Amazon.com Widgets

« Matching Wits With Bill Maher | Main | A Change of Mind »

Links With Your Coffee - Tuesday

coffee.gif


 

Comments

From "1001 rules...":

364. Feel free to crash a tailgate.

That would be the only reason for me to buy a big-ass Hummer. Here in L.A. the biggest assholes in the biggest douche trucks are the ones tailgating you on the freeway. I can't possibly let them trample my Civic only for some shits and giggles.

The science of voodoo: When mind attacks body

I submitted this because I thought it was nice counter to the recent placebo post.

Shows there is definitely a lot more going on related to mind/body and health than some people would like to admit.

Thanks for sending the link Max. LRon Hubbard picked up on this phenomenon in a not so great (my opinion) way, but he was on to something: our mind(set) can affect our health as much as any other habit.

Dunno, I find those anecdotes a little too unbelievable and suspiciously all happened a too long time ago IMO. I would expect negative suggestion would have equivalent effect as placebo, not kill you out of nothing.

What do you guys think of Sotomayor and of the criticisms brought against her?

I haven't really looked at the criticisms from the left. She seems to be fairly moderate.

From the right, the criticisms aren't even about her. Republicans have to associate her with the left in order to make the case that after another appointment, Obama is stacking the deck with liberal judges.

These are the three points the GOP are bringing up:

Watch this especially, for a quick summary. (video)

Here is some more info on Sotomayor from Rachel Maddow.

It seems the only thing being reported about her is that she would be the first hispanic to be appointed to the Supreme Court. That either means the media is so fixated on race that nothing else matters, or that she has nothing exceptional (good or bad) to make here worthy of the appointment, so rather than run the risk of criticizing a minority woman, they just talk about how great it will be to have a hispanic on the court.

Well, if Obama were to stack the Supreme court with someone as far to the left as Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia and Thomas are to the right, sadly, Leon Trotsky is dead, Fidel Castro is very ill and near death, and Hugo Chavez is busy running Venezuela, so Obama is shit out of luck.

Funny, I thought Trotsky, Castro and Chavez were all socialists. If that's 'right', then what are you?

You better hold some hearings.(Trotsky and Castro called themselves Communists last I checked)

It's been a while since I read the Communist Manifesto, but if I'm recalling correctly, Communism is just Socialism fully realized.

Maybe you could clear that up for me Red. Better yet, maybe Mat would ;)

I think that the Communist Manifesto was Capitalism fully realized. As in no more new cheap labor to exploit.

It's been a while since I read it as well, so I could be way off base, but I thought the summary was:

Globalization via capitialism is an inevetable process. Capitalism will always lead to socialization in a closed system where there are no new sources of cheap labor. Therefore, once we are 'globalized' we will have a communist 'revolution'.

But I'm no Cliff Notes...

Yeah, you're totally off.

Meh, I think I'm hitting the dartboard, if not the bull.

From wiki:

Marx argued that capitalism, like previous socioeconomic systems, will produce internal tensions which will lead to its destruction.[2] Just as capitalism replaced feudalism, socialism will in its turn replace capitalism and lead to a stateless, classless society which will emerge after a transitional period, the "dictatorship of the proletariat"

No he is not totally off. You are.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels: The Communist Manifesto

Just as feudalism had naturally evolved into mercantilism and then capitalism, so capitalism would inevitably give way to its logical successor, socialism (a term which in Marx's usage includes its most advanced form, communism) as the necessary result of class struggle.

Funny, I thought Trotsky, Castro and Chavez were all socialists. If that's 'right', then what are you?

In trying to make a "funny" here, you prove your reading comprehension is a little weak, Syngas.

I think it explains much about you.

Re-ead what I wrote, then read what you wrote. You make no sense.

Sorry Mat,

I guess your attack on Roberts, Scalia and Thomas provoked the 'fuck you' reaction I try to surpress because it usually embarrasses me. I get it now. So what do you think of Sotomayor?

I consider judges to be the referees. They should be picked only because of their ability to make good calls. If we think their race is a reason why or why not to pick them then we are the racists we claim to hate.

I guess your attack on Roberts, Scalia and Thomas provoked the 'fuck you' reaction I try to suppress because it usually embarrasses me.

What should embarrass you more is your poor reading comprehension of what I wrote. Your first comment is completely illogical in context to what I wrote.

Secondly, I wasn't "attacking" Justices Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas, just pointing out the right-wing media's hypocrisy in whining about Obama "stacking" the Supreme Court with, in their words, an "extreme" leftist like Sotomayor. Sotomayor is certainly not as far to the left ideologically as Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas are to the right. That is an undeniable fact.

While I was joking that to find a far-left ideologue who is as equally as far from the center on the left as Roberts, et al. are on the right, you'd have to find a Fidel Castro or Leon Trotsky kind of far-extreme leftie, that was, Syngas, quite obviously—at least so I thought—irony, so your so-called "fuck you" reaction also seems a little strange in this context.

Of course that's what I'm embarrassed about Mat - I don't read well when I'm pissed off.

I have no idea how far to the left she is Mat.

What disturbs me is that the MSM I'm exposed to only seems interested in her race. I don't have cable, so I'm not quite as up to speed on what 'right-wing media' is saying about her - unless you mean ABC, CBS, and NBC. So far all I learned about her is she grew up in a poor, minority borough in New York, the daughter of a single mother blah blah blah.... all stuff that tells me nothing about what kind of judge she is.

I don't give a damn what race or upbringing the ump at the World Series is. I would like to see a few more former Cubs players officiating, but then we all should ;)

Why would you be pissed off when someone says something so mild about Roberts, Scalia and Thomas? It wasn't that much of an attack per se.

Also, forgive me, I forget. You were a libertarian, or a conservative?

Yeah, Trotsky, Castro and Chavez were/are real sweethearts.

Mostly, I'm just an asshole.

So far all I learned about her is she grew up in a poor, minority borough in New York, the daughter of a single mother blah blah blah....

True, but apparently empathy arising from hardscrabble origins wasn't code for "activist judge" when Alito was being considered. As Mat has pointed out, Sotomayor certainly doesn't have the pedigree of a rabid left-winger. She was put up for her current position by Bush I and had several conservative GOP senators supporting her (including Stevens, Helms, Frist, and Santorum).

A glowing recommendation from Rob Kar includes some references to specific cases, especially in the comments where Kar really gets into the nitty-gritty of cases in response to some complaints by commenters (some of which were quite justified - the fawning nature of Kar's recommendation. But then, I've written recommendation letters, they are almost always glowing concerning strengths and damning only with faint praise).

Well, Cory, her race and gender are newsworthy issues, along with her education, qualifications, and judicial experience.

Why would the fact that the MSM--rightfully, I might add--is spending lots of time discussing the fact she's a Hispanic female piss you off so much?

There is a definite cultural significance to the fact she would be the first Hispanic--male or female--to sit on the Supreme Court.

It is also newsworthy that she came from humble roots and yet graduated from Princeton and Yale Law.

That these cultural facts about Judge Sotomayor, which are being so widely reported by the MSM, puts you in such a tizzy, coupled with your utterly puzzling and illogical conclusions above in all your comments...well, I just don't know what to say, honestly.

You've obviously left your A-game in the closet today, rhetorically, and frankly I find everything you're saying puzzling and downright weird.

No Mat, the MSM doesn't piss me off, you're comparing Roberts, Scalia, and Thomas to socialist dictators pissed me off. The MSM is doing what it always does - takes an important subject and discusses the parts that aren't important. The reports I've seen don't mention education, experience or judicial experience. Clearly I need to order cable.

My A-game is being directed at restoring a 1950 GMC Truck right now. I probably won't be able to fill the tank if Obama has his way, but it'll look nice in the garage ;)

Ha! It will be tough to drive your truck when you're interned in an Obama reeducation camp, comrade Syngas!

Please Mat! Not room 101!

OK Syngas,

If you're looking for more than the MSM's mundane back story on Stomayor, check out this article from the Wall Street Journal.

They go over many of her decisions succintly, without cherry picking done in Erick's links (sorry Erick, but I didn't find anything you posted to be anything helpful). Maddow's summary was only slightly more helpful, as she picked out the cases that painted Sotomayor as either a moderate or mixed moderate-liberal, just to counter the neo-cons. That's not such a horrible thing, just not thorough.

The thing is, you say

The reports I've seen don't mention education, experience or judicial experience. Clearly I need to order cable.

YET, the Wall street Journal article was right there in the Maddow run-down to which Jill referred. How curious are you anyway? You have your truck; I have my yard, house, and students to contend with. We all have something. If you wish to debate, you can dig around and find things. If you wish to recline and opine, I'd like an ignore function Norm.

'I'd like an ignore function Norm.'

Not necessary.

Sorry that I offended you Syngas. From your prior posts, it didn't really seem possible. I do have a problem reading 3 or so posts of yours saying nothing but the Sotomayor back story is out there when you're on the internet.

Here's where I found common ground with you:

That either means the media is so fixated on race that nothing else matters

Yes, this is a huge embarrassing problem for the media - cable included. Your complaining that there's nothing else out there for you when there is, as you intimate that

or that she has nothing exceptional (good or bad) to make here worthy of the appointment, so rather than run the risk of criticizing a minority woman, they just talk about how great it will be to have a hispanic on the court.

Since you've posted numerous times in this thread, why not take a few minutes to do some investigating? Then you'll have something. I'd go into the Trotsky et. al. stuff but you've been over that with Mat.

I've had my ass handed to me here when I make unsubstantiated/uninformed claims - once from Norm during the primaries and once from someone else during the short-selling discussion. So I went and looked things up. I too don't have cable,and my tv reception sucks, so I used the google until I found enough scholarly sources to give me information. THEN I went back into the threads to respond (the primary one had been closed, so I offered my mea culpa elsewhere).

If you would do this, I would not care if we disagreed. Soo much better than rinse/repeat or changing the subject. Did you link to the WSJ article or not and if you found it helpful at all?

I doubt that Syngas has any desire to return here. He's the lone dissenting voice on this forum and thus he takes a lot of heat. I actually think that it takes a lot of courage for him to post here. On the other hand, he's not exactly a shy little delicate flower and that's why he elicites such responses. ;)

I use the winky smiley in memory of Syngas.

Whoa - did I miss something? I am sincere in my apology to Syngas, as I am sincere in trying to get him to engage more. Did he mention somewhere that he isn't coming back?

Anyhoo, thanks for the winky smiley suggestion.

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