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 07-10-2008, 03:47 PM
Bloggingheads Bloggingheads is offline
BhTV staff
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,936
Default Low Serotonin Edition

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-10-2008, 04:25 PM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default See Mickey get the better of Bob

http://www.bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs...7&out=00:02:05
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-10-2008, 05:01 PM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Mickey's is being disingenuous here.

Bob is making the point that Mickey is more critical of Obama than McCain.

Mickey responds by saying it's not true because he always criticizes McCain on immigration.

But the immigration critique implies that McCain is bad because he's too close to Obama's (liberal) views; so in essence the critique of McCain is tantamount to saying "He's bad because he's too much like Obama." Hence, it's just another (disguised) critique of Obama.
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-10-2008, 05:40 PM
Thus Spoke Elvis Thus Spoke Elvis is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 329
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Nah, Mickey thinks McCain is worse than Obama on immigration, not the same. Why? Because McCain has no domestic agenda except immigration, whereas this will clearly be a backburner for Obama given all the other, more pressing and politically popular issues on his plate (e.g., health care, reducing carbon emissions, etc.).
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-10-2008, 05:55 PM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
Nah, Mickey thinks McCain is worse than Obama on immigration, not the same. Why? Because McCain has no domestic agenda except immigration, whereas this will clearly be a backburner for Obama given all the other, more pressing and politically popular issues on his plate (e.g., health care, reducing carbon emissions, etc.).
Maybe, but it's still an example of Mickey pushing the agenda ever rightward.

He attacks Obama from the right and he attacks McCain from the right.
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-10-2008, 06:04 PM
Thus Spoke Elvis Thus Spoke Elvis is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 329
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
Maybe, but it's still an example of Mickey pushing the agenda ever rightward.
I agree with Eric Alterman, who once argued convincingly on bloggingheads that immigration is neither a right-wing or left-wing issue. George W. Bush and McCain were two of the biggest proponent of a more open immigration policy, while protectionist Democrats like Sen. Byron Dorgan were strong opponents. It's a complicated, multifaceted issue.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-10-2008, 06:22 PM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
I agree with Eric Alterman, who once argued convincingly on bloggingheads that immigration is neither a right-wing or left-wing issue. George W. Bush and McCain were two of the biggest proponent of a more open immigration policy, while protectionist Democrats like Sen. Byron Dorgan were strong opponents. It's a complicated, multifaceted issue.
Yes, you have a point there. But Mickey's xenophobic anti-immigrant and paranoic rhetoric is more representative of hard-core right-wing Republicans.

The Democrats, once clearly the party of the segregationists of the South, have dramatically advanced a pro-civil rights and anti-racism agenda over the past half century, and although Mickey's style appeals to the lowest common denominator in both parties, the Dems. now have a more robust culture of resisting racism.

Granted, there are strong vestigial elements of racism in the Democratic Party as well, as we all learned in some of the primaries where Clinton trounced Obama by garnishing the I'd-never-vote-for-a-black vote.
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-10-2008, 07:32 PM
harkin harkin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,169
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
But Mickey's xenophobic anti-immigrant and paranoic rhetoric is more representative of hard-core right-wing Republicans.
This sentence is illustrative of the amount of dishonesty thrown at Mickey here. I have never once heard him say he is 'anti-immigrant'. What Mickey advocates is enforcing existing immigration law, which allows for hundreds of thousands of immigrants, those that stick to the rules and don't cut in line.

In 1985 the politicians (of both parties) said "hey, we have an immigration reform bill, we're going to secure the borders and grant amnesty to millions of illegals". The congress passed an immigration reform bill (1986) with two major provisions, to secure the borders and to grant amnesty to millions of illegals. The amnesty part was easy (roughly 3 million), the border security was a joke. After 20 years (and 15-20 million more illegals) the politicians (of both parties) came at us again and said "hey, we have an immigration reform bill, we're going to secure the borders and grant amnesty to millions of illegals".

For insisting that the government follow through on their 1985 border security promise before rewarding amnesty to millions who flaunted our laws, opponents of the bill are called racist, paranoid and xenophobic, when in reality all they are are citizens demanding their goverment be held accountable to their word.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-10-2008, 07:50 PM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
In 1985 the politicians (of both parties) said "hey, we have an immigration reform bill, we're going to secure the borders and grant amnesty to millions of illegals". The congress passed an immigration reform bill (1986) with two major provisions, to secure the borders and to grant amnesty to millions of illegals. The amnesty part was easy (roughly 3 million), the border security was a joke. After 20 years (and 15-20 million more illegals) the politicians (of both parties) came at us again and said "hey, we have an immigration reform bill, we're going to secure the borders and grant amnesty to millions of illegals".
Calling people "illegals," as you did four times in one paragraph is hurtful, disparaging and inflammatory. Watch your language.
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-10-2008, 07:54 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
Calling people "illegals," as you did four times in one paragraph is hurtful, disparaging and inflammatory. Watch your language.
I'm sure Harkin will wade over to respond to your comment soon. :LOL:
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-10-2008, 07:59 PM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Why? Because you're referring to a person primarily by an adjective that is the most relevant one for describing the activity in question to which you object?

I suppose it's like calling a homosexual a sodomite?

I think what's at issue is how much you disapprove of the activity in question. For instance, calling Ted Bundy a murderer rather than a "anti-social individual" seems perfectly kosher, because murdering is an activity that is so unusual, and of such high moral significance, that it's permissible to describe someone who engages in it just by that descriptor. Sodomy, on the other hand, is regarded by many people in the West either as morally permissible or, if morally bad, then morally not very serious (obviously there are a sizable number of people who think it is a serious moral wrong); consequently, referring to someone as though his whole being revolved around sodomy is degrading.

(But "child molester" seems appropriate to describe someone who molests children, regardless of who complex he is otherwise.)

Anyway, it seems like the main issue is how much of you disapprove of the activity in question, not a callous disregard for individuals' life-projects, complexities, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-10-2008, 08:22 PM
Thus Spoke Elvis Thus Spoke Elvis is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 329
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby G View Post
Anyway, it seems like the main issue is how much of you disapprove of the activity in question, not a callous disregard for individuals' life-projects, complexities, etc.
It also depends on the context of the conversation. When we're talking about immigration generally, it's entirely sensible to use terms like "legal immigrant" or "illegal immigrant" so people know what category you're talking about, even if those phrases might be offensive in other situations.

Let me give an example. I have a friend named Jerry who happens to be black. When we discussing race issues, we'll often refer to people as "blacks" and "whites." No problem there. On the other hand, if I said to Jerry, "Hey black, are you coming over to watch the game tomorrow?," there would be a big problem.

In short, context matters.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-10-2008, 08:19 PM
harkin harkin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,169
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
Calling people "illegals," as you did four times in one paragraph is hurtful, disparaging and inflammatory. Watch your language.
If you can suggest a better term to distinguish persons who did not immigrate legally from others who did, I will be happy to entertain it.

I LOVE how branding Mickey 'racist' 'xenophobic' and 'paranoid' is OK but to use a perfectly apt term is 'hurtful. disparaging and inflammatory'.

The delusions continue.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-10-2008, 09:26 PM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
If you can suggest a better term to distinguish persons who did not immigrate legally from others who did, I will be happy to entertain it.
Thank you. I would suggest "undocumented immigrant," "economic refugee" or, if you insist on a pejorative, you could try "illegally imported working families."

I never hear anyone refer to the businesses who hire undocumented workers as "the illegal corporations" or "illegal businesses."

Why is the nanny the "illegal," but the parents who hire the nanny are not illegals? Why not refer to suburban families as "illegals," since they often all benefit from off-the-books services provided by nannies, gardeners, housekeepers, handypersons, etc.

Why don't I see the MinuteKlan protesting outside "illegal" homes and businesses?
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-11-2008, 01:38 AM
Mr. Acid Glee Mr. Acid Glee is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 13
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
Thank you. I would suggest "undocumented immigrant," "economic refugee" or, if you insist on a pejorative, you could try "illegally imported working families."

[...]

Why don't I see the MinuteKlan protesting outside "illegal" homes and businesses?
"undocumented" doesn't work well because there are Americans without SS numbers and driver's licenses. "Economic refugee" could describe a legal immigrant coming here from somewhere where the economy sucks. "Working families" is probably wrong because there are 20% more male immigrants than females, US-wide (maybe they're all gay, though, who knows? No one surveys for that )

I don't know why you think "illegal" is pejorative, anyway. There are plenty of victimless crimes (including, for the most part, immigration - sorry Mickey) which do not absolutely stigmatize their practitioners.

On the other point: If the Minutemen were indeed racist, they would have no shortage of Mexican-employing businesses to protest. But perhaps their beef really is with illegal immigration, in which case their strategy of monitoring the border is consistent. To single out a business, they would have to somehow know that the owners had willfully ignored immigrants with false documentation. That seems like a lot of work! (although maybe they could outsource it...)
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-11-2008, 11:12 AM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

I don't think difficulty of finding things out is the reason the Minutemen don't protest illegal immigration; I think most of their worries are "cultural," e.g., "when I was younger I could go to a store and know that the cashier spoke English; now, I'm lucky if I can be understood at all"; and "my next-door neighbors play mariachi music way too loudly, and way too late; and they leave shopping carts on their front lawn and litter; I hate what my neighborhood is becoming!"

While the businesses enable illegal immigrants to come in and engage in this behavior (whether confirmation bias explains the minutemen's observations, or whether illegal immigrants really do engage in this behavior at a greater proportion than other residents of, say, Los Angeles, I don't know), it's the immigrants' behavior that the minutemen don't like. When this is compounded with the suspicion that the immigrants whose behavior is so bothersome also came in illegally, their anger becomes directed at the immigrants.

I should note, I don't think cultural concerns are racist per se, though they can of course be motivated by racism, mixed with racism, racistly expressed, etc. Instead, I think people who express them are used to their social settings being one way and don't the direction they're changing in. Assuming they're correct in their observations, which of course they may not be, is that so bad? After all, I hear secularists all the time decrying the religious direction the USA has taken since the late 70s. While some of these complaints are motivated by anti-religious bigotry (say, "all religious people are stupid" or "the worst people are always religious"), I don't think the complaints per se are bigoted. Instead, what matters is whether the cultural changes in question are really better or worse.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-11-2008, 11:54 AM
Mr. Acid Glee Mr. Acid Glee is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 13
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

I think they do have some legitimate security concerns as well.

The question of which culture is better is too hairy to touch IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-11-2008, 08:58 PM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Acid Glee View Post
I think they do have some legitimate security concerns as well.
I see the whole thing as nothing but a wingnut hot button issue that the party strategists cooked up because they know it will resonate with the not-so-swift swift-boat buying crowd, who already constitute a huge part of the base. And just like their previous brainfarts (war on drugs, war on gays, war on godless baby killers, etc.), this too shall pass. Why? not because they don't have great ideas on how fight the "problems", but because their strategies not only cost way too much, they don't really offer much possibility of even making a dent.
I suspect the "immigration" (get rid of the Mexicans) issue will fade quickly after a certain day in November.
As for the militant radical groups that always seem to form around these issues, membership will wane after a few violent and tragic confrontations occur and several of their brethren and sisthren are locked up.
I think the minutemen see themselves sitting atop some gigantic border-spanning barrier, firing off M16 rounds at anyone who dares breach the designated "no traffic" zone. Instead of course, what I see as the more likely scenario of merely forming yet another hate based prison gang.
The bottom line is, even if their wildest dreams came true, they would only succeed in giving the dreaded hordes a new name:
"Boat people".

that's right, I made up a word, "sisthren", and I happen to think it's cool
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-11-2008, 09:52 PM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

I think you're being hasty in calling all these people "wingnuts." I've already given explanations that (I hope) make clear at least the motivations that minutemen, et al. can have without being obviously evil people. Moreover, Mr. Acid Glee brought up security concerns too.

As for this being an issue that "shall too pass"--[sarcasm]like, I assume, the issues of abortion, gay rights, gun control, and other issues that haven't been discussed for decades[/sarcasm]--I doubt that very much. If anything, it's going to get even more discussed as Spanish-speaking immigrants make up an ever-larger proportion of the US population.

As for solutions, well people who are critical of these issues will tell you that things like the San Diego border fence work very well, and that deportation has powerful deterrent effects, causing illegal immigrants to "deport" themselves. Moreover, I should think that anti-immigration people would be happy to enforce sanctions against businesses that make it a business of employing undocumented workers.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-12-2008, 04:45 AM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby G View Post
I think you're being hasty in calling all these people "wingnuts." I've already given explanations that (I hope) make clear at least the motivations that minutemen, et al. can have without being obviously evil people. Moreover, Mr. Acid Glee brought up security concerns too.

As for this being an issue that "shall too pass"--[sarcasm]like, I assume, the issues of abortion, gay rights, gun control, and other issues that haven't been discussed for decades[/sarcasm]--I doubt that very much. If anything, it's going to get even more discussed as Spanish-speaking immigrants make up an ever-larger proportion of the US population.

As for solutions, well people who are critical of these issues will tell you that things like the San Diego border fence work very well, and that deportation has powerful deterrent effects, causing illegal immigrants to "deport" themselves. Moreover, I should think that anti-immigration people would be happy to enforce sanctions against businesses that make it a business of employing undocumented workers.
Perhaps I wasn't clear, I'm implying the issue was fanned by the right wing spin machine as a form of scapegoating to rally support for their candidacies. I even had a local state senate hopeful leave a robophone message on my home voicemail quoting bogus stats from that fabricated email that has been showing up everywhere since '04 (the one falsely attributed to the LA times).

Maybe you remember when the "life" issues were at a fever pitch with constant protest vigils and even violent clashes ensued. Are you saying that things haven't cooled considerably since then? Or that most politicians haven't taken to avoiding the issue entirely? Or that the anti-gay platform hasn't lost a substantial amount of steam recently? Or that the left hasn't modified the stance on gun control to be more about limiting extreme weaponry, and less about personal protection?

I'm saying there are plenty of other easily accessible, easily warped into black and white sorts of issues out there, and this is just the hate-and-fear-du-jour. Yes, these are all multi-faceted complex issues that may never go away, I'm just of the mind that it's a little odd how they get their few minutes in the spotlight and then seem to fade considerably, after the election, of course.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 07-12-2008, 05:45 PM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Oh yea, and what ever happened to the billion dollar "war" on drugs? Remember when we taxpayers were buying "high tech"
Surveillance and intercept jet aircraft and boats, the last time there was a push to "seal off the border"?
We criminalized the addicts, and now we are paying huge amounts to put them up in the penal system, where they can still get drugs. Now we don't even see the frying egg "this is your brain" ads anymore.
How would I have approached it? I'm so glad you asked! Maybe we could have spent the money and resources learning about and combating addictions and their contributing socio-economic factors. But I got the impression that would sound to much like socialism to most Americans, so we end up doing not the smart thing, or the humane thing, or the cost effective and competent thing, we just talk tough and use it as a political plank, and waste billions. And all the while, the talking heads on TV are citing examples and statistics that make it sound like major progress is being made, when, in reality, the opposite is true.
So sorry if I'm a little cynical about the war on Mexicans, because we are employing tactics I see as more than just a tad bit reminiscent of the other hot button issues of their day.
My humble thought on strategy would involve trying to help improve conditions in Mexico, the way we are improving things for the Chinese, and supposedly the Iraqis, by getting them more involved in democracy and the new global economy. And I know this will get me in trouble, but maybe we could put a tiny bit of pressure on the Pontiff, so as to pace proliferation in the Papalist populations. Don't get me wrong, pressuring employers and making immigration difficult would help tremendously. Registering migrants and charging visas, taxation, and social security contributions should not only serve as a deterrent, but would help offset costs as well.
But alas, none of my ideas make great talking points, or campaign platforms, or feed into the fear and loathing some cultures have for those that don't walk or quack like them. Which IMHO is the reason the US will never lean too far toward socialism, and that's OK with me, because I see our great strength as stemming from our roots as the proverbial capitalist melting pot, that may, after all, still have a heart, even in the heartland.

Last edited by handle; 07-12-2008 at 06:56 PM.. Reason: punchup
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-19-2008, 01:48 AM
jh in sd jh in sd is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 154
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Hi Wonder, Remember, "That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-11-2008, 02:45 PM
DoctorMoney DoctorMoney is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 305
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
Yes, you have a point there. But Mickey's xenophobic anti-immigrant and paranoic rhetoric is more representative of hard-core right-wing Republicans.
You are being far too kind to hard core right-wing Republicans if you think they're generally going to find Mickey's line of reasoning palatable.

It's also a little unfair for you to give someone hell for calling folks 'illegals' when you call Mickey anti-immigrant. Really? Is he against immigrants?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-11-2008, 04:10 PM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
It's also a little unfair for you to give someone hell for calling folks 'illegals' when you call Mickey anti-immigrant. Really? Is he against immigrants?
You're right. He's probably okay with English-speaking Canadian immigrants.

He is, however, anti-Mexican-immigrant, legal or illegal. He has expressed concern that Mexican irrendentists may "reconquer" the Southwest of the US and declare it part of Mexico. This would happen, according to his crackpot theory, when a critical mass of believers in "Atzlán" exist in the Southwest, citizens or non-citizens.
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-10-2008, 05:41 PM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Au contraire, my wondering friend; Mickey has outlined on his blog why McCain would be worse than Obama on immigration. I don't know whether he thinks McCain's stated policies are worse than Obama's, but he's made the point that Obama would spend his political capital on health care, whereas McCain would spend his (given the near-certainty of a Democratic congress) on immigration reform. So if you're concerned about immigration reform, McCain would be worse than Obama. Moreover, as Kaus also points out, if you're scared of both health care and immigration reform, you should worry more about McCain than Obama, because health care reform is more reversible than immigration reform.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-10-2008, 05:53 PM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Re: See Mickey get the better of Bob

Quote:
So if you're concerned about immigration reform, McCain would be worse than Obama.
I am very concerned about immigration reform, and I agree that McCain would be worse than Obama. Far worse.
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-10-2008, 05:00 PM
piscivorous piscivorous is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,593
Default Geography

If Iraq is fairly stable and actually being governed by a government that is seen as viable by many of the Iraqis they may have a problem with Iran causing problems in Iraq. It's not like they have been kissing cousins in the past. There is at least an equal if not better chance that Afghanistan will be the theater in which Iran can and will cause problems. After all Afghanistan also borders Iran, currently it seems to be deteriorating instead of stabilizing, it's government is seen by just about everyone as highly corrupt and inefficient and they are less likely to have the blow back from the the general populace.

Last edited by piscivorous; 07-10-2008 at 05:36 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-10-2008, 05:06 PM
gwlaw99 gwlaw99 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 260
Default Re: Geography

Quote:
Originally Posted by piscivorous View Post
If Iraq is fairly stable and actually being governed by a government that is seen as viable by many of the Iraqis they may have a problem with Iran causing problems in Iraq. It's not like they have been kissing cousins in the past. There is at least an equal if not better chance that Afghanistan will be the theater in which Iran can and will cause problems. After all Afghanistan also borders Iran, currently it seems to be deteriorating instead of stabilizing, it's government is seen by just about everyone as highly corrupt and inefficient and they are less likely to have the blow back from the the general populace.
I think you meant this.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-10-2008, 05:35 PM
piscivorous piscivorous is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,593
Default Re: Geography

Thanks and you are Absolutely correct. I will fix it in the original comment. Whis that they would get the strike through tag working.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-10-2008, 05:49 PM
Dinsdale Dinsdale is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4
Default Re: Comments on Comments?

Mickey has a comments section? Really. I've been reading kausfiles on and off seven years and I've never seen it. I can't even find the thing now.

Anyway, you two don't always make the most interesting view, but you do make the most amusing. Thumbs up!
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 07-10-2008, 06:33 PM
graz graz is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,162
Default Parsley, sage ... or Fleeger?

http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/126...1&out=00:51:04

Since you asked for it Bob, I will offer a correction to your contention. Far be it from one of the gang of 12 to support McCain. But, he did denouce Parsley:
http://changeyourcondition.net/2008/...ian-preachers/
But there was no evidence of low serotonin on your part today. Thanks for bringing the "meat."
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 07-10-2008, 06:59 PM
graz graz is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,162
Default Mickey as the white Bill Cosby

serotonin high... hip-hop low

Let's not let ignorance get in the way of Obama bashing... Mickey.

lil wayne

This is embedded in the original blog. If you don't read this for context, it would lend credence to Mickey's claim. Yet, we know Mickey expended his journalistic instincts already when he posted his "most damaging to Obama yet" discursive dig:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalra...slams-hoo.html

http://www.slate.com/id/2194571/#obamaskatrina

Last edited by graz; 07-10-2008 at 09:46 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 07-11-2008, 07:34 PM
artoad artoad is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 44
Default Re: Mickey as the white Bill Cosby

Bob, I look forward to opining on any discussion of hip-hop between you and Mickey. A word of warning to both of you though. Please avoid what I witnessed a few years ago on a Dan Rather newscast. Dan was reporting on the addition of the phrase "mack daddy" to the lexicon of a particular American dictionary. Dan exhibited total wide-eyed incomprehension. I've never seen a more embarrassing display of overwhelming "blancitude". That said, let's get down and let's get busy.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 07-10-2008, 06:49 PM
uncle ebeneezer uncle ebeneezer is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,332
Default Re: Low Serotonin Edition

Just to clarify the logic of my comment about Mickey's comment about we commentors: Mickey complained about the predominance of Lefty commentors on BHTV. Usually when a person complains about a situation it is because they wish it were otherwise (ie- Mickey wishes the comments section was more balanced.) Usually if a person wants to change a set of conditions they take action that is within their power to achieve that goal. For someone like Mickey who loves to tout his readership and his draw, one would think that he very easily could summon his legion of fans to come over here and change the balance of the comment-board on a level that the Gang of 12 liberal conspiracy couldn't possibly counteract (none of us has a blog in Slate, that I know of.) But he'd rather complain about the comment section (that he doesn't read because it's not balanced enough to his taste...though how he know's this considering he doesn't read it still strains logic) but does nothing to change that scenario. For someone who repeatedly makes charges of "why don't these people do ___, to change their situation?" style arguments (which I oftentimes find insightful) it's strange that he doesn't take his own advice.

Moreover, his disinterest in getting BHTV more success through using his vast Slate readership, is completely at odds with his constant griping about not being paid. Quiz Mickey: would more viewers likely increase or decrease the financial stability of BHTV and the potential for your own financial reimbursement?

I stand by my guns that Mickey's animosity towards BH commentors is more based on the fact that they have been critical of Mickey to a level that he's uncomfortable with and that although he likes to pretend he doesn't care about what we think, he's really the sad clown who's crying on the inside.

Ann Althouse's comment section better than BHTV...puhleeze!!

Hmm, wonder why Ann has such feelings towards BHTV commentors. Could it have something to do with her embarassing little tantrum aimed at Garance, and the fact that BHTV commentors called her out on her ridiculously over-the-top behavior?
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 07-10-2008, 07:06 PM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Attention Gang of 12

Let's form a Facebook group. Who's down?
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 07-10-2008, 07:09 PM
graz graz is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,162
Default Re: Attention Gang of 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
Let's form a Facebook group. Who's down?
I'm a social networking novice. And secondly, like Groucho, I'm averse to joining any group that would have me as a member.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 07-10-2008, 09:10 PM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Attention Gang of 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
Let's form a Facebook group. Who's down?
How can we have a Facebook group and still be a secret cabal?
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 07-10-2008, 09:15 PM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Re: Attention Gang of 12

Quote:
How can we have a Facebook group and still be a secret cabal?
What we lose in anonymity we gain in solidarity.

Plus, we can network with other evil progressive gangs from other sites and form a federation of gangs to take over the galaxy.
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y síguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 07-10-2008, 09:27 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: Attention Gang of 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wonderment View Post
What we lose in anonymity we gain in solidarity.

Plus, we can network with other evil progressive gangs from other sites and form a federation of gangs to take over the galaxy.
Unfortunately, I live in a small, ultra conservative town, and work at a large, ultra conservative corporation. My boss listens to Rush Limbaugh in his office. As a result, I'm not willing to reveal my true identity on this forum. Doing so could easily cost me my my job -- and in this town, you either work for The Company or you work for peanuts.

I understand you live in southern CA. That's about the other side of the world from where I'm at. The people around here would faint if they were exposed to views that are mainstream in your community.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 07-10-2008, 11:50 PM
uncle ebeneezer uncle ebeneezer is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,332
Default Re: Attention Gang of 12

Yeah I've already given way too much information. My covert operative status is already in jeopardy, as it is.

I'd be curious, if Bob could let us know, if BHTV meets the same rough breakdown of contributors vs. "lurkers".
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 02:12 AM.


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