freecounterpoint: Taranto great today

Monday, March 31, 2008

Taranto great today

[Put that little pic back, for JJ & MFT's benefit. -- AI]

21 comments:

Tecumseh said...: Yep, I just finished the first item (McCain=Kerry). Well, that's pretty plausible, so far. Do you have a proof to the contrary (besides the fact that Kerry was a total jerk when it came to defaming his fellow soldiers, and McCain was a class act)? I mean, from a political point of view, as of 2000--2004, the two were almost indistinguishable (forget about propaganda a la Howie Dean). I grant you too that McCain has been making some tactical moves this year to position himself slightly more in the Republican mainstream -- but that's mostly politics, not really convictions, is it?; 3/31/2008 5:04 PM
My Frontier Thesis said...: At the D.C. level, AI, it's all politics.; 3/31/2008 5:17 PM
Mr roT said...: McCain the liberal. Forget the voting record. Forget the surge. Forget everything. It's all about Romney.; 3/31/2008 5:21 PM
Tecumseh said...: To the contrary, JJ, to the contrary -- it is you (and the McCain sycophants) who is (are) trying to rewrite history. In between that period in the 1980s and most of the 1990s (when McCain was a "foot soldier in the Reagan revolution" -- correct), and the business about the surge about 1.5-2 years ago, there was a crucial period of about 8 to 10 years in McCain's political life (certainly including the period 2000--2004 that I mentioned before) where he veered quite a bit to the Left. I mean, nothing wrong with that -- it's a free country, after all -- but why try and cover it up, or result to some cockamamie Mitt/L. Ron Hubbard non-sequiturs? Better to clear up the air, explain what can be explained, agree to disagree on the rest, and simply move on? But, until and unless McCain can clear the air on this (or Hillobama implode on him, and make it trivial for him to win, which I don't think would be good for the sanity of the electoral process), he's gonna be dogged by lingering questions about his politics of the recent past, and how they square with what he presents himself to be at the moment. I think that's a fair issue to ask -- we all (except Pepe, of course) have been asking these sorts of questions about Obaba -- why not be fair, and ask the same about McCain. Just because he's much closer to me politically than Obama, it does not mean I will give him a complete pass, roll over, and sing his hosannahs. He gotta earn my vote, goddamit!; 3/31/2008 6:41 PM
Tecumseh said...: PS: Also, in all fairness, Romney had to answer pointed questions (some coming from McCain himself) about how he flip-flopped from running somewhat to the left of Teddy K. in 1994 to running to he right in 2008. I think Mitt managed to answer relatively well this question (part of the reason being the flipping back occurred a while ago, not just a few months before the primaries), but of course not nearly well enough to assure him the nomination.

This business about flipping and flopping (business that bedeviled J-F Kerry in 2004) is one of the most frustrating in this political races -- yet one of the few instances voters can remind politicians of their past stances. If McCain can't stand the heat on such questions, he's toast.; 3/31/2008 6:50 PM
Mr roT said...: he'll be toast if the ideological purity police keep painting him a liberal when he's to the right of their drooling deus, Reagan; 3/31/2008 9:01 PM
Tecumseh said...: Relax, JJ, relax. I give McCain more credit that he can handle that. But, if he cannot handle some loudmouths, or some people in his own party not completely happy with him, then he doesn't deserve to win, and we're all fokked. C'est la vie, baby.; 3/31/2008 9:14 PM
My Frontier Thesis said...: AI, everyone and everything — to varying degrees — is a contradiction, a paradox, myself included, with the exception of Romney. Even Jesus was a paradox, even a contradiction, but Romney wasn't. We understand the deification of Romney. Okay. Good job. We'll caste some statues and place them around the country.

History can guide our decisions, but it also has the ability to make us retarded (for example, Pepe, or people who still support Romney — Pepe, don't fucking freak out on me, it's just a joke... sort of. I'll buy you a cold condolence beer should we ever meet).

Still AI, I'm going to vote for McCain. Could you at least vote for Nader?; 3/31/2008 10:17 PM
Tecumseh said...: MFT: I don't get any of the above. You (and JJ) seem to have concocted out of whole cloth a myth regarding Romney, and what kind of man he is, and what I think about him, ans what this has to do with McCain as a candidate -- and it gets ever and ever more divorced from reality. Can we get back to, like, facts? And clear, logical arguments, based on syllogisms and the like? Just a thought...; 3/31/2008 10:49 PM
Mr roT said...: Like facts:I mean, from a political point of view, as of 2000--2004, the two [McCain and Kerry] were almost indistinguishable (forget about propaganda a la Howie Dean).; 3/31/2008 11:15 PM
Mr roT said...: Fact1. Fact2.; 3/31/2008 11:18 PM
Mr roT said...: MFT, should we send AI a gift of bronze?; 3/31/2008 11:20 PM
Tecumseh said...: From JJ's reference: National Journal, which ranks members according to the political tilt of their votes, found that since Republicans took control of the Senate in 1995, "McCain has moved steadily to the middle" and by 2006 was the 46th most conservative senator.

Hmmmm... Given that there are <50 Republican senators, that means McCain by 2006 was one of the most pinkoish Republican senators (give or take 1 or 2), no? You can slice and dice that, and bring up Vietnam, L. Ron Hubbard, or the yeti, but facts are stubborn things, ya know?

As for Kerry & Mac, I refer you guys to the pic of the two lounging together in 2004 in a Senate office, and mulling over a joint ticket. That pic is etched on my retina...; 3/31/2008 11:29 PM
Tecumseh said...: News from 2004.; 3/31/2008 11:44 PM
My Frontier Thesis said...: To repeat myself, with amendment: AI, everyone and everything — to varying degrees — is a contradiction, a paradox, myself included.

And this country was founded on contradiction and compromise, and has stayed together through it as well. For example, dealing with the political realities of that Pecular Institution so the colonies could keep a united front against Great Britain required some northerners and abolitionists to let future generations reckon with the said (and fucking grotesque) Peculiar Institution. These contradictions are even found in the Declaration of Independence (All Men are Created Equal) when the political realities required that, in fact, All White Voting Men Are Created Equal — to fight Britain, all the major tobacco farmers had to be on board; we even needed and entered into terms of agreement with France, and acquired a great deal of necessary Naval power.

Now this is one version, an historical example, of individuals "flip-flopping" or "going to the other side" to bring about realistic change (it's also an example about how the world is in a constant state of crisis; and how all history is tragedy). I don't think anyone is denying McCain falling out of marching orders to front some kind of McCain-Feingold bill back then (and whatever else he did). But in being a bit of a contrarian, I'll be it's helped him form some alliances across the aisle, and he might just be able to 1.) understand the spectrum of angles a bit more to get some compromise going; and 2.) reach back across that political aisle when he needs those extra votes to get something truly important passed during his presidency.

I'm still voting for McCain.

Again, if you decide not to, which is entirely your choice, could you please vote for Nader?; 3/31/2008 11:56 PM
Tecumseh said...: Far as I know, the elections are in November, which is more than 7 months away. So why think about that now? I'd rather concentrate on what McCain is campaigning on, what kind of policies he's shaping up, etc. That's part of the reason we have such long campaigns here in the US -- as opposed to, say, France or the UK, where the policies of the Parties are pretty much set in stone years in advance, and the campaigns are much more Party vs Party affairs, with campaigns not much longer than 1 or 2 months tops. Here a "maverick" like McCain can pretty much take over a major Party and run it into whichever direction he wants (McGovern did that to a certain extent with the Dems in 1972) -- which is a bit scary, if you ask me. So I want to see some clear platform on which he will run, and presumably will guide (to some extent) his administration, if he indeed wins the election.

To put in a nutshell: there is much more to a Presidential election than pulling a lever in November. (As for the Nader talk, that's just verbal diarrhea, c'mon.); 4/01/2008 12:25 AM
Mr roT said...: Hmmmm... Given that there are <50 Republican senators, that means McCain by 2006 was one of the most pinkoish Republican senators (give or take 1 or 2), no?

So Kerry was the furthest left and McCain was in the middle and so they were similar.

You remind me of the Chilean wine label that says 'Central Coast'.; 4/01/2008 1:21 AM
My Frontier Thesis said...: AI, just to reiterate, this was a country founded on consent, compromise, and descent. That we can have discussions like this is what keeps a Democratic Republic healthy — you're still wrong, of course ;-); 4/01/2008 1:31 AM
Tecumseh said...: What am I wrong about, exactly? That McCain was so (relatively) close to Jean-Francois Kerry in 2004 that Kerry seriously considered running on a joint ticket with him against Bush-Cheney? (BTW, Kerry-McCain woulda probably won -- at least, AA would have voted for that ticket, I think, for reasons he explained at the time.); 4/01/2008 1:45 AM
My Frontier Thesis said...: AI, I'm the only one 100% correct, all the time. It doesn't matter what anyone else says (I meant this, and my last comment, as sarcasm, but as I increasingly find, I'm not all that good at delivering sarcasm through the written word).

Looks like McCain's a commie. Better get him back in the Hanoi Hilton (See. Again, another bad delivery).

Fuck. I'm outta beer. (now this statement is a departure from the above, and wasn't sarcastic, just a brute reality that I have to face at 11:17pm); 4/01/2008 2:18 AM
Arelcao Akleos said...: What, all this blathering about MCain the Commie while the true story lay at the end? David Gale had an Unstable Marriage Algorithm and it apparently fatally infracted him.; 4/02/2008 12:24 AM