We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Friday, April 4. 2008
Limited government vs. expansive government. No Left Turns
Blame these monsters for airline drink policies
Radical gays vs. Moslems: Who wins?
Protein takes an interesting look at Barone's piece on academics and Jacksonians in the Dem party. Especially the racism part.
Did Al Gore go nuts in 2000? Am. Thinker
Skook made me think about possibles bags, ie pocketbooks, and I was reminded that guys needed them because clothing didn't have pockets. Who invented pockets?
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
I liked this line from Zincavage re 'what Coulter found' about Obama...
"Malcolm X hiding behind the mask of Sidney Poitier."
Obama is a very clever man... and is close to pulling off a great charade on the American people.
Dishonest... good question. Appearances would say yes. But I would have to hear his inner debate to answer that. His self deception could be so complete that 'he' is being honest. What then? And does it make any difference?
"There's a fine line between clever and stupid". If Jeremiah Wright truly believes what he says he is the prototype for what he pretends to despise. Characterizing the 'followers' of such a person would not be difficult. They are silly, petty, confused and a danger to themselves and others. It matters little how 'articulate' or presentable the follower might be when in fact he is a fool.
No disagreement on 'fool'... just saying a very clever one. After all... he is a contender for the White House...
Do you mean Obama or the statement is clever, but dishonest? From what I've learned of Obama, that sounds like an accurate desciption of the man.
Obama entertains rapport with his wife and Reverend Wright. Of course he's dishonest. He is either dishonest in his sincerity to his wife and pastor, or he is dishonest to the American public. You pick.
No, no pick. He could be dishonest to both. Avarice knows no bounds. Thus my 'hear his inner debate'.
Until Obama took the stage, Reverend Wright and his wife formed his 'inner'. That is, he had no 'debate' until he had to construct one for his hour upon the stage. He signifies nothing.
Good point, but he's been calculating success and 'revenge' since an early age. Who's to say how deep his self deception goes.
No denying that. But his 'self' is so shallow that it might not even recognize deception: And if it does, it's not deep enough to feel much remorse or guilt. The good Reverend justified him and absolved him of remorse by 'God damning America and Whitey'. His wife made him some dark chocolate pot-laced brownies so he could be suave and Isaac-Hayes-smooth for the crowds. Obama is giving America the Shaft.
Well if I can stop laughing over those pot laced shafted brownies that go down Issac Hayes smooth...
As to 'self deception'... was it yesterday, under Obama's plan, that would have been the day the last American military person would have departed Iraq. The amount of self deception involved in that mental exercise baffles the mind, mine at least. And presumably he would do such a thing without remorse or guilt.
So maybe the question isn't so much one of dishonesty and/or deception, but one of conscience, or lack thereof.
RE: possibles bags...In the old days a mountain man carried a 'possibles bag' a bag that had a bunch of stuff in it he just MIGHT need when he's off away from camp.
I had to look that up. Had a few old beaded pouches. Were for tobacco, I think. Dr. Helen has a post about purses. Think she said hers was stolen. Wonders how men get by with so little stuff they do not need a purse. Good pockets are the key. Tough though if one wants to wear a dress or skirt, to also have good pockets.
Men DO NOT get by without purses.
We men are constantly stuck without stuff we need, like binoculars, knives, pliars, cigars, mouthwash, condoms, checkbooks, combs, cameras, sandwiches, Bibles, matches, ammo - you name it.
Haha BD. Am guessing suspenders were invented to hold up a mans pants because his pockets were so heavy with possibles.
Here is an attractive man purse, the BucketBoss.
Ha. Men get by without purses because they put their stuff in their women's purses.
Until McCain starts talking as if he is one of "us" he won't be raising much money.
"I understand they want the border closed..." (heard this on the radio this morning) Just who is "they" John? Not you, obviously.
He isn't going to get much cash treating his base that way. He might go for the middle, but they aren't RNC donors. He might get somewhere if he nominates a real conservative as VP.
Bottom line: watch him fail (without any money or good press), and wonder if it was on purpose. I don't trust this guy, might vote for him, would never give a dime.
Why do I mention all this? Obama.
And I specifically do not put any personal items in my laptop bag I use for a briefcase. Instant man-bag, eewww.
Dr. King assassinated.
Nothing in his life became him like the leaving it.
That is harsh.
He was a mixed bag, IMO, but a net positive force.
Would MLK accomplished as much without the threat of X, et al out there? I always found it odd that no one before MLK could get the attention he got. Why suddenly at that point, given that not much had changed in the previous decades, did mainstream society suddenly sit up and take notice of the problem? I've always been a firm believer in TR's "Talk softly but carry a big stick". Outside of recognized, legitimate legal power it's hard for one man to do both (note, not impossible, just highly unlikely to happen) without first seizing recognized power...JMHO
Hey, TNJ, here is "A Very Brief History of the Pocket" by the BBC:
Limited versus expansive government.
Thomas Jefferson said that liberty declines as government grows.
Kesler's got it right when he talks about the "kinds of things" government does.
For Pete's sake, the federal government has a $3.0 TRILLION budget. And the Democrats (in particular) want more. Is anyone awake any more?
There is no revenue problem! There is a huge spending problem. People are abdicating their freedom for a few hollow promises of "something for nothing". Everyone is entitled. What rubbish!
I hope Americans wake up before it is too late.
me too, barrett -- it is shaping up to be a close-run thing, isn't it.