Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Notices

Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-24-2008, 11:04 AM
Bloggingheads Bloggingheads is offline
BhTV staff
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,936
Default Gotterdemocraterung

.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-24-2008, 12:44 PM
Eastwest Eastwest is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 592
Default The Real Crime: That Barack Ever Came forward as a Candidate

It's time for Barack to step aside, with apologies, for the good of the party and the good of the country.

Apologies for what?

Apologies for arrogantly putting himself forward with no experience, poor judgment, bad friends, and so many negatives that there is absolutely no way he can ever beat the Republican attack machine.

The whole basis for choosing the Democratic candidate needs to be who has the best chance of beating McBush.

If Barack had the brains to stay away from the race issue entirely, or, when unavoidable, the smarts to downplay it as much as possible, he might have stood a chance. But no, he had to foreground it instead with a sermon to the country on the topic which had nicely been put to sleep where it belongs (at least during campaigns wherein racists make up over half the electorate).

The Result: The "Bradley / Wilder Effect" will kill him for sure, even if the polls look OK in the fall, thus also guaranteeing at least four more years of Republican insanity, both internationally and domestically.

Thanks, Barack. What an idiot.

EW

Last edited by Eastwest; 04-24-2008 at 12:57 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-24-2008, 01:01 PM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: The Real Crime: That Barack Ever Came forward as a Candidate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastwest View Post
It's time for Barack to step aside, with apologies, for the good of the party and the good of the country.

Apologies for what?

Apologies for arrogantly putting himself forward with no experience, poor judgment, bad friends, and so many negatives that there is absolutely no way he can ever beat the Republican attack machine.

The whole basis for choosing the Democratic candidate needs to be who has the best chance of beating McBush.

EW
I haven't had a chance to watch the diavlog, yet; and I'm not sure if you're kidding. But I don't think the problem is with the particular candidates - the current process and political context seem only to be capable of producing structurally weak candidates on the Dem side. I'd like for that not to be true - especially when, as I see it, the Federal judiciary is in danger of being fatally compromised by Republican appointments - but, I think the truth is we have met the enemy and he is us. I think the party is in need of grass roots reorganization similar to what the GOP underwent prior to 1994. Until either the party power structure or the demographics of its constituents have changed. I had, and still have to an extent, hopes for Howard Dean in this regard - but anybody who styles himself an agent of change in an organization like a major political party has a real battle to win.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!

Last edited by AemJeff; 04-24-2008 at 01:12 PM.. Reason: fix typo
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-24-2008, 01:11 PM
piscivorous piscivorous is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,593
Default Re: The Real Crime: That Barack Ever Came forward as a Candidate

let me give you a recap. I'm right...no I'm right... your facts are right...yes they do... I'm right ... no I'm right.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-24-2008, 01:34 PM
Eastwest Eastwest is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 592
Default Re: The Real Crime: That Barack Ever Came forward as a Candidate

Neither Kleiman, Mumi, nor Popcorn have woken up and smelled the coffee:

The Bradley effect will kill Obama.

Folks keep trying to blame Hillary for exposing Barack's obvious negatives and thus making him "unelectable."

Excuse me: Barack is his own worst enemy. He had the negatives even before Hillary pointed them out.

So we're supposed to think that, absent Hillary, the Republican attack machine would somehow have either not noticed Obama's negatives, or out of abundant tastefulness and nobility, would somehow not have brought them up at all?

Kleiman and all the other Obama Kool-Aid drinkers love to demonize Hillary. They are just refusing to recognize the fact that their darling Barry is unqualified, arrogant, damaged goods who doesn't stand a chance of winning the White House. What are they smoking?

EW
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-25-2008, 12:35 AM
Baltimoron Baltimoron is offline
Deactivated User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Busan, South Korea (ROK)
Posts: 1,690
Send a message via Skype™ to Baltimoron
Smile Diavlog Synopsis

You missed a few "I'm not going to answer that"'s and "Oh, come on!"'s.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-24-2008, 01:37 PM
bkjazfan bkjazfan is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: South Los Angeles, Ca.
Posts: 1,192
Default Re: The Real Crime: That Barack Ever Came forward as a Candidate

I have been listening to discussions on race for longer than Obama has been alive and now he comes up the ingenious idea to have another one. Either he's late to the party and used it to deflect the reason he sat and listened to anti-white, American comments from his spiritual advisor for 20 years.

John
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-24-2008, 02:01 PM
submersibledirigible submersibledirigible is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6
Default Re: The Real Crime: That Barack Ever Came forward as a Candidate

Jeralyn: "I'd like to hear Barack Obama for once say I will go out and campaign for Hillary if she's the nominee"
http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/104...3&out=00:39:31

You're in luck Jeralyn! Not only has Obama indicated he'd campaign for Hillary Clinton if she's the nominee, but he's indicated his Organizing Fellows program would even work on Hillary's behalf if she won the nomination.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/6/11170/54536
Quote:
Q. You recently talked about a fellowship program where you will train some of the young grassroots activists that have joined your campaign. Can you talk more about that?

A:Basically what we've done is we've been attracting so much volunteer talent, so many young people who have gotten involved in the campaign, that we wanted to give a handful of them an opportunity to have some more intensive training. So we've asked them to apply for fellowships. I think they're called Obama Fellows. They will get intensive training, and they will be put on staff and will have an experience, starting in June.

Q:The nomination may not be decided by then, are you sure you're going to be ready to set those grassroots volunteers loose in June?

A:We're still going to be interested in training. Even if I'm not the nominee, I'm still going to be somebody who cares very deeply about the Democratic Party winning in November, and still will hopefully have a little bit of influence on the process.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-24-2008, 02:41 PM
MightyRick MightyRick is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3
Default Re: The Real Crime: That Barack Ever Came forward as a Candidate

"The Bradley Effect will kill Obama"? Please don't misuse an already misunderstood phenomena. The Bradley Effect speaks to only the surface regarding what happens, not why it happens. What happens is that the polling numbers for black candidates are sometimes higher than the resulting votes. Lots of ideas have been advanced for why this is so, but it is still not well understood. The only potential effect here is that people might say, "Look, Obama is beating McCain in the polls, so let's nominate him." But the numbers may not accurately reflect how the voters will actually vote, thus overstating one of the reasons to nominate him. Actually, I think the Bradley Effect has been diminishing, but has come back into play with Obama.

Regarding this diavlog, it was painful to watch. She was all over the place and he wouldn't back up and rephrase his many badly stated questions. For example, he asked, "Name a big state Clinton won." She replied with lots of them. He then said, "But those don't count...no Democrat is going to win Texas, any Democrat will win Mass., etc." She then (correctly) replied, "But you asked me to name big states..." He should have just backed up and said, "I'm sorry, I should have stated the question better. Leaving aside the states that won't be in play, which big state did Hillary win that is going to be in play in the fall?" This type of behavior would have saved us a lot of nonsense.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-24-2008, 03:25 PM
Eastwest Eastwest is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 592
Default Re: The Real Crime: That Barack Ever Came forward as a Candidate

Re Mighty Rick's "Please Don't Misuse 'Bradley Effect'")

I presumed too much of readers (that they would understand the concept refers to polling numbers portraying an unreasonably rosy picture for the prospects of a black candidate in a general election.)

This is also known as "Wilder Effect" in reference to that black governor's predicted margin of 10% shrinking to 1% final margin.

So perhaps prefer: "The unpleasant realities disguised by the 'Bradley / Wilder Effect' lead Obama-cult dreamers to suppose he's got a chance of reaching the White House when in fact he doesn't have a prayer."

It would be nice if semantic precision would help your friend Barry, but, unfortunately, he's dead meat twisting in the wind, a gruesome testimony to the problem presented by cult-dreamers stampeding a nominating process to a foolish and unrealistic conclusion.

Result: We get two "exotics": the first woman or the first Black, neither exemplifying the best those categories have to offer, this when a simple safe candidate (like Biden or Dodd) would have beat McCain no problem.

An Obama nomination would be another fine example of how Democrats always manage to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

EW
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-24-2008, 03:39 PM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Shorter EW

"Barack Obama is black, therefore he can't win." Speculating about the "Bradley Effect" prior to the national election without reference to, at the very least, the effect of McCain's support for the war and how that might offset whatever effect race might have on the contest is premature, at best, and, probably, disingenuous. But you did get to call him "Barry!" Well argued, sir!

I'm with everybody who made the claim that Jeralyn wasn't very good here. This was painful to watch.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-24-2008, 04:15 PM
Eastwest Eastwest is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 592
Default Re: Shorter EW

Re Aemjeff's:

Quote:
I'm with everybody claiming Jeralyn wasn't very good here. Painful to watch.
Of course. This is expected from Obama-cult echo-chambers. Not surprising you found it "painful." (Reality's hard for dreamers to swallow.)

Sure, go ahead and discount "Bradley Effect" as somehow inoperative in the polls' misrepresenting Obama's very-dismal prospects. I wish you were right. But the fact is, outside of university intelligentsia, out-of-touch elites, and idealistic newbie voters, racism is alive and well in the American electorate, especially when the level of insecurity in that same electorate is sky-high due to Republicans so ably pushing those buttons. (Prediction: Al Qaida scare in late October.)

I would vastly prefer your ideal world. Trouble is: We live in the real one.

Obama's minted-in-Deval-Patrick-land "hope" is a false one. He was frustrated as an arrogant young freshman senator that he does not have the interpersonal skills necessary for wheeling and dealing with the ossified and corrupt minds of the US Congress. Can't blame him for trying to do an "end-run." Trouble is, end-running for president exposes all one's faults and raises everyone's worst fears, even the unreasonable ones.

Obama doesn't stand a chance in November.

EW
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-24-2008, 04:30 PM
look look is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,886
Default Re: Shorter EW

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastwest View Post
Re Aemjeff's:
...racism is alive and well in the American electorate...
Not just the malignant racism of my father, but the benign racism of my mother.


Quote:
Can't blame him for trying to do an "end-run."
I think he didn't expect to be so successful. This was probably supposed to be a trial run to gain exposure.

I think the most significant thing Kleiman said was that even if they go on from here to split the remaining votes, Hillary would still need 80% of the remaining supers.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-25-2008, 12:46 AM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: Shorter EW

Quote:
but the benign racism of my mother.
I'm curious about what you mean by this. It's not that I can't imagine something like "benign racism," but that it sounds like it means something quite specific to you.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-25-2008, 05:56 PM
look look is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,886
Default Re: Shorter EW

Quote:
Originally Posted by AemJeff View Post
I'm curious about what you mean by this. It's not that I can't imagine something like "benign racism," but that it sounds like it means something quite specific to you.
Jeff, I'm talking about the low-level racism that is borne of unfamiliarity. My mother was from small-town southern Ohio where she had little to no exposure to black people. Many moons ago when I joined the Army for a three-year hitch, she asked the recruiter if there were a lot of blacks in the Army. He replied that it was about the same percentage as in the American population. She has black neighbors she's friendly with to call over the fence hello, and give plants to when they need dividing, etc.

Along these same lines, my 85 year-old aunt (again from southern Ohio), a former school teacher, told the story a couple weeks ago, that the first time she finally had a black student, that one day his dad came in and stuck out his hand and said, 'Hi, I'm Billy's father.' She said to us, 'One of the hardest things I've ever done was to raise my arm to shake hands. I'd never touched a black person before.'

In the mid-Seventies, my great-uncle, a Catholic priest, then around 55 years-old, said matter-of-factly, 'In 50 years we'll all be brown.' He's probably about 50 years of the mark, but still, good call, Uncle.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-25-2008, 06:41 PM
Bloggin' Noggin Bloggin' Noggin is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 893
Default Re: Shorter EW

Interesting stories, there, look. I think this is the kind of thing that Obama was trying to do with the bit about his grandmother in his race speech -- the bit that conservatives insisted on reading as "throwing grandma under the bus". I thought it was very clear, his point was that people can have racist attitudes and hangups without being bad people. At this point, we need recognize racism as a social problem -- those attitudes in good people can cause a lot of problems for those of the relevant race -- but we need to be more forgiving of individuals when these attitudes slip out. Harsh blame and anger aren't the way to go.
If conservatives would really listen to that part of the speech, they would see there was nothing to fear from Obama.

Incidentally, there was a very touching scene I think in the PBS bio of Lyndon Johnson where a black member of the administration (what's his name -- Wilkinson -- used to see him a lot on the Newshour I think on those panel discussions or something). tells a story about how Johnson blurts out 'Nig--' before recalling who he's with. Johnson wasn't putting anyone down, but the word just started to slip out, and he was deeply embarrassed. Wilkinson understood and was actually rather touched by Johnson's fumbling attempts to get past that half-uttered word. (Sorry I told the tale so badly. Gotta run)
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-25-2008, 07:13 PM
hans gruber hans gruber is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 106
Default Re: Shorter EW

Quote:
Johnson wasn't putting anyone down, but the word just started to slip out, and he was deeply embarrassed. Wilkinson understood and was actually rather touched by Johnson's fumbling attempts to get past that half-uttered word
Upon passage of the Civil Rights Act, LBJ remarked that he'd have those ******s voting Democratic for 100 years. His not infrequent use of the n-word may not have been indicative of a sincere animosity toward blacks, but it was not a touching and forgivable idiosyncracy as you apparently claim. LBJ, from what I know about the man, was a contemptible figure on a personal level, to say nothing of his political judgement. Take, for example, the annecdote of his early political career where he'd leaked to the press that his opponent had sex with animals. When told this wasn't true, LBJ reportedly said that of course it wasn't, he just wanted to see him deny it.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-26-2008, 03:40 AM
look look is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,886
Default Re: Shorter EW

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloggin' Noggin View Post
Incidentally, there was a very touching scene I think in the PBS bio of Lyndon Johnson where a black member of the administration (what's his name -- Wilkinson -- used to see him a lot on the Newshour I think on those panel discussions or something). tells a story about how Johnson blurts out 'Nig--' before recalling who he's with. Johnson wasn't putting anyone down, but the word just started to slip out, and he was deeply embarrassed. Wilkinson understood and was actually rather touched by Johnson's fumbling attempts to get past that half-uttered word.
Yes, I'm familiar with that story...very sweet.

Have you read many presidential bios?
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-25-2008, 07:38 PM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: Shorter EW

Thanks for that. I have some relatives who probably wouldn't feel out of place, including some I'm very close to. One interesting phenomenon in my family is that the southerners (sadly, all passed now) were more likely than the northerners to be genuinely free from any form of racism benign or otherwise.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-24-2008, 06:16 PM
Bloggin' Noggin Bloggin' Noggin is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 893
Default Re: Shorter EW

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastwest View Post
Re Aemjeff's:



Of course. This is expected from Obama-cult echo-chambers. Not surprising you found it "painful." (Reality's hard for dreamers to swallow.)

Sure, go ahead and discount "Bradley Effect" as somehow inoperative in the polls' misrepresenting Obama's very-dismal prospects. I wish you were right. But the fact is, outside of university intelligentsia, out-of-touch elites, and idealistic newbie voters, racism is alive and well in the American electorate, especially when the level of insecurity in that same electorate is sky-high due to Republicans so ably pushing those buttons. (Prediction: Al Qaida scare in late October.)

EW
It really is possible to distinguish between the following two propositions and assign them different truth values:

1. Obama is the greatest thing since sliced bread (whole wheat, I guess) and will win easily in November

and

2. Ms. Merritt did a lousy job of defending her position, from a logical point of view (as opposed to a spinmeister's point of view).

At least most of us can make such distinctions: for example, my political position is closer to Bill Scher's than Jonah Goldberg's, yet in their diavlog together, I think Goldberg did better than Scher. I think in last week's Scher/Carroll diavlog, Scher wasn't very effective against Conn. I like Obama, but I don't think he did very well in the PA debate. See? It's not so hard.

I think Obama has a better chance of winning than you do, but that doesn't mean I think racism poses no dangers for his candidacy. I do take seriously your concerns, but I don't regard them as established with the certainty you project. Perhaps things will turn out as you expect, but I don't think your case is strengthened either by calling everyone who disagrees deluded or by claiming that Ms. Merritt did a good job of defending her position.
Your persuasiveness would be enhanced by an attempt to be (or at least appear) a bit more judicious.

Last edited by Bloggin' Noggin; 04-24-2008 at 06:18 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-24-2008, 06:34 PM
Eastwest Eastwest is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 592
Default Re: Shorter EW

Re BlogginNoggin's:

Quote:
Perhaps things will turn out as you expect, but I don't think your case is strengthened either by calling everyone who disagrees deluded or by claiming that Ms. Merritt did a good job of defending her position.
First: If you'll trouble to review my posts, you'll notice I never made any reference to Ms. Merritt or any acknowledgement of her arguments. (I didn't find her overly eloquent. Nonetheless, the negative characterizations of her POV owe more to righteous indignation than objective analysis.)

Second, On my calling folks out for "delusion," etc. it's a bit of a diagnostic tactic and therapeutic stratagem.

"Delusion" refers to an inability (willful or otherwise) to see reality as it actually is (as distinct from how one might wish it to be).

The diagnostic aspect: Where folks react strongly, then I know how acute their "Obama Deification Syndrome" has become.

The therapeutic stratagem: For those amenable to learning (maybe 20%), this may actually facilitate awakening to realities.

Sorry if you might have taken this personally. Your right, though: People don't like straight talk. They'd rather be told what they want to hear (common echo-chamber sentiment).

Cheers,
EW
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-24-2008, 06:46 PM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: Shorter EW

Quote:
Nonetheless, the negative characterizations of her POV owe more to righteous indignation than objective analysis
Really? I'm curious. By what metric have you determined the truth of that?

Quote:
Where folks react strongly, then I know how acute their "Obama Deification Syndrome" has become.
I've reacted in a fairly strong way. Nonetheless, I'm pretty sure you'd have a hard time finding much in the way of Obama worship in anything I've written.

Quote:
For those amenable to learning (maybe 20%), this may actually facilitate awakening to realities.
Your clear analysis of the lesser beings among whom you're unfortunately beset gives the rest of us a clear example to which we can strive.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-24-2008, 11:31 PM
Bloggin' Noggin Bloggin' Noggin is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 893
Default Re: Shorter EW

[QUOTE=Eastwest;74923]Re BlogginNoggin's:



Quote:
First: If you'll trouble to review my posts, you'll notice I never made any reference to Ms. Merritt or any acknowledgement of her arguments. (I didn't find her overly eloquent. Nonetheless, the negative characterizations of her POV owe more to righteous indignation than objective analysis.)
Not so fast! You dismissed Jeff's objection to Ms. Merritt's reasoning (note that: her reasoning, not her eloquence) as a consequence of his being a member of the "Obama cult". So you WERE implicitly saying that no one could object to her reasoning on sensible grounds.

Quote:
Second, On my calling folks out for "delusion," etc. it's a bit of a diagnostic tactic and therapeutic stratagem.

"Delusion" refers to an inability (willful or otherwise) to see reality as it actually is (as distinct from how one might wish it to be).

The diagnostic aspect: Where folks react strongly, then I know how acute their "Obama Deification Syndrome" has become.

The therapeutic stratagem: For those amenable to learning (maybe 20%), this may actually facilitate awakening to realities.
I know of no reputable psychotherapy that would regard such therapy as anything but malpractice. To diagnose and treat someone, you actually need to know something about them, other than that they see things differently from you. There are any number of non-delusional reasons why someone might disagree with you -- those must be eliminated before you can diagnose "delusion". If I went in for long-distance diagnoses myself, I might suggest that you suffer from delusions of grandeur.
Certainly Obama isn't the only one with a condescension problem.

Quote:
Sorry if you might have taken this personally.
I didn't and that was in no way my point. My point, to reiterate, was that even a Hillary supporter (one who isn't himself a Hillarybot) can make a distinction between support of Hillary and thinking that Ms. Merritt did a half-way decent job at defending her sensibly (just as I feel Bill Scher didn't defend liberalism very well against Jonah Goldberg).

Quote:
Your right, though: People don't like straight talk. They'd rather be told what they want to hear (common echo-chamber sentiment).
Again, this bears no resemblance to what I said. What I actually said was that someone who is independent-minded enough and discerning enough to reject bad defenses of his own side (what I called "being judicious") has more credibility with those who are not already in the choir than someone who is not so discerning and independent.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-25-2008, 01:04 AM
Eastwest Eastwest is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 592
Default Re: Bloggin Noggin's EW Second-Tier Protestations

Re Bloggin Noggin's:

Quote:
Not so fast! ......

I know of no reputable psychotherapy......

Certainly Obama isn't the only one with a condescension problem.......

My point, to reiterate, was that even a Hillary supporter (one who isn't himself a Hillarybot) can make a distinction between support of Hillary and thinking that Ms. Merritt did a half-way decent job....
Wow, like you really thought I was seriously talking professional psychotherapy?

To clarify: I found both Diavlog participants hysterically emotional and allergic to rational sequiturs. The points brought up in my posts are my own and have nothing to do with that 50-minute bickering session.

As for the inferred "condescension problem," I don't find it a problem at all. Where I encounter uncritical cult mentalities, I don't feel the least bit apologetic for pointing out the stupidity of leaving one's critical faculties on the doorstep. After all, I'm not running for office and so don't have to play sycophant to get your vote. If I were to somehow meet the approval of Obama groupies, I'd consider it an insult.

Best,
EW

Last edited by Eastwest; 04-25-2008 at 02:56 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-25-2008, 05:05 PM
Bloggin' Noggin Bloggin' Noggin is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 893
Default Re: Bloggin Noggin's EW Second-Tier Protestations

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastwest View Post
Re Bloggin Noggin's:



Wow, like you really thought I was seriously talking professional psychotherapy?
No, my point is that you need more evidence of "delusion" and "cult mentality" than the fact that someone supports Obama or a negative reaction to Ms. Merritt's reasoning. You say above that you can tell he's deluded from his strongly negative reaction to Ms. Merritt. But consider that your posts on the subject of Obama tend to be extremely shrill and contemptuous -- also heavy on confident assertion and light on actual evidence. By your own criteria, it appears we would be justified in inferring that you are suffering from delusion and "cult mentality" as well -- though of an anti-Obama variety.
Let me amend "condescension" to "arrogance." You've charged Obama with that as well. The issue isn't just one of pandering (or politeness) -- arrogance is a cognitive problem. It keeps the arrogant from learning from other points of view (see the history of the Bush administration).

Last edited by Bloggin' Noggin; 04-25-2008 at 05:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-25-2008, 05:46 PM
Eastwest Eastwest is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 592
Default Re: Bloggin Noggin's EW Second-Tier Protestations

BN's:

Quote:
You say above you can tell he's deluded from his strongly negative reaction to Ms. Merritt.
Never said any such thing. I've stated repeatedly I don't associate myself in the least with Merritt. My posts reflect my own opinions, not those of either of these two screeching juvenile diavlog participants.

Yes, I do feel Obama is contemptible. You don't agree. No problem.

Folks shouldn't deduce I'm enthusiastic about Hillary, merely that I think she's the only survivor electable because she's best able to survive our misogynist and racist electorate.

To me, it's insane the primary process bypassed boring-but-safe candidates like Biden and Dodd, both of whom would have won the general, this in favor of the two most vulnerable and difficult-to-elect personalities. It's nuts.

I don't criticize the idealism, energy, and commitment of Obamaphiles. It's necessary, praise-worthy, and long-overdue. It's just a shame they've been tricked into following pied-piper style a dishonest and arrogant slickster who never stood a chance of becoming elected once his negatives emerged.

Bill Clinton was right: Veteran observers wouldn't be fooled by him. Only youngsters and ideologues have been suckered. You call my analysis arrogant. I think it's reality-based.

EW
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-24-2008, 09:27 PM
graz graz is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,162
Default Re: Shorter EW

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloggin' Noggin View Post
It really is possible to distinguish between the following two propositions and assign them different truth values:

1. Obama is the greatest thing since sliced bread (whole wheat, I guess) and will win easily in November

and

2. Ms. Merritt did a lousy job of defending her position, from a logical point of view (as opposed to a spinmeister's point of view).

At least most of us can make such distinctions: for example, my political position is closer to Bill Scher's than Jonah Goldberg's, yet in their diavlog together, I think Goldberg did better than Scher. I think in last week's Scher/Carroll diavlog, Scher wasn't very effective against Conn. I like Obama, but I don't think he did very well in the PA debate. See? It's not so hard.

I think Obama has a better chance of winning than you do, but that doesn't mean I think racism poses no dangers for his candidacy. I do take seriously your concerns, but I don't regard them as established with the certainty you project. Perhaps things will turn out as you expect, but I don't think your case is strengthened either by calling everyone who disagrees deluded or by claiming that Ms. Merritt did a good job of defending her position.
Your persuasiveness would be enhanced by an attempt to be (or at least appear) a bit more judicious.
Bloggin' the logician... thanks for the clarity, concision and a response to name calling that responds in opposition and not in kind.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-24-2008, 11:30 PM
JLF JLF is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 34
Default Re: Shorter EW

I fear you might be right about Obama's chances. I also fear that Clinton's chances aren't much better. There isn't another Democratic politician that can guarantee a stronger GOP vote. No one has her negatives, negatives that aren't going away by November.

So what that leaves is the choice of two of the weakest possible candidates to face the one Republican with the strongest chances of attracting moderate Democrats. And knowing this, every Democratic leader is busy rearranging the deck chairs. Without much doubt, Obama will be the Democratic Party nominee. Without much doubt, 30-40% of the American electorate in November will willingly sacrifice another four or five thousand young men in a hopeless war in Iraq and mortgage the economy to China all to avoid voting for a black man.

Mencken was right: "No one in this world has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people."
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-24-2008, 05:04 PM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Can a black win? Can a obliterator of Iran win?

Quote:
"Barack Obama is black, therefore he can't win."
This is, sadly, a very real question. Mind-boggling that it is, 40 years after the murder of Martin Luther King, we still may very well be a country with enough bigots to impede the election of an African-American.

Obama tried to overcome this "handicap" by pretending to be a post-racial candidate, but he actually had a biography (and autobiography) behind him that would -- by definition - stir up the racists. My guess is that even Condi Rice or Colin Powell would have a "Rev. Wright" someone in their lives that the race-baiting oppossition would discover and loop in campaign ads. Everyone has a Willie Horton, and it really is the KKK of America as far as a 10% bloc of swing voters are concerned.

So after all the cogitation of pundits like these two, there is a real electability issue: Will Barack turn into McGovern or Kerry or Dukakis? Superdelegates may not deny Obama a victory he deserves, but they may feel they are commiting electoral suicide as they cast their ballot.

I am an Obama supporter, but there is some reality to be faced about his prospects. Perhaps if Democrats and independents distanced themselves sufficiently from the core precepts of the military-industrial-congressional-prison complex, they might be sufficiently worried about a Clinton presidency .

Clinton last week threatened to obliterate Iran with nuclear bombs. So much for Democrats spreading goodwill in a world damaged by Bush unilateralism. Do we really want a president who is threatening the world with genocide?
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 04-24-2008, 05:19 PM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: Can a black win? Can a obliterator of Iran win?

Quote:
["Barack Obama is black, therefore he can't win."]
a very real question
It's undeniably true. The point I tried to make in response to EW is that, from where we sit now, it's not necessarily determinative. There's been no such contest, yet. The Hillary/Obama fight is a pretty approximate test and doesn't shine that much light. There will be a lot of factors in the fall. I've just spent >$3.50/gallon to fill up my car. My home equity has plummeted in the last twelve months. My current job seems secure, but I worry about the effect of a long downturn. al Sadr's organization is threatening to resume all-out war. It's possible that in November the conditions will be such that the Dems could run Ronald MacDonald and still win. Or not...

I'm on record worrying about the viability of both Democratic candidates. I dithered about whom to vote for until the last possible minute, and I still have doubts about the choice I made. I can see profound weaknesses in all three major candidates from both parties. I think that anybody who claims they have a clear idea of who really has the advantage has a significant burden to demonstrate why that might be true. I haven't heard any convincing arguments, so far.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 04-24-2008, 05:36 PM
popcorn_karate popcorn_karate is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,644
Default Re: Can a black win? Can a obliterator of Iran win?

Nope - Hillary is a disaster. She's a Republican-lite Authoritarian, with the added downside of loving nanny-state regulations, as well.

I'll take 4 years of McCain, with both houses of congress in democratic hands fighting his policies, over 4 years of Hillary enacting the Republican agenda while democrats in congress go-along because she's a Democrat.

If Barak loses in the fall, many of us will blame hillary. Maybe then we can start rebuilding our party with-out the likes of the Clintons, Liebermans, Mickey Kaus and other corporate shills.

If he wins - even better.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 04-24-2008, 06:05 PM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Re: Can a black win? Can a obliterator of Iran win?

Quote:
If Barak loses in the fall, many of us will blame hillary. Maybe then we can start rebuilding our party with-out the likes of the Clintons, Liebermans, Mickey Kaus and other corporate shills.
Or, more likely, he'll get blamed, and she will be back in 2012.
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 04-24-2008, 11:38 PM
JLF JLF is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 34
Default Re: Can a black win? Can a obliterator of Iran win?

If Obama loses in November you can bet the ranch she'll be back in 2012.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 04-24-2008, 06:06 PM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: Can a black win? Can a obliterator of Iran win?

Quote:
Originally Posted by popcorn_karate View Post
Maybe then we can start rebuilding our party with-out the likes of the Clintons, Liebermans, Mickey Kaus and other corporate shills.
PK, Be careful what you wish for. If you want eliminate everybody you don't like from the party, you end up with something like the Greens or the Libertarians.
The only nationally successful Democrat we've seen in forty years is Bill Clinton. (Carter lost his second term.) An ideologically pure party purged of its successful tacticians would be an excellent way to guarantee Republican hegemony.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!

Last edited by AemJeff; 04-24-2008 at 06:58 PM.. Reason: fix spelling error
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 04-25-2008, 01:58 PM
popcorn_karate popcorn_karate is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,644
Default Re: Can a black win? Can a obliterator of Iran win?

You are essentially correct.

But my problem is not so much with their ideology as their double-dealing and back-stabbing of people that are supposedly on "their side". Ideological purity is not on my agenda ( and could never come close to happening in the democratic party)
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 04-24-2008, 06:07 PM
harkin harkin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,169
Default Re: Can a black win? Can a obliterator of Iran win?

Jeralyn is the same person who in her previous BH appearance declared that republicans who change parties to vote for a democrat in the OH primary should have their web comments investigated to see if they do not meet her prescribed level of sincerity (those who do not go to jail if Jeralyn has her way).

How's the investigation coming Jeralyn? Did you change your tune because these voters are voting overwhelmingly for HRC or because you realized you had no understanding of constitutional law?
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 04-24-2008, 07:48 PM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default maybe we just missed the point?

We should be listening to Jeralyn, a resident of Denver CO., she knows how the wind blows in the "heartland", where I also lived for a couple year snippet of my misspent youth.
If Obama (who I will enthusiastically support, against Mcquagmire) does not transcend "clinggate" in a big way, we better start painting our signs for the big Iraq march on Washington in the fall.

Why?

I hope you watched Mickey and Robert's sort of tongue-in-cheek exchange on (sorry to paraphrase) the idea that we expect people to suddenly adopt our viewpoints if they are empowered to greater economic or social status, because we see our points of view are simply right. (sorry no dingalink.. I have to download the WMV)

I'm going to tell you something that will probably scare you: I think the vast majority of the "heartland people" from the south, the midwest, and virtually
all rural and working class areas in this country are not misguided, dumb, or inarticulate.
Their cultural viewpoints, while different from many urban dwellers, are completely rational and reasonable for anyone working to carve out a decent life in those environments.
I am going to use an extreme example to illustrate this:
When your closest human neighbor may live a mile or more from you, and the nearest town is ten, twenty, or more miles away, having a gun handy is probably the closest thing to security you can muster. Mistrust of outsiders, yes especially if they don't look or think or talk like you has evolved from basic community protection and policing, by people who don't have a lot of time for considering gray areas. Hence the "love it or leave it" type of rationale.
And "clinging" to religion is not just bible thumping, it's a place you go to interact with the people in your community, and see they are on the same page as you, and know the value of a moral existence, thus, you can rest somewhat assured, that they are on your side.
I am not addressing racism here because I see no monopoly on that ugliness in any demographic, or geological area.

OK, you say, but many of them live in urban or suburban environments now. True, but that doesn't change a persons world view. The American frontier has been settled for many years now, but people still want to live like pioneers, and idolize the cowboy-pioneer culture.

The assumption that they are misguided, and need to be shown the light, spells death to the left wing. It leaves them no alternative than to embrace the carpet bagger mentality of the right, simply on face value of principles put forth to them even when those principles are voiced under completely false pretenses.

When I looked at in this way, I can see that even an urban progressive, change embracer like myself, would rather be pandered to, than told that I didn't know what was good for me, and that my principles were all wrong, and that you were going to fix things for me.

Here is what I see is the core problem: these voters have decided most (all?) of the presidential elections.
We have NOT had a Democratic president from the North, since JFK! Regardless of race, background, or stumpablity.
You may see Black and White, I see North and South.The Clintons hail from Arkansas. Obama claims Illinois.
Transcend race? we are way past due. We might want to transcend closed mindedness in our political party as well.

I think we are in BIG trouble.... I pray that I am wrong, but I'm giving even odds that I'm not. (not much of a gambler, I'm afraid, two-to-one maybe?)
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 04-24-2008, 07:55 PM
Whatfur
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: maybe we just missed the point?

Not sure if a conservative should be able to contribute to the love fest going on here but first let me say that I am pretty sure at this point that unless these 2 become some combination of P and VP that McCain is looking real good. Its going to be hard getting YouTube video of any new McCain anger outbursts unless he stops laughing long enough.

Can you imagine THAT first lady hanging around the White House with Bill...picking out china and stuff? OMG there is another SNL or MADTv skit in there somewhere. Wonder if she is still runnin proud of her bitter, ignorant, little country.

Seriously....the biggest thing that I find rather funny/ironic over and above you Dems ignoring the votes in MI and Florida (of all places) but the fact that the supposed "party of the people" ...doesn't trust "the people" and thus we have "super-delegates". How effing elitist IS THAT!!!!??? Not to mention that Obama can get more delegates from an Idaho caucus than Hillary gets from winning TX. Pretty funny stuff. No wonder you are all wound up so tight.

In case you forgot all the problems with Obama...
http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/104...5&out=00:35:58

And of course Hillary is ...well...Hillary.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 04-24-2008, 08:11 PM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Re: maybe we just missed the point?

I agree, the mich fla thing is a disaster, but if I"m not mistaken, It was the Repub state Govmts that moved them up knowing full well about the Dem rules.
So nice slimy lawyer type move you guys! Another back door win for the party of Morality, and right thinking! Need I say "fair and balanced" too? How bout "dittos"?
I know, you don't care 'cause it works for you. Well, you better get busy working for your war guy, 'cause we are gonna "swift boat" him big time!

Sorry, was that mean? I was just groovin' on your SNL reference. NHI
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 04-24-2008, 08:34 PM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Re: maybe we just missed the point?

One more thing "whatfur"
I assume you didn't even read my post, but the jist was that people in the "heartland" and rural areas are not misguided or dumb. Your party is banking that they are.
Gen. Patton said Americans love a winner, and will not tolerate a loser. You guys
won the last election, but you can't close the deal in Iraq, or Afganistan. Don't look now, but your incompetence is showing. And another thing Americans don't like is being used for RPG fodder.
You know what they do to Carpetbaggers don't you?
Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.