want to come to the defense of Sullivan. I have been reading his blog, well longer than this one. I read it originally as I always try and read the opposition to my view. It was of the blogs very pro invasion of Iraq and I read it for the other side. I read and still read others but have read his blog all during the shift from supporting Bush and the war, to supporting Kerry and now an almost crazed Obama fan. He has gone a bit crazy about the Palin issue, but I do agree that the appointment of Palin by McCain tells us an awful lot about McCains decision making style, fast and with his gut, and I am not sure I want that in a president, maybe a cowboy, maybe a war hero but i think the president needs to really be careful with decisions.

The shift with Sullivan, seemed to be with the torture issue and the atrocities and human rights violations at Abu Ghraib and later Guantanomo. He really liked McCain for his then clear opposition to these practices. He also shifted with the Bush attempts to grab presidential powers and subvert the constitution. These are essentially pretty conservative principles. To follow the Geneva convention, to stand by the constitution, to have a free market.

I also am a bit uncertain about this economic bailout. Why exactly are we doing this? What will it achieve? Can we afford it? It is not giving a free ride to all those companies that betrayed reasonable principles? I mean it seems we allowed crazy practices for folks to make outlandish amounts of money and now we save them?

I am really concerned that we are now giving unprecedented power to a few guys in washington to use massive amounts of money, unregulated money, sort of like that war resolution we gave to Bush, where we were trusting him to do the right thing. Sort of like just trusting the federal government to do the right things with billions and billions of dollars. Is this really the right thing or are we doing this to preserve votes from folks that are losing their life savings in an EXPECTED market meltdown.

I know i may sound like a crazed ron paul supporter, but is this bailout the right thing really?

I think more than anything I am fed up with douchebag pundits. Let's have some real reporting and a lot less opinion. The Atlantic's James Fallows has consistently been one of the best journalists in America. He was also dead right about the war. Kevin Phillips has been dead right on the economy. The Sullivans and George Wills of the world aren't fit to carry these guys' briefcases.

And theis bailout will cost every taxpayer $2000.00

Yay.

Oh, wait, or will the Chinese own this debt too?

sigh

"I think more than anything I am fed up with douchebag pundits."

Here here. Sullivan is mainly famous as a guy who has opinions. And his opinions are dfferent from mine! And he changed his opinions! So what? It's like watching a reality show with someone living instead of living yourself. Someone on the internet changed his mind about the war! I have to disagree on Will, though. There are better writers, but he's less of a shill and more of an independent thinker than most pundits out there, certainly more than Cokie Roberts or Sam Donaldson. At least since Clinton left office. He was horrible during Clinton.

"I know i may sound like a crazed ron paul supporter, but is this bailout the right thing really?"

I hope that's not known as the Ron Paul position. The left position would be to bail them out with first a very strong punitive stipulation (how about: no CEO from any bailed out company will ever get a severance package and will never get paid more than the president of the U.S., unless they pay back the taxpayers in full? Then let's do some ENRON-style humiliating hearings...), not to be vindictive, but to prevent them from doing it again in the future.

I'm posting while angry; please excuse me.

+++++++++++++++

Put them in Jail. hard-core Reality TV camera in the cell JAIL.

...or dress them in Orange Jail Jumpers and make them pick up street trash in a chain-gang.

The difference between white collar and blue collar crime is education. e.g. Lawyers KNOW the law, and thus if they break it, they are disbarred. Financial people know the economy, and if they destroy that for greed, should be sold up the river, a tattoo on thier forehead describing thier shame (the ink kind of tattoo, not the midget kind of tattoo).

I never understood how a purse stealing teenager could get 5 years in prison, but a man who effectively stole millions of purses gets aquitted or slapped on the wrist.

Navigation

Support this site

Google Ads


Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2017 Norman Jenson

Contact


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives