Neoconservative Hipster Thinktank: Politics Thread

by **Laexile** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 01:32:53

dajafi wrote:Interesting article about McCain from a fellow POW:

http://www.alternet.org/story/95825/

This guy isn't a huge fan--as you'd expect from something on alternet.org--and he gets some facts wrong (McCain's age, for one). But I don't think this qualifies as swift-boating, either: he offers a lot of praise (frankly I think the stories about McCain raising hell at Annapolis are endearing, and the POW stuff is almost beyond comprehension in its power, even if it isn't particularly relevant to the position McCain now seeks) and seems to like the guy--just doesn't think he should be president.

As has often been mentioned with McCain's Vietnam, an out and out swift boat would backfire. John Kerry's Vietnam record was easy to swift boat. John McCain will not talk about his time as a POW unless he's asked a question like the religion question in Saddleback. None of the McCain literature mentions it. Now certainly it's part of his heroic image.

This article is written by a fellow POW, like the Kerry stuff was, and it says that McCain being a POW wasn't especially heroic and really lots of guys were more heroic. And really he's going to die in the next year or two anyway.

If he'd limited the article to the last three paragraphs, his judgement of McCain today, at least that would be relevant. The obvious purpose here is to tear down McCain. Should the Republicans get someone who worked with Obama to write, "sure, he was a community organizer, but he didn't give nearly as much of himself as other guys did?"

If John McCain were out there saying he was tortured for 5 years and he was the only one who refused release there'd be a point. But he won't talk about being a POW, so why tear him down on it?

by **Laexile** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 01:38:52

A couple of people asked about the RNC speaker list. Cindy McCain and Dick Cheney will both speak. Notice how they put Cheney and Bush on night one? Get them out of the way. Note when Bobby Jindal speaks and that Ron Paul isn't speaking. That's wrong. He's earned it. McCain needs his supporters. If he agreed to endorse McCain, let him get up there and bash the Republican Party.

Monday, Sept. 1
Speakers will include:
U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman (Conn.)
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (Calif.)
Vice President Richard B. Cheney
First Lady Laura Bush
President George W. Bush

Tuesday, Sept. 2
Speakers will include:
Former New York City Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani
Former Gov. Mike Huckabee (Ark.)
Former Gov. Tom Ridge (Pa.)
Gov. Sarah Palin (Alaska)
Gov. Jon Huntsman (Utah)
Rosario Marin, California Secretary of the State and Consumer Services Agency and former Treasurer of the United States
Former U.S. Sen. Fred Thompson (Tenn.)
Gov. Linda Lingle (Hawaii)
Former Lt. Gov. Michael Steele (Md.)

Wednesday, Sept. 3
U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman (Minn.)
Meg Whitman, National Co-Chair for McCain 2008 and former President and CEO of eBay
Carly Fiorina, Victory ‘08 Chairman for the Republican National Committee and former Chairman and CEO of Hewlett-Packard Co.
Former Gov. Mitt Romney (Mass.)
Mrs. Cindy McCain
Gov. Bobby Jindal (La.)
Republican Party’s Vice Presidential Nominee

Thursday, Sept. 4
Speakers will include:
Gov. Tim Pawlenty (Minn.)
Gov. Charlie Crist (Fla.)
U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback (Kan.)
U.S. Sen. Mel Martinez (Fla.)
John McCain

by **drsmooth** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 08:26:58

jerseyhoya wrote:
I think if McCain picked Lieberman, and simultaneously took a 1 term pledge and Lieberman pledged not to run for reelection, that might be the sort of thing that would play well. It's a high risk/high reward type thing. Otherwise, I'd be really, really angry if he picked Lieberman though. There are tens of millions of Republicans in the country. Pick one of them to be your Veep.

would someone please, please, explain why the honk radio grandees ever emitted the 1-term pledge nonsense, let alone why it has had any life whatsoever?

It's like something out of a knockoff politics videogame

by **jerseyhoya** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 09:06:09

drsmooth wrote:
jerseyhoya wrote:
I think if McCain picked Lieberman, and simultaneously took a 1 term pledge and Lieberman pledged not to run for reelection, that might be the sort of thing that would play well. It's a high risk/high reward type thing. Otherwise, I'd be really, really angry if he picked Lieberman though. There are tens of millions of Republicans in the country. Pick one of them to be your Veep.

would someone please, please, explain why the honk radio grandees ever emitted the 1-term pledge nonsense, let alone why it has had any life whatsoever?

It's like something out of a knockoff politics videogame

Because McCain is really old. And many, many Republicans don't like him so this means they can hold their nose and vote for him to beat Obama with the knowledge that they'll never have to do so again. For Independents, it might be appealing if he pledges to run a non-partisan administration, that would not need to curry favor with anyone due to him not seeking reelection.

by **TenuredVulture** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 09:14:57

dajafi wrote:The NBA draft once had four rounds?

I think it was actually 6. I once worked with a guy who was a 6th round pick. He didn't make the team.

by **jerseyhoya** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 09:30:37

dajafi wrote:You might be right about the politics. But in addition to being something of a diss against those tens of millions of Republicans, it would also send the message that McCain is really, really, really uninterested in domestic issues. All he and Holy Joe have in common substance-wise is the shoot-first thing.

Otherwise, I think the one-term pledge is a non-starter. Right or wrong (and I can see reasons why it could be a good thing for someone like McCain), the result would be to lame-duck whoever made it right after they were sworn in. I don't think it's a coincidence that Nixon, Clinton and Bush all fared so much worse, politically and substantively, after they were made lame ducks by the 22nd Amendment.

Well, they're more or less on the same page on climate change and immigration reform. Once upon a time before he was picked to be Gore's VP, wasn't he in favor of some sort of Social Security private accounts business? They disagree more than they agree domestically, but the war isn't the only thing they agree on.

by **TenuredVulture** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 09:37:35

Lieberman is pro-choice, right? It seems the Republicans are pushing the abortion issue hard right now--they must think it will make a difference in swing states among working class social conservatives.

In any event, appealing to that voting block appears to be a central strategy, and that seems quite inconsistent with Joe Lieberman as VP. A lot of people who will be reluctant to vote for Obama because of his ethnicity are also anti-semitic.

McCain almost has to pick an evangelical, someone comfortable talking about Jesus.

by **drsmooth** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 09:53:31

jerseyhoya wrote:
Because McCain is really old. And many, many Republicans don't like him so this means they can hold their nose and vote for him to beat Obama with the knowledge that they'll never have to do so again. For Independents, it might be appealing if he pledges to run a non-partisan administration, that would not need to curry favor with anyone due to him not seeking reelection.

this is all very well, but the point is it's complete fantasy to imagine that any real-world candidate considers even for a second going along with it.

by **jerseyhoya** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:13:55

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yYlzX2ZOLM[/youtube]

by **BuddyGroom** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:58:14

CalvinBall wrote:Fox was tearing apart the first night of the convention. It was laughable.

I watched MSNBcs coverage for the most part. Olberman slob knobbing the night was too much. I enjoy Matthews' and Chuck Todd's insights.

I only watch bits and pieces of the conventions, but when I do, it's almost always on C-SPAN. Regardless of the network, I find the talking heads sitting screen-front and using the actual convention goings-on as a dramatic backdrop very arrogant. Again, that's whether its CBS or Fox News or whoever.

If I want the input of talking heads, I know of many, many places and times to find such. If I want to watch the convention, I want to actually watch the convention.

by **BuddyGroom** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:04:28

jerseyhoya wrote:
dajafi wrote:
jerseyhoya wrote:1) She did a good job of telling who she was.

2) Mediocre on saying she loved America.

3) Did not give good insights on who Obama is. Liberal litany or something or other.

It was a personality/humanizing speech, not a policy address or especially a rally-the-troops stemwinder. And I don't think she mentioned McCain once. Basically her job was to present herself and her family, including her husband, as in the tradition of shared American values. I think she did that, particularly with the story about her father.

I'm just kind of bummed that her brother is no longer the hoops coach at Brown. (He moved on to some bigger school with a higher-profile program.)

I was just summarizing what Rove said after Pacino made his Rove poohpooed the speech comment.

I don't really think she had to do any more than she did tonight though. She made herself seem like a real actual person when she talked about her dad's illness, and I liked the video before the speech. She talked about how much she loved the country. I dunno. I don't really care about her insights into Barack. I can't imagine anything she could have said that would have been all that interesting or important regarding the election.

In all honesty, I'm glad you thought it was okay. The talking-head conservatives can't say that, regardless of what they think. They have a job to do, just like pro-Democrat talking heads. (There are no actual left-wing talking heads in the mainstream media, but I'm getting off point.)

I thought Michelle Obama came across well and likeable. I thought the bit afterward with Barack talking to his family via video connection was cringe-worthy, especially when he kept trying to stay on script while his daughters were talling him they loved him. Hey Barack, want people to think you're a decent, normal guy (which I think you are) - pay more attention to your two adorable daughters then to your handlers and their script. There is no downside to being a good, attentive parent.

I also thought the playing of "Isn't She Lovely" after Michelle Obama's speech was WAY over the top.

I thought Craig Robinson was good - I don't recall him with the Sixers, but do remember reading about him as a standout at Princeton.

by **TenuredVulture** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:10:52

BuddyGroom wrote:
CalvinBall wrote:Fox was tearing apart the first night of the convention. It was laughable.

I watched MSNBcs coverage for the most part. Olberman slob knobbing the night was too much. I enjoy Matthews' and Chuck Todd's insights.

I only watch bits and pieces of the conventions, but when I do, it's almost always on C-SPAN. Regardless of the network, I find the talking heads sitting screen-front and using the actual convention goings-on as a dramatic backdrop very arrogant. Again, that's whether its CBS or Fox News or whoever.

If I want the input of talking heads, I know of many, many places and times to find such. If I want to watch the convention, I want to actually watch the convention.

I agree with this. Few talking heads are worth watching anyway. I like that Brooks guy and Mark Shields on PBS.

by **drsmooth** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:25:54

BuddyGroom wrote:
I also thought the playing of "Isn't She Lovely" after Michelle Obama's speech was WAY over the top.

To be fair, neither Superwoman nor Boogie On Reggae Woman would have worked either probably

by **FTN** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:31:50

Boogie on reggae woman what is wrong with me
Boogie on reggae woman baby can't you see

by **dajafi** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 13:26:16

FTN wrote:Boogie on reggae woman what is wrong with me
Boogie on reggae woman baby can't you see

Thanks, guys. Now I've got this song in my head.

Which isn't actually such a bad thing.

by **jerseyhoya** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 14:09:07

For Both conventions:

* Every time someone says "the next President of the United States," drink 1
* Every time the camera shows a sign with the name of your home state, drink one. Any time a speaker mentions your home state, drink one. For every speaker on stage from your home state, drink 2.
* Every time the camera shows a person in the general audience (not on stage) that you can name without the aid of a caption on TV, drink one.
* Every time a speaker compares the candidate of his or her OWN party to a past president, drink 1. If that past president is Lincoln, FDR, Kennedy or Reagan, drink 2.
* Every time a speaker compares the candidate of the OTHER party to a past president OTHER than George W. Bush, drink 1. If that president is Carter or Nixon, drink 2.
* Every time an "ordinary American" is mentioned by name by any speaker, drink 1. Take 1 additional drink for each affliction or hardship this person is suffering (e.g., lost a home, lost a job, lost health care, has cancer, etc. Children in excess of four count as an affliction). Take an additional drink if this person was the first person in his or her family to go to college.
* Any time any speaker says "flip-flop," take one drink of something other than whatever you had been drinking.
* Any time any speaker says "100 years or more" in reference to the Iraq war, drink something 100 proof or stronger.

For the Democratic convention:

* Every time someone says "hope" or "change," drink 1. If "monger" follows either of these, drink an additional two (hope-monger, change-monger). Drink an additional one if the speaker says "change we can believe in."
* Every time a speaker says "unity" or "unify," drink one, and only one.
* For every "terrorist fist bump," drink a shot, an Irish car bomb or a Jaeger bomb.
* Every time Biden says "literally," drink two.
* Every time a speaker says "failed policies of George Bush," drink 1. Every time a speaker makes a reference to a third Bush term, take three drinks
* Any time any speaker or reporter references McCain's age, take two drinks of something that's been aged.

For the Republican convention:

* Every time any speaker says "my friends," drink 1.
* Every time any speaker describes Obama as an "empty suit," empty your drink.
* Every time any speaker says "9/11" or "September 11th," drink one.
* For istewart, every time a person of color appears on the stage, drink 1. Drink two if that person is not J.C. Watts, Colin Powell, or Condoleeza Rice.
* Every time any speaker references or parodies any of Obama's campaign slogans (e.g. "change we can believe in," "yes we can," etc.), take a sip of your drink, spit it back into your glass/cup/bottle, and then drink again.
* Every time any speaker references Obama's youth or inexperience, take two drinks of something that hasn't been aged (vodka, most beer, etc.)
* Every time a country song is played during a musical interlude, drink two. Every time a song made famous by a black recording artist released after 1980 is played during a musical interlude, drink 5.

From a friend, from the poker site 2+2.

There's about a 99.8% chance I will be engaging in this during Hillary's speech tonight. The 0.2% is if Floppy's post game interview ties me up too long.

by **dajafi** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 14:12:59

Put the EMTs on speed dial...

by **jerseyhoya** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 14:19:06

The third bullet will be really painful.

"Ooohh, there's Shelia Jackson Lee, she's nuts!"

by **drsmooth** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 14:35:01

jerseyhoya wrote:There's about a 99.8% chance I will be engaging in this during Hillary's speech tonight.

Based on your list of drink triggers, there's a 99.8% chance 99.8% of your blood will consist of alcohol after about 90 minutes.

But you may then be able to answer that ancient conundrum; "which transfuses more easily through an intravenous tube - beer or whiskey?

by **jerseyhoya** » Tue Aug 26, 2008 14:38:29

drsmooth wrote:
jerseyhoya wrote:There's about a 99.8% chance I will be engaging in this during Hillary's speech tonight.

Based on your list of drink triggers, there's a 99.8% chance 99.8% of your blood will consist of alcohol after about 90 minutes.

But you may then be able to answer that ancient conundrum; "which transfuses more easily through an intravenous tube - beer or whiskey?

I don't think Hillary will speak for more than a half hour or so. Let's say there are 30 sips in a beer. Even if you drink once every 20 seconds, that's only three beers during her speech. I don't think we're looking at something that's gonna be deadly here.

Archived

Neoconservative Hipster Thinktank: Politics Thread