Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Quick Notes on the State of the Union Speech

Quick Notes on the State of the Union Speech

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

In spite of the pressure of current setbacks, and in spite of the ubiquitous obstructionism from some sections of the Congress, the Obama State of the Union Message on the occasion of his first year in office was a joy and a pleasure to watch. Self-confident, self-effacing, and with a natural humor, our president set an aggressive and positive tone for the future. When his lovely wife Michelle seemed a little flustered in the gallery, his affection was spontaneous and uplifting. Without being dreary, there were a few items which I personally found interesting.

Relations with China are at a point which could bring the "bloom or the blight" to future history. Obama said that we will not "accept second place" in the world. But then, neither will China. He was respectful, cordial, and never condescending. (Aside: my thought, particularly in view of the recent figure skating events covered in the media, is that perhaps at some future time America and China will feel a close and real love and respect one for the other.) The President spoke kindly and respectfully of Germany, and India, and he spoke highly of the Muslim world, hoping that we might contribute to their efforts at education, and such.

We have long pondered the seeming inconsistency pertaining to Iran and her nuclear capacity. The issue re-occurs — why can we have nuclear armaments, while they cannot? He resolved that issue, this observer felt, in saying that we must be forever watchful that nuclear weaponry never fall into the hands of terrorists. If Iran had such weaponry, it could indeed fall into unfriendly hands, and that in my estimation resolved the issue.

The Supreme Court has been a disappointment in recent times, encouraging gun ownership in spite of obvious reasons to limit such ownership. And now the Justices have given lobbyists and special Interest groups, domestic and foreign, unparalleled rights to influence the American government. Sometimes one has to wonder. Former Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was critical of the decision. Barack Obama in an atypical moment in his delivery expressed displeasure and disappointment. Many of us I'm sure had hoped he would.

Innovation and education were a part of the president's message. He said we must reward those students who excel at mathematics and science. He also remembered that community colleges are an important asset that should and will be supported and further developed.

He indicated that America has always fought for the value of life and liberty for all — men, women, children — and that she would continue to do so. Isolationism, then, is not an option.

He indicated that regardless of one's views on the causes of global warming, clean and efficient energy is an important issue, and will require continuing legislation.

He reminded us of the principle of "Pay as You Go," or PAYGO. PAYGO is a term used to refer to financing where budgetary restrictions demand paying for expenditures with funds that are made available as the program is in progress.

The Republican reply to the State of the Union — the Republicans, we must concede, having had little time for preparation — delivered by Virginia Governor Bill McDonnell started out on a high note as he introduced his two fine sons; but in my estimate his response moved in a downhill direction from that point on. Surprisingly, the Republican main thrust was for "less regulation, less legislation." Some might find that counterproductive. The Virginia Governor used the phrase "frivolous lawsuit" in connection with potential mis-occurrences in the field of health care. But then, if the suit is frivolous, it probably won't get far; so, what’s the point?

I feel the American public will be uplifted by the president's insights and programs, and that it was an historically wonderful "State of the Union" by a brilliant and unaffected President.

Powered by

About John Lake

John Lake had a long and successful career in legitimate and musical theater. He moved up into work behind the camera at top motion pictures. He has done a smattering of radio, and television John joined the Blogcritics field of writers owing to a passion for the liberal press, himself speaking out about the political front, and liberal issues. Now the retired Mr. Lake has entered the field of motion picture, television, and video game (now a daily gamer!) critique. His writing is always innovative and immensely readable!
  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I don’t believe what I’m hearing.
    This article should be labeled “satire.”

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Apparnetly you watched an entirely different speech from the rest of the country.

    Dave

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    No, he didn’t. He’s simply predisposed to the idea that Obama can do no wrong.

    No different, really, from the kind of garbage that MSM keeps feeding us.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer/dan_miller Dan(Miller)

    Re comment #3, apparently lots of CNN viewers liked it.

    Dan(Miller)

  • Glenn Contrarian

    There were areas where I didn’t agree with the president – ‘clean coal’ and biofuels immediately come to mind, since I haven’t seen any real progress on the first and the second one takes more energy to produce than is obtained from it.

    I also disagreed with increased offshore drilling…but that one’s not quite so bad.

    I strongly AGREED with his push on nuclear energy – I’ve always been for it (unlike most of my fellow liberals), because next to truly renewable energy sources, nuclear power’s the cleanest we presently have. That’s why I’m a contrarian.

    The most interesting point of the night, IMO, was when he listed eight different instances of tax cuts…and not one Republican clapped in applause. Things get interesting when you take toys away from spoiled children….

    I think he should have gone further in pointing out how the Republicans have refused any attempt at bipartisanship, since they’ve voted in lockstep even against bills that they’ve co-sponsored, and refused to even consider an exchange system for health care reform…never mind that the Republicans (some of whom are still serving now) had proposed just such a system as a counter-proposal to ‘Hillarycare’. But I have to remind myself – these days, hypocrisy doesn’t seem to be a negative trait in the eyes of many conservatives.

    A banner point of the night was when the president directly addressed the Supreme Court and told them just how bad their decision was, how it went against a century’s worth of legislation, and how it could lead to foreign companies pumping in all the money they want to influence elections here stateside.

    “Government run by organized money is the same as government run by the organized mob.” FDR said that…and he was absolutely right.

    President Obama’s speech will not be perfect in anyone’s eyes…but it was directed mainly at the independent voter – and in that respect it was very, very good.

  • Clavos

    A banner point of the night was when the president directly addressed the Supreme Court and told them just how bad their decision was…

    An act that was not only wrongheaded, but also shockingly inappropriate for the occasion and place. The Justices displayed much more class than our crass president by not reacting to his rude remarks.

    President Obama’s speech will not be perfect in anyone’s eyes…

    Ya think?

    …it was directed mainly at the independent voter – and in that respect it was very, very good.

    Funny. This independent wasn’t impressed at all, except for the comments about nuclear energy.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    So what do you think, Glenn? This sudden call for “jobs bill” is a case of awakening? After being in office for one full year bailing out Wall Street putting the cart before the horse? So now he finally realizes that it’s the economy, stupid, and in the wake of political defeats in Massachusetts and Virginia and New Jersey? After dividing the country despite his solemn pledge to unite it?

    You may keep on referring to fine political points – just like the ones you mention. But all I see is lack of integrity, lack of passion, lack of true leadership. The man was elected mostly on the basis of his symbolic value. The Democrat Party was so keen on proving to themselves and all alike how free of bias and enlightened they are.

    Well, now we’re getting the dividends.

  • Baronius

    John, I’m surprised that you didn’t like the Republican response.

    I didn’t see the speech, or the response. There’s something distasteful to me about a lawyer encouraging study in science and math. But it really bothers me that a lawyer wouldn’t recognize the Supreme Court’s obedience to the Constitution in this recent decision.

  • Baronius

    Oops. My sarcastic notation didn’t show up on the beginning of comment #8. Of course John’s adoration for the speech prepared me for his dislike of the Republican response.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I didn’t like the Republican response. It was in the same pedestrian vein as the original address.

    It was a perfect opportunity to address the country at large, the people who have been led to expect so much only to end up being disappointed, the tea-party crowd, what have you. But no, the response was geared to counter Obama’s speech, for which very reason it was equally dry, devoid of meaningful content and failing to connect.

    But, apparently, any populous kind of message must be deemed as inappropriate for such a momentous occasion as State of the Union speech (or its rebuttal). And so, the disconnect continues.

  • Princeton Conservative

    I thought the President did an excellent effort to revitalize Americans into supporting him and his agenda!….

    hahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahah

    NOT!

  • STM

    He looked like a shot duck to me at the outset of the address. One-term President is my tip, or a very close run thing next time round, and I don’t care either way as I’m not American so there’s no bias involved.

    You have to ask yourself too what he might be thinking right now, having lost a senate seat held by the democrats since 1946, in the most democrat-friendly state in America, and in the first term of his government.

    Granted, the Bush administration and the shysters on Wall St left him with a jumbo-sized shit sandwich, but still … he’s not been able to rise above it, which is the mark of a good politician. I hope he proves us wrong.

    I also notice Hillary saying yesterday that she wouldn’t do the full eight years in her job – and that line of questioning from the media assumes Obama will get back in.

    Perhaps Ms Clinton knows something we don’t, or has been checking the polls and at least suspects that she won’t even be required to go round again.

  • Arch Conservative

    Can Mr. Lake get his tongue any further up Obama’s ass?

    I fell asleep twenty minutes into
    Obamapalooza 2010 last night. but even asleep I knew it was the same old horseshit.

    The only way to make an Obama State of the Union speech worth watching these days would be to have Biden wrestling an crocodile behind Barry.

    The GOP should have Scott Brown give the rebuttal……from inside his pickup truck…..now that would have been worth watching.

    This guy’s so bad even Jimmy Carter will soon be saying what the F$@k?

    “President Obama’s speech will not be perfect in anyone’s eyes…but it was directed mainly at the independent voter – and in that respect it was very, very good.”

    I have a thousand dollars that says come election day this November those independent are not exactly going to be showing any great fondness for Barry and the Dems Glenn. You want some of that action?

    Here’s to Brack Obama….a legend in his own mind.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Don’t say that, Archie. I’m being accused by some of the very same thing.

  • pablo

    “John Lake, aka BigBadJohnny, is a Chicago born humorist, self-styled expert, and sometime Liberal Blogger.

    I can only assume that John was using the humorist part of his bio by writing this article.

  • pablo

    Hey John Lake,

    You ever see “The Obama Deception”? Great flick man, its available on video.google

  • Jordan Richardson

    Oh God. The Obama Deception is one of the stupidest “documentaries” I’ve ever seen. Filled with out-of-context quotes and fear-mongering, the only thing it’s worth is a good laugh.

    It reminded me of Ben Stein’s evolutionary hit job in Expelled.

  • pablo

    How about some cases in point Jordan? Or is that too much to ask? I can’t stand Stein.

  • Jordan Richardson

    It’s been a while since I’ve seen it, but I just watched the introduction again and the use of ominous music really reminded me of Stein’s nonsense.

    To dig any deeper in context and to offer a fairer critique would require a reviewing and I must concede I’m not really up to that today.

    I do recommend Lake and others watch it, though, if only for interest’s sake.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    I strongly AGREED with his push on nuclear energy – I’ve always been for it (unlike most of my fellow liberals), because next to truly renewable energy sources, nuclear power’s the cleanest we presently have. That’s why I’m a contrarian.

    That makes two of us, and apparently just about no one else who matters.

    The most interesting point of the night, IMO, was when he listed eight different instances of tax cuts…and not one Republican clapped in applause. Things get interesting when you take toys away from spoiled children….

    A claim which every think tank from Heritage to Cato debunked this morning, pointing out scores of tax increases and how his “cuts” were merely restructuring which in some cases actually raised taxes – as usual mostly on working people.

    A banner point of the night was when the president directly addressed the Supreme Court and told them just how bad their decision was, how it went against a century’s worth of legislation, and how it could lead to foreign companies pumping in all the money they want to influence elections here stateside.

    The best part of that was Alito mouthing “that’s not true” to the camera. And in fact it is NOT true and shows a gross ignorance of campaign law on Obama’s part or the part of whoever wrote his speech. The FEC already has rules entirely separate from McCain-Feingold which specifically block foreign corporations from donating to US campaigns and those restrictions were in no way struck down by this decision. Under those rules even if a foreign corporation had a US subsidiary only revenue generated by that subsidiary and kept in the US could be used to promote candidates in the US.

    Dave

  • pablo

    Jordan Ok I see. You say filled with out of context quotes, but you only saw the introduction. Ok, that makes sense. Then when asked to provide some examples politely you decline. Ok I see.

    I make a recommendation of something that I find of value. You denigrate it. Ok. Thats fine, but when asked by me to cite some examples in the interest of civility and discourse you decline, and then admit you only saw the intro!

    Ok Jordan, I see how it is. Thanks.

    Next time you cite something of value to yourself, and I come in and denigrate it, without citation when asked, particularly not even having read or watched the substance, don’t be surprised if I respond in kind Jordan.

  • pablo

    Nalle 20

    And how about a US corporation that has foreign stockholders to the tune of billions? As usual you make no sense, and ignore the obvious.

  • pablo

    My mistake Jordan, i misread what you said, and I apologize. I am still waiting however to ever read an apology from Nalle to ANYBODY. Particularly in light of his demeanor in general to those that he disagrees with. Any comment on that Nalle? I didn’t think so.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Pablo, I’ll try to clear up some time over the next couple of days to watch it again. No promises, though.

  • pablo

    Fair enough Jordan, thank you.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    John,

    I read your article this morning, and I thought to myself,”Why didn’t I see this yesterday?”

    Finally, the voice of reason. While these little critics criticise and chide, (not all of them here)like a bunch of spoiled brats , you had the grace and intelligence to not only watch the Presidents State of the Union, but to write about it like an adult.

    Thank You

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    I neither listened nor watched Obama on 27 January. I was blessedly asleep. There are times when sleep is a true blessing, and the early morning of 28 January (21:00 EST is 06:00 IST), this was indeed the case.

    Were I Obama, I would have written his speech this way:

    My fellow Americans:

    The state of the union is strong. The United States of America has stood for 234 years and I see no reason why it should not stand for another 234 years.

    We live in interesting times; certainly, we live in noisy times. The loud sound most of you hear around you lately is the sound of your country being flushed down the toilet. Nevertheless, the fundamentals are sound. Please do not be disturbed if it appears that it is my hand on the flusher. It is only an illusion, one of many caused by the previous administration. All is well, and is truly getting better. Trust me.

    And right now, I would like to direct your attention to Vice President Joseph Biden, a man whom I could not do without. He is presently wrestling the crocodile that is our economy. Rather than bore you with unimportant details, I’m going to sit back on this easy chair, and watch. I suggest you join me for the next twenty minutes or so.

    May Allah Bless America,
    Good night and thank you

  • Arch Conservative

    In reading Jeannie’s #26 we see that apparently mass quantities of “the One’s” Kool Aid are still being consumed.

    According to Jeannie if you’re not fawning over Barry O’s speech which of the following is true:

    A. You’re not behaving like an adult
    B. You lack grace
    C. You’re unintelligient
    D. All of the above

    Seriously, am I the only one that finds Jeannie’s consistent, idiotic remarks annoying?

  • Arch Conservative

    Thanks for the Biden wrestling the coroc reference Ruvy. It’s nice to be appreciated once in awhile.

    Someone should start a thread on which we all pretend to be the great Barry O and offer state of the Union addresses.

    It’d be a real hoot.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Ruvy,

    If you really want someone to pay attention to your opinion about this subject, then don’t you think you should at least try to understand what was proposed?

    I have a copy of the bullet points here.

    Please don’t let the garish website scare you away!

    :]jeannie the flaming liberal

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Arch,

    I choose D.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Arch,

    That was really too short of an answer. As I am trying to see the world through your eyes at the moment, I will try to elaborate a civil response for you.

    I need to know were you actually are coming from here. So, let me ask “What profession are you currently in?”

    I realize that this might be the single most important motivator for most of your comments directed towards me.

    Also, “Have you written any articles here at BC?” I just ask you because I would really like to read one. Not that I have that many under my belt here either.

    :]jeannie the polite liberal

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Jeannie,

    Just so this is clear to you. I supported Obama in 2008. He is an openly anti-Israel president, and that is precisely what Israelis need to teach them about the true nature of Jew-hatred (even by self-hating Jews) in the American government. My compatriots are waking up to the message and beginning to comprehend that the American government is no friend to Israel or to Jews. Remember, I’m not talking about the American people at large, people like you. I’m talking about the élites who steal your money, your hope and your future – élites that Obama belongs to and speaks for.

    Obama is an unmitigated disaster – not for us – but for you. But I saw one positive note in the bullet points you led me to.

    Obama Accepts Blame

    Obama took blame for not adequately explaining his plans to the public and connecting with their everyday worries.

    He said, “I campaigned on the promise of change, ‘change we can believe in,’ the slogan went.”

    Obama said, “And right now, I know there are many Americans who aren’t sure if they still believe we can change, or at least that I can deliver it.”

    He actually took responsibility – openly – for something. You can trash the entire remainder of his State of the Union Address; it’s small potatoes and garbage. He knows he is playing poker with nothing but a pair of deuces – and that everybody else at the table knows his hand, too. He knows there is nothing he can do but attempt to survive until 2012 – or find some disaster that he can use to declare an open dictatorship in your country. This is an issue that goes far beyond partisan politics. NEITHER PARTY CAN DELIVER YOU FROM EVIL. YOU ARE IN TROUBLE AND THERE IS NO SAVIOR!

    [Edited]

    Ruvy

  • http://joannehuspek.wordpress.com Joanne Huspek

    I also fell asleep after 20 minutes, but politicians seem to have that effect on me, even when I meet them in person.

    My worry is that I don’t feel any safer from terrorists. Perhaps my fear should be filed in the “when it’s time for you to go, you’ll go” file. However, every night when I go to bed and observe 727s making their way to Detroit Metro Airport right above my head, I gotta wonder if I should move away from the flight pattern.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Ruvy,

    I know that this two party system is strangling any chance we have for change in this country, but on the same hand I have to choose one of them, because as an independent, I don’t have a political party. “Where is it? “, ” Who truly represents me?”

    You always say that “Isreal is not supported” and now you are saying that “Obama hates Jews.” Please show me the link for this last one, because I just don’t see it.

    :]jeannie who likes the Jews.

  • Mark

    There is a significant number of viewers reporting ‘falling asleep’ after 20 mins. I suspect subliminal programming. I was too busy live blogging the comment thread that was live blogging the eminent BC caricatures live blogging the speech to notice.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    You missed a good speech.

  • Clavos the Impaler

    Mark,

    Are you always that convoluted? I don’t recall previous incidences…:-)

    Greetings (fond ones) to you, Mr. Farrier.

  • Mark

    Clavos, although edited now, I just want you to know that I want the rich bastards Ruvy referred to above to buy their yachts before getting busted.

  • John Lake

    I feel I identify with some of the commenters here for one simple reason: I took a quick look at “The Obama Deception”, and fell asleep after – a very short time.
    I could comment on it without having seen it. Seriously the comments here were great.
    One learns quickly in our community that it is pointless to quote an irresponsible source. If you have great comment from an unsubstantiated site, you simple can’t use it.
    These points apply to “The Obama Deception”.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Ruvy, #33,

    Obama Accepts Blame:

    He said, “I campaigned on the promise of change, ‘change we can believe in,’ the slogan went.”

    Obama said, “And right now, I know there are many Americans who aren’t sure if they still believe we can change, or at least that I can deliver it.”

    He actually took responsibility – openly – for something. You can trash the entire remainder of his State of the Union Address; it’s small potatoes and garbage.

    END OF QUOTE

    Insightful, Ruvy, but not going far enough. It’s not clear, besides, that he accepts the blame. “Not being able to deliver” could be taken in this context to simply mean that the inherited conditions were such that no human being could deliver under the circumstances.

    Were he to say, however:

    “We fucked up in thinking that our corrupt financial institutions needed bail-out – as evident by their present practices of returning to their corrupt ways. I promised to unite this great country, but in taking my eye of the ball, I’ve only contributed to its divisiveness. Jobs both in the private and public sector (like rebuilding our infrastructure) ought to have been my first priority – to stop the mounting unemployment and the erosion of public confidence in their government, which was the unavoidable aftereffect. I attempted too much in too little time, not realizing as I should that first things must come first. I was so obsessed in fact with being a progressive president and moving this country in the right direction that in the end, there was too much on my plate, and the results are dismal. Whatever had passed or is about to get passed was but a half-ass job, far from complete and thorough – a compromise of a compromise (such as the health bill on the table). In that spirit, the deliberations took place behind closed doors rather than being open for public view, as I originally promised, in the interest of full public disclosure and transparency.

    For all these things, my fellow Americans, I take full blame and responsibility, because the buck stops here. I wasn’t experienced enough for this formidable job, surrounded myself with wrong kind of advisors, too confident of myself that I could deliver on my campaign promises and bring us together as a people in such a short time while the economic crisis which we all experience continues unabated.

    I still stand, my fellow Americans, by my mission statement as expressed in the course of my presidential campaign and the State of the Union address. We must move America in the right direction. But I realize now that I also have to deal with the impending realities. My vision exceeded my grasp.

    But this first year has not been in vain, for I have learned from my mistakes, so I ask you to extend me your vote of confidence and I promise, you’ll see a new administration in the making. I have also, effective today, asked for the resignations of Messrs Timothy Gaithner, Lawrence Summers and Mr. Bernanke. I realize now they’re part of the problem, not the solution, and I intend to fill those critical posts with people with integrity and vision, not because they’re merely qualified or have connections with Wall Street.

    We are going to start with a clean slate, my fellow Americans, this thing I promise. I can only ask you to judge me by results.

    Thank you.”

    Yes, Ruvy, were he to say that – I would be in his corner rain or shine. But he didn’t.
    Consequently, all we got is another pretty speech.

    So yes, Jennie – we may need a comprehensive mission statement, but it’s not worth a hoot if there’s discrepancy between words and action, or if the resulting action is half-ass. Sorry.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Mark, was that you the live blog? I was wondering, but I didn’t think so. :-)

    Are you always that convoluted? I don’t recall previous incidences…:-)

    Ahhhhh, I thought I was just stupid.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    I find it totally incredulous that the same individual who represents himself as a learned human being could simultaneously appear like a very dim-witted thinker.

    wouldn’t you also agree?

    ?

  • Mark

    Cindy, I thought about entering a comment on Dave’s live blog but was concerned that it might negatively impact the spacy time continuum.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    lol…

    Some commenter remarked about the need for anarchy. Other than that he didn’t strike me as being much like you. But if you didn’t watch it, it was really just a free-for-all mud slinging fest. One poor commenter said he thought that this was to be a serious political discussion (I forget what he actually said, but this is the gist), not some asinine party with a bunch of immature idiots.

  • Mark

    link to image of that spacy time continuum for you nit pickers

  • Mark

    …I did watch it — my drinking rules were far more liberal

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    …like being transported back in time to what the sky looked like on lsd…

    So, it really does look like that? I knew I liked lsd for a reason.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Dave –

    A claim which every think tank from Heritage to Cato debunked this morning, pointing out scores of tax increases and how his “cuts” were merely restructuring which in some cases actually raised taxes – as usual mostly on working people.

    Provide proof, please…because my federal taxes haven’t gone up one cent.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Bye Ruvy,

    I’ll be back later to look for your response…my treadmill awaits…

    :] We’re all just hamsters now, aren’t we?

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    lol…it was a really fun excuse to drink. that is pretty much what I got out of the whole deal.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Hard to imagine somebody got something else out of that.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Dave –

    The best part of that was Alito mouthing “that’s not true” to the camera. And in fact it is NOT true and shows a gross ignorance of campaign law on Obama’s part or the part of whoever wrote his speech. The FEC already has rules entirely separate from McCain-Feingold which specifically block foreign corporations from donating to US campaigns and those restrictions were in no way struck down by this decision. Under those rules even if a foreign corporation had a US subsidiary only revenue generated by that subsidiary and kept in the US could be used to promote candidates in the US.

    The talking point you’re using is mere distraction, a false argument. The loophole Obama referred to had NOTHING to do with McCain-Feingold. He was not referring to a corporation’s ability to donate to a campaign fund. He WAS referring to a corporation’s ability to dump all the money they wanted to advertise for or against a candidate or a political issue during a campaign.

    And just like Obama pointed out, thanks to the extremely activist conservatives on the Supreme Court who have now overturned nearly a century of legislation and jurisprudence, FOREIGN corporations can now spend all they want in advertising for or against a candidate or political issue during a campaign.

  • Mark
  • Mark

    wrong link sorry — corrected

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    One might take issue with the first-mentioned item (link in #55) – massive spending package. A more interesting question would be: how exactly was this money distributed. If the main focus would be on rebuilding infrastructure, I’d see no problem with that. But it wasn’t.

  • Mark

    Over at the Heritage website I don’t find much reaction to the Tax Cut Claim that wasn’t canned before the speech was delivered.

  • doug m

    To whoever is keeping track of the tally, I find Arch Conservative’s annoying comments consistently idiotic.

  • doug m

    Roger, you seem to have become much more pessimistic since I first stumbled across the site. Hope things are all right

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Not really, doug – just coming to a realization that the system is broken. Otherwise, I’m doing relative fine, and I trust that my personal life doesn’t influence unduly my thinking on politics.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Mark –

    I check references when they’re given – IMO that’s why Dave’s gotten a bit more careful as time’s gone by, because there’s nothing more enjoyable on this blog than to use a conservative’s references to point out how the conservatives are wrong.

    Now, as to your reference:

    Its first point:

    At the outset of the economic downturn, Cato ran an ad in the nation’s largest newspapers in which more than 300 economists (Nobel laureates among them) signed a statement saying a massive government spending package was among the worst available options.

    That was in January 2009, just after Obama had inherited the worst economic crap sandwich since FDR took over from Hoover in March 1933. Remember how conservatives have always claimed that it was WWII that got us out of the Depression? To an extent, they’re RIGHT. But WHY are they right? Because what happens in a war? Vastly increased government spending…which is another way of saying, ‘stimulus’.

    And BTW, the Dow was in free fall when Obama took over. Where is the Dow now? Over 10,000…and the overall trend (not counting the past three days) has strongly pointed up. This is simply beyond question.

    The second point:

    “When the president says that he has ‘cut taxes’ for 95 percent of Americans, he fails to note that more than 40 percent of Americans pay no federal incomes taxes and the administration has simply increased subsidy checks to this group. Obama’s refundable tax credits are unearned subsidies, not tax cuts.”

    WRONG! The Cato Institute put out a false argument! Why? Because look at the tax cuts passed by the Obama Administration: “We cut taxes for small businesses. We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers. We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children. We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college.”

    So those forty percent of Americans who pay no federal income tax ALSO don’t have any small businesses (and yes, you can have a small business even in poverty), none of them bought any starter homes on the cheap, none of them have any children, and none of them went to college?

    Hm?

    Hey, but don’t let this stop you from claiming that Obama is evil, evil, EVIL!

    Third note:

    The president’s proposed spending freeze covers just 13 percent of the total federal budget, and indeed doesn’t limit the fastest growing components such as Medicare. A better idea is to cap growth in the entire federal budget including entitlement programs, which was essentially the idea behind the 1980s bipartisan Gramm-Rudman-Hollings law. The freeze also doesn’t cover the massive spending under the stimulus bill, most of which hasn’t occurred yet.

    Why? Because there are areas you CAN cut, and areas you CANNOT cut. Have we seen any conservatives come out to support a spending freeze for the military? No. Also, when it comes to freezing the stimulus bill, you don’t leave a job half done…and is the economy improving? Check out the next sentence in your reference:

    Now that the economy is returning to growth, the president should both freeze spending and rescind the remainder of the planned stimulus.

    Ah, even your reference admits that the economy’s returning to growth…and if the Cato Institute’s claim from last January had been true, that a massive stimulus was the very worst thing we could do, would the economy be growing at all?

    No.

    And the last point, on unemployment:

    Cato Policy Analyst Tad Dehaven: “Actually, the U.S. economy has lost 2.7 million jobs since the stimulus passed and 3.4 million total since Obama was elected.

    Of course your reference fails to note that from December 2007, to January 2009, the economy had lost 3.6 million jobs…1.8 million jobs just over the last three months ending in January 2009. Your reference strongly implies that hundreds of thousands of American workers lost their jobs because of Obama, but NOT because of the crap sandwich of an economy he inherited on January 20th, 2009.

    Yeah, we’re still losing jobs…but if you’ll look at the overall trend, the unemployment situation is FAR better than when Obama because if the trend holds true (as it likely will), we’ll have positive job growth this spring.

    Mark, you should learn to see BOTH sides of the story, and not just the one you want to believe.

  • Clavos the Impaler

    #61:

    Not. One. Link.

    Not. One. Source.

    None.

    But plenty of speculation and unfounded optimism…

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Jeannie,

    You always say that “Israel is not supported” and now you are saying that “Obama hates Jews.” Please show me the link for this last one, because I just don’t see it.

    Jeannie, I never said anything like either of those two statements. This is what I did say:

    “I supported Obama in 2008. He is an openly anti-Israel president, and that is precisely what Israelis need to teach them about the true nature of Jew-hatred (even by self-hating Jews) in the American government. My compatriots are waking up to the message and beginning to comprehend that the American government is no friend to Israel or to Jews.”

    The American government – the ruling élites who steal your money, your hope and your future – hates Jews. They were happy to see the Nazis do what they would have looked heinous doing – murdering off my people – and they did nothing to stop that murder.

    NOTHING.

    They Americans fought the Nazis because Hitler had declared war on the US, and if he weren’t defeated, he would win. But the liberation of the Jews (and others) from the Nazi death camps was not an issue of importance to the governing elites in America who rejected pleas by Jews all through 1944 to bomb concentration camps in central and eastern Europe. Liberating the death camps came with the territory of conquering Germany.

    That is why I reject any claim by any American that the Americans saved the Jews in WWII (something that zing always self-righteously claims). They did no such thing. They saved themselves. Those Jews who happened to live through the Nazi hell through April or May of 1945 survived on their own to the day of liberation.

    The American governing élites did not want to see a sovereign Jewish entity in the Middle East. They did everything they could to sandbag it: the refused to sell arms to the Haganá or Etzé”l; Truman tried to get Ben-Gurion to delay the declaration of a State in May 1948; the Americans refused to sell arms to the new State of Israel and the infant IDF in 1948; they threatened to withdraw their recognition from the new state in 1949 unless YitzHak Rabin withdrew from El-Arish in the Sinai; they pressured Israel not to attack in 1967 (and failed); they pressured Israel not to attack in 1973 (and succeeded); they welshed on their deal to re-supply weapons to the Israelis in the resulting war until Nixon (who was not part of that governing élite) forced Kissinger (who is) to live up to the deal made with Prime Minister Golda Meir. They screwed Israel over afterwards, forcing her to withdraw from territory she had conquered, and from territory in the Sinai and the Golan Heights that was hers by right of conquest.

    Now here’s the point, Jeannie. Obama openly represents this élite that hates Jews and Israel, an élite that governs America. McCain would not have openly represented this Jew-hating élite. Now it is plain as day for any Israeli to see that the élite that governs your nation hates Israel, and ultimately, hates Jews. All the so-called “Jews” in the Obama administration – every damned one of them – is a self hating Jew who hates what he or she is.

    And I could make that last assertion stand up in a court of law if it were to come to that. Every one of these JINO’s (Jews in name only) has left a paper trail as long as the Hudson showing what they think. That’s what “academics” do for a living – leave paper trails.

    I’ve written about this in detail elsewhere at Blogcritics Magazine and in my own blog, dear. Go check out my articles here and my blog-site, Ruvy’s Roost. And please leave comments there if you have them. I do not really desire to hijack this thread at all.

    shavua tov
    Have a good week!
    Ruvy

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    I wonder how many of you despise the manner in which Obama brushes his teeth or wipes his ass? Apparently, in your esteemed opinions, the man has absolutely no virtues, and is, in fact the very imbodiment of evil.

    Frankly, I loved watching Obama make mincemeat of the House Reps yesterday. To do as he did – walking into the veritable lions den by himself – takes balls that no other president has had. He made the Rep reps look peevish, mean spirited and, at times, just knuckle dragging stupid.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    He didn’t make mincemeat of out anyone – that’s an exaggeration, because the questions were too general for the format – but he definitely came across as knowledgeable and stately. If we could only maintain this kind of demeanor throughout the remainder of the term, it would be a great plus.

    Perhaps the most revealing thing about this encounter is the ill will on the part of the many Republicans and a kind of stasis which apparently pervades both political parties to the point that it’s difficult to get anything done. Thirty years ago the divisions weren’t quite as pronounced to prevented any meaningful and concerted action, but those days apparently are gone.

    Here is a good link to the event, BTW, courtesy of Jeannie Dana. It covers the event in full.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Glenn,

    Enjoy reading.

    Have a good week….

  • Mark

    Actually, Glen #61, the only point that I was trying to assess was Dave’s statement concerning think tanks from Cato to Heritage immediately responding to Obama’s Tax Cut Situation. I have little interest in the facts of the tax cut statement which I am sure can be twisted whatever way you please.

    As for your argument about the marvelous work Obama has done with this recession, it also is an irrelevancy in my book. My objection is to a system based on necessary periodic contractions which heap suffering on poor folk. Obama is a major figurehead for this system; I expect no change from him.

    You are a political partisan. I don’t give a flying fuck whether ‘conservatives’ or ‘liberals’ rule the government roost as neither will address the underlying problems; you and I don’t have much to talk about.

    ps Obama is Hitler.

  • Mark

    gak…Glenn

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    Well, actually the Reps made mincemeat of themselves. I watched the whole thing. There really were few legitimate questions. Virtually everyone who stood up went on ad nauseam with talking points and accusations. All Obama had to do was point that out.

    How any of you can persist in the notion that Obama has been an abysmal failure is simply absurd. Considering all, the jury shouldn’t even be in deliberation at this point. I still contend that no other individual, and, more importantly, no other tactics would have put us in any better shape today than we are. Essentially, all the Republicans have had to offer are more tax cuts, which given the deficits that you are all so rabid about, would have been even more disastrous.

    It is largely due to Republican backed deregulation (which, amazingly, they still support) that sent the economy to circling the toilet. Pretty much all that was possible for Obama to do was plug the drain as quickly as possible. Some of it may have been a knee jerk response, but there was little time for reflection.

    The fact is that the economy IS growing, that jobs ARE being created. A number of small businesses ARE hiring or contemplating the hiring of new employees.

    All of you Obama haters and naysayers are being far more peevish, far more whiney and far more cynical than ANY of us Bush despisers ever were.

    I’m not happy about some of the things Obama has or has not done to date, but what president has EVER pleased everyone – even amongst his supporters. I think the left wing of the party has some legitimate gripes, as do others. But all presidents, and Obama perhaps more than most, have been obliged to walk precariously upon a thin wire in the attempt to perform the duties of the office while also being forced to play politics with and for their constituents, their party, and ultimately for themselves to survive.

    I am no Pollyanna, but neither am I a subscriber to the broad and hopeless skepticism that most of you apparently have decided is cool. You are little better, and display little more intelligence than playground bullies.

    And a note to Dave. I found nothing wrong with Obama’s calling out the SCOTUS during his speech. Each branch of government has not only a right, but a duty to respond to the others. What more perfect opportunity than at the State of the Union address with all parties in attendance? Conservatives have long been openly and loudly critical of so called “activist” courts. If the recent SCOTUS decision is not “activist” I don’t know what the hell is.

    B

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “My objection is to a system based on necessary periodic contractions which heap suffering on poor folk.”

    Correct. And those periodic contractions appear to be the unavoidable consequences of the system which is not being challenged.

    One might wonder why. Is it because we’re experiencing unexplainable downshifts in demand for goods and services worldwide?

    That’s a rather far-fetched proposition considering not only the steady growth of the world’s population but also the continuation of poverty.

    Hence, if we can’t lay the blame on diminishing demand, the causes have to do with either overproduction of certain goods and services (which amounts to economic waste) and/or speculation activity – you take your pick – I’d say both.

    Speculation, of course, comes down to “take the money and run” mentality and is inseparable from it.

    Have I missed anything?

  • Mark

    Rog, diminished ‘demand’ simply means a drop in purchasing power relative to production and can exist in the face of increasing want.

    The situation gets desperate when its labor (ie little boys and girls) that has been overproduced.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Right, you’re using it as an economic rather than “real-life” concept, but still you can’t escape the paradox.

    To wit, it there exist a “real” demand for certain goods and services, production capacity should never wane. And in light of that, drop in purchasing power, however it comes about, comes close to “cutting your nose to spite your face”: it’s counter-productive, indicative perhaps of the system’s internal inconsistency.

    There seems to be a connection here to Marx’s theory of surplus value.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Baritone,

    These people are blinded by either greed or fear, and I have a feeling that there is a lot more of the latter.

    This is like arguing with the last buggy whip salesmen who could not see the benefits of the automobile…dinosaurs

    :] see ya later

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I’m gripped by neither, Jeannie. And Mark is even more fearless than I – ready to go where no man had gone before.

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    No, I don’t think it’s either greed or fear. Well, I suppose we all are subject to fear at some level, even Roger, despite his protestations to the contrary.

    I think much of their rhetoric is, as I suggested above, born of cynicism. I think we should be cynical to a point. Many people lie behind a smile and a handshake.

    I don’t, nor did I ever believe that Barack Obama was or is our deliverance. However, I look upon him as a source of some change. Not wholesale change. Not dramatic change, but change nonetheless, and for the better. It is likely to be incremental.

    The nihilists who spread their messages of gloom and doom amongst these pages, if you will, feel – honestly, I believe – that pretty much all is lost. That this country of ours is, in a word, doomed. That the only means of saving it is to bring it down.

    It is they who are naive. They believe their cynicism renders them superior and makes them wise. They are naive to believe that great changes can come somehow peacefully, or even relatively so. Or if not naive, then they are romantics who have watched far too many doomsday movies and/or played too many such video games, and who fancy themselves as the invincible hero in some dark soul blasting hell war.

    In this, naivete once again rears its head, as they believe that such a purge would have the effect of some magical cleansing that would perhaps leave the world at the mercy of their wisened hands that will bring about peace and prosperity for all in a capitalist utopia.

    Well, that’s a load of crap. Wake up and smell the manure that emanates from your minds, down through your fingers and on to BC. You are the very soul of the worst of the conspiracy theorists who see bogeymen around every corner and behind every piller and post, and the source of a lot of negative energy that serves no useful purpose other than to massage your own egos. Enough!

  • pablo

    Baritone,

    [Edited] I guess you did not like the suggestions over on the other Obama article with my suggestions. Nice reply! I know, I know the things that I was suggesting were so damned radical.

    [Edited] I prefer the naked truth, which you just cannot abide. That truth is actually very simple. We have a secret government that is totalitarian in nature. The Bilderberg group is real and they choose the president not you. JFK was killed in a coup, what we have is the facade of a republic

  • pablo

    [edited]

    Hey John Lake how is your tongue doing man?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Wow, that’s quite an indictment, B-man. My only question is – who is the intended object?

    I, for one, don’t feel especially affiliated with any particular group of thinkers here on BC, whether they’re for Obama or against, be they flaming liberals or rabid conservatives. If anything, Cindy and Mark come closest, perhaps, to approximating my own thinking, but even so, there are too many significant differences to lump us together, converging as we may be.

    Is it nihilistic or necessarily romantic to have come to a conviction that the present political system is broken? And what’s so nihilistic or romantic in trying, under the circumstances, to be thinking outside the box? I think it behooves all of us to be constantly engaged both emotionally and intellectually with what we perceive as social and/or political problems which face us as individuals and as members of a society? Isn’t that the obligation of every thinking person? Why must we always subscribe to old categories of political or economic thought if we happen to think these categories are becoming unworkable? And where is the ego trip you’re talking about?

    What has ego got to do with thought processes, with groping and with thinking and with trying to understand?

    You may have to excuse my bad form for intercepting this public message and making it personal. My only excuse is that I’m being mentioned in the opening paragraph.

    There’s a deeper-seated reason of course, which is to establish communication. Which is why I’ve gone through pains to turn what is essentially a public notice/announcement/communique/edict on the wall/etcetera and etcetera into a form of address, by assuming the role of the addressee.

  • Jordan Richardson

    What has ego got to do with thought processes, with groping and with thinking and with trying to understand?

    Ego has everything to do with thought processes. You should know that, Roger.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Jordan,

    I wasn’t discussing elementary psychology, and neither was Baritone.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Anyways, it’s getting late in KY. I’ll catch some of Alex Jones on George Noory so I can be up-to-date on Pablo. Manana, everybody.

  • pablo

    Dread,

    Several items of note:

    In case you haven’t heard Osama bin Laden has come out green! That’s right apparently he has come out firmly on the side of the warmer mongers. Will wonders never cease.
    Osama is not as conclusively phony as is Al-Ciada.

    From Bloomberg yesterday:

    “Jan. 29 (Bloomberg) — The idea of secret banking cabals that control the country and global economy are a given among conspiracy theorists who stockpile ammo, bottled water and peanut butter. After this week’s congressional hearing into the bailout of American International Group Inc., you have to wonder if those folks are crazy after all.”

    From Jim Cramer CNBC yesterday, after claiming undying love and admiration for Geitner and Bernanke, 3 minutes into his adoration, he said that the Bavarian Illuminati, Trilateral Commission, Goldman Sachs and Queen of England are not all bad!

    You just can’t make this shit up dude. And this just in from Climategate, The University of East Anglia broke the law on FOIA.

    It has been another busy day for the New World Order. :)

    No links provided folks, look them up yourself!

  • pablo

    I forgot the Bloomberg headline:

    “Secret Banking Cabal Emerges From AIG Shadows: David Reilly”

  • zingzing

    hey pablo, i heard the ocean isn’t wet. someone told me. and they told me on THE INTERNET. you should investigate.

  • pablo

    You are cute as usual Zing.

  • pablo

    Hey Zing,

    Do you think Pachauri will be out of a job soon? Oh I am sorry, you probably do not know who that is. Try google.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Zing,

    if someone issecretly controlling the world, they’re pretty bad at it. but that’s what plays into your delusions. can’t you see your theories eat and self-perpetuate themselves? get a damn grip.

    This was such a good statement that I thought it should be repeated.

    :/ So, these are some of the wackjobs who post, and here I thought that I had …issues.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    You know, I would like to ask Mr. Lake why there are not more political articles of any view, opposing or not, published in this section of BC.

    But I know the answer to this question already.

    And they post such vile acidic poison in these threads, that it is little wonder no one will write for them.

    SO

    It is no great surprise anymore, that these people are sooo hungry for any kind of banter, that they will engage at this level of intensity with me.

    :[ A mere nobody on the political stage…sad

  • John Lake

    Thank you so much Pablo for your concern.
    [personal attack deleted]
    Ruvi who occasionally comes up with something substantial and relevant shouldn’t suggest (in his usual groove) that Obama is anti-Semitic. The President isn’t. President Obama comes, as do many of his advisers, from Chicago (my home town) ( Da North Side!)and I happen to know that although sympathetic with the Islamic world (about time somebody was) he is clearly NOT an anti-Semite!

  • http://www.indyboomer46.blogspot.com Baritone

    Roger,

    I’ll respond to you a bit later. I got bidnes.

    B

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    John,

    Please keep writing articles here, and I promise you that I will read them like an adult.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    No problem, B-man. And forgive me for having been too polemical than I ought to have. I do believe we can have a conversation.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    John, Baritone,

    Do me a favor and read comment #63 carefully. And go to the links provided if you feel you need back-up on my charges. I never said, and never have said that Obama is anti-Semitic. Anti-Semitic is a term I do not use.

    However the governing élites in your country are anti-Israel and anti-Jewish. By the way, the correct term is not “anti-Semitic”: the correct term, directly from the German, is Jew-hatred – judenhass.

    Unpleasant as that truth may be to you, and unacceptable as that reality may be to you, that is the truth, and that is the ugly reality. It doesn’t matter to me if you like that or accept it. That isn’t my problem. And frankly, I would be terribly surprised if either of you could (or would be willing to) comprehend the judenhass that resides in the governing élites in America. This same Jew-hatred infests a large part of the British aristocracy as well.

    Mind you, I throw no accusations at either of you personally. Neither of you strikes me as being part of any governing élite. But having studied this in rather close detail over several decades, I know whereof I speak.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Ruvy,

    Hello, the original response was to #33, and my words whether soft or hard get muddled up by many people here, don’t they?

    truce?

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Ruvy –

    Thanks – I just learned a new word: judenhass. That does seem to be a more apropos word (as opposed to “anti-semitism”) for the attitudes of many.

    That said, here’s a truism I’m sure you’ll disagree with: the more one hates, the more one sees hatred in others. Conversely, the less one hates, the less one sees hatred in others.

    I’m not trying to restart the ‘forgiveness’ debate you and I once had, and I’m not going to tell you to go sing “Kumbayah” with the Islamists (you know I’ve defended Israel’s defensive posture, too)…but if you began hating less, you’d stop seeing judenhass around every corner. That, and you’re more likely to live longer, too – less heartache, more time with the grandkids, and more time to make a positive difference in the world.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    Glenn,

    That said, here’s a truism I’m sure you’ll disagree with: the more one hates, the more one sees hatred in others. Conversely, the less one hates, the less one sees hatred in others.

    Please don’t assume you know how much I hate or do not hate – or why. But more to the point, please don’t assume that I’ll disagree with you. For all I know, you may be right. No one ever said that to me before. So, it is something worth mulling over.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Ruvy –

    Then please accept my sincere apology for my assumption – I should not have done that…and now that I think about it, the more I’m sure I did assume wrongly of you.

    And the very fact that you responded calmly and thoughtfully tells me quite a bit that I should have already known. Thanks -

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    All I meant can be summed up in these philosophical bits of wisdom, for beginners to the subject, that I got from children of the female variety. I hope they are not too technical for you to comprehend. Here goes:

    Girlz go to college to get more knowledge. Boyz go to Jupiter to get more stupider.

    Or in it’s shortest version:

    Girlz rule, boyz drool.

    And sorry bud, but if you down and see what I bet you’ll see, you won have to go anywhere, cuz you are already there.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    So why didn’t you say that in the first place, for Chrissake?

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    lol :-)

    (If Irene is still here, I am sure she will be by to back me up on that!)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Just what I thought, women power.

  • http://mizbviewsfromthetower.blogspot.com Jeanne Browne

    John Lake: Excellent article and assessment of the president and his speech. I’ve been feeling discouraged about Pres. Obama, largely because of the health care debacle, the Afghanistan War and his still-not-Left-enough-for-me approach to things, but this speech inspired me to trust his instincts to balance substance and politics, even if I still don’t agree with all his actions.

    I also thought his session with the Republicans was courageous and beautifully executed.

    And Baritone (#64) — As always, good to read your intelligence, common sense and good manners. I still find it very difficult to handle the hatefulness, rudeness, personal off-topic blather, and general stupidity reflected in so many of the political comments on this site. Clearly, many folks didn’t (and won’t) take the president’s message about civility to heart.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    At a time when American and world politics are so exciting and volatile, this place ought to be bursting at the seams with fresh articles and comments from many people of all political persuasions, but it’s not.

    Instead it is so decidedly stilted and cramped in here that I swear you can hear the whisker fall off of a cat.

    So

    If I am allowed to make one suggestion this morning, it will be to open up the windows and doors and let some fresh air and sunlight in.

    I ask you

    “Why are there only two editors here that continually force their personal politics on all who dare enter?”

    Because this is the way I see it

    When one little voice of opposition of any sort shows up here to comment or post an article, it is then met with the quick and heavy hand of the “I” or the crass snide cutting insults of the “N”.”

    All who enter should be met with respect, at least by the people who work here.

    “This is what being fair and balanced really means.”

    : Dare I speak?

  • Mark

    So, I nominate jeannie, our new number six, for censor. We’d achieve ‘fair and balanced’ fer sure.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    I rest my case here, but I would appreciate an unemotional and polite answer.

    :| When your ready.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Mark?

    Satire?

  • Mark

    yes, jeannie, with a tablespoon of sarcasm.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Mark,

    Why is this not OK to ask.

  • Clavos the Impaler

    “Why are there only two editors here that continually force their personal politics on all who dare enter?”

    Well, I suppose we could have more, but at the moment, there are only two Politics editors, and most of the other section editors only come over to comment on Politics threads on a sporadic basis. No one — editor, writer or commenter — is ever turned away, and very few have ever been banned — none by a Politics editor, it’s not our job.

    All who enter should be met with respect, at least by the people who work here.

    Disagreement is the very essence of politics. It is why we have two parties and other democratic nations have even more.

    Disagreement is not disrespect. Most folks commenting on these threads understand that.

    “This is what being fair and balanced really means.”

    The Politics editors probably understand this better than anyone.Where it counts, in the editing process, both of us scrupulously maintain complete neutrality. This has been publicly acknowledged, and even commended, by a number of writers on a number of occasions.

  • Mark

    jeannie, asking is ‘not a problem’ as they say in China; my issue is with the perseveration. iirc, the last time you went off on this tack, it ended with sails in the water.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Clavos, sorry, I meant Clavos the Impaler,

    The way you present your name tells it all to me and it is my opinion that your political stance colours the way you interact with everyone here.

    I can see the difference when you like someone and when you don’t.

    You absolutely despise my politics and tell me every day. in between the lines.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    But Jeannie,

    By the same token, you seem to despise the politics of such as Archie, Andy and the Refounding Father. So where is the difference?

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    I don’t want to keep bringing all of this god awful negative energy into my soul. it might follow me into my grave…

    But someone has to stand up, once in a blue moon that isn’t a politician or a college graduate, and say “ENOUGH.”

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    No Roger,

    That’s where you are really mistaken. I am trying to learn from all of you.

    Even when I seem like the biggest bitch here.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    So Roger,

    Why haven’t you or Glenn or Mark applied for a position here as an editor from another perspective?

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy
  • Glenn Contrarian

    Jeannie –

    Clavos and I disagree on most things – but I remember how he (and Dave, but IIRC it was mostly Clavos) accepted a strongly anti-conservative article I’d written at about two in the morning. Later that morning I woke up and checked the article and saw I’d made a truckload of mistakes, to the point that I was actually ashamed of the article. What made things worse is that the article had already been accepted – I could no longer correct my mistakes!

    I waited with trepidation for my article to get published, for I was absolutely sure that Dave and Clavos would publish my article with all the mistakes therein…for if they had, it would’ve certainly hurt my credibility – one less strong liberal for them to have to deal with, right?

    But when the article appeared, I was very pleasantly surprised. Clavos had not only edited out all the mistakes, but had improved the wording of my article to the point that it made my points more strongly than when I’d written it in the first place. I thanked him and joked about how he had to be gagging when he was editing my article…but I was also deeply impressed at his professionalism.

    So while I’ll argue with Clavos and Dave and go toe-to-toe and hammer-and-tongs with them on political matters, as editors they’ve earned my respect.

    So please cut Clavos some slack – he know his duty and he does it well.

  • Clavos the Impaler

    Glenn,

    I had prepared yet another comment in reply to Jeannie, but you’ve made the need for it superfluous.

    Thank you.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Clavos,

    I want to read your response.

  • Mark

    #119, in my case, it’s because I’d need an editor to edit my editing.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    And mine, except for this little off-the-cuff remark.

    Don’t let education stand in the way, Jeannie. In all likelihood, I’m better educated than most of yous, but that doesn’t make me the smartest.

    So there!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    #125 refers to #122. But if Mark is humble enough to admit he needs editing. where does that put me?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    It looks like we all need lessons from Nick Baggage, Archie’s new idol.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger, #125,

    So there? what are you getting huffy about?

    chill, please.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Sometimes I’m just like a gorilla, Jeannie, can’t help pounding on my chest.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Clavos,

    I seem to be in the middle of a maelstrom here, as usual.

    I ask for your response to my question, “Why do you act this forceful towards anyone you disagree with?” I know I come off this way, but I don’t work here.

  • Clavos the Impaler

    OK, Jeannie.

    I said that, except for those, such as the president or congress, who are in a position to actually implement their politics, i don’t despise your or anyone else’s political ideas.

    I also said (having to reconstruct here, as I deleted it after I saw Glenn’s comment) that there is a difference between the comments threads and my editing function and I know beyond any doubt that I respect and observe the difference.

    The rest of my response pretty much covered the same general point that Glenn did.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    I’ll be back later, if I’m not banned.

  • Clavos the Impaler

    Jeannie,

    As to the “forceful” question…

    I don’t have an answer, other than that’s my personality. You’ve seen my FB page — I don’t pull my punches there, either.

  • Clavos the Impaler

    Note to Mark and Roger:

    All of us need editing.

    That’s why BC policy does not allow editors to self-publish.

  • http://thingsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Nick Baggage?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Play on words. Believe it or not, there was a radio personality so named, but for the life of me, the google search shows nothing.

  • Zedd

    After the immense test of our endurance and generosity that we suffered under Bush, how fickle can you guys be? Compared to the bizarreness of the past administration and the disaster that it created on so many levels, not to mention the icky, almost unbearable, cringe-some nature of those State of Union addresses… wwwwwwhat? Something is terribly wrong. There is definitely a twilight zone component to what I’m reading.

    Who could do a better job? How would it be done, with this Congress and this electorate? Are you serious? You’ve got a population of Birthers; folks who care about pit bulls and lipstick, a Congress that is in a fog and is partially stuck in the 60’s and 70’s and is at best, marginally clued in; an opposition party that is stuck on useless rhetoric and believe that espousing rhetoric is the solution (impossible ideas, those that have never been implemented in the history of human civilization)

    The speech addressed what it needed to address. Our economy (spending and jobs), civility in discourse (because it’s tearing the nation apart), responsibility of legislators to WORK(no need to add commentary to that) and health care.

    What would you propose he do under our current circumstances? Let’s move away from our fantasy presidency. But with the state of affairs as they are, what should he do?

    I understand Reps putting the speech down. They live in fantasyland (a utopia where business is always good and their generosity trickles down to the common man and he becomes wealthy simply by making an effort. Where government is only slightly necessary and the bible is taught in schools yet every one’s liberty is protected). They’ll never (in their current state) understand pragmatic solutions. But some of you guys have obviously lost your minds too.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Here he is, Cindy, Nick Begich in person:

    Dr. Nick Begich serves as Executive Director of The Lay Institute on Technology, Inc., a Texas non-profit corporation. He is also the publisher and co-owner of Earthpulse Press Incorporated, an Alaska based organization. Dr. Begich is the eldest son of the late United States Congressman from Alaska, Nick Begich Sr., and political activist Pegge Begich. He is well known in Alaska for his own political activities. He was twice elected President of both the Alaska Federation of Teachers and the Anchorage Council of Education. He has been pursuing independent research in the sciences and politics for most of his adult life.

    Begich received his doctorate in traditional medicine from The Open International University for Complementary Medicines in November 1994.He co-authored with Jeane Manning the book Angels Don’t Play This HAARP; Advances in Tesla Technology. Begich has also authored Earth Rising I & II, both with the late James Roderick. He has published articles in science, politics and education and is a well known lecturer, having presented throughout the United States and in nineteen countries. He has been featured as a guest on thousands of radio broadcasts reporting on his research activities including new technologies, health and earth science related issues. He has also appeared on dozens of television documentaries and other programs throughout the world including BBC-TV, CBC-TV, and TeleMundo.

  • Clavos the Impaler

    I’ll have some of what Zedd is consuming.

    Her hallucinogenic view of America and the world can only have been induced by some very fun substances.

  • Zedd

    Clavos,

    I asked some basic questions, just answer them and quit with the cornball jabs.

    BTW I missed seeing your posts where were you?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Zedd,

    You’ve just proved my point.

    Either the system is broken so that even Obama, with all the leadership skills, abilities and good will you’re attributing to him can’t get us out of our morass. The alternative is – if the system ain’t broken, then perhaps his first year in office was not quite as brilliant as you’d like to believe.

    So take your pick now.

  • Zedd

    Roger,

    What I am curious to find out is which of the two alternatives that you’ve offered, do you believe to be true?

  • Zedd

    Roger,

    I think I’ve taken my pick. It’s a nearly impossible situation. HOWEVER, this particular person has done a good job handling this impossible task. Especially doing it without smoke and mirrors.

    Somehow I think the American public wants to be played with. We are looking for someone who will distort reality for us, postpone the ugly and tell us that we will have everything that we want just because we are America. Instead what we have is someone who says, “if you want change, YOU have to change”. Not fun.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, in that case we’re doomed unless we start thinking in terms of the most drastic solutions.

    But as I’ve always argued, change will come about irrespective of human agency or, to put it more succinctly perhaps, in spite of it.

  • Zedd

    You are correct Roger. What about good change Roger? I want good change not just any change.

    Bush provided a good irritant to cause people to want to move forward. However, because we are so fickle, we have forgotten just how ridiculous things were just a year ago and that the woes that we are experiencing right now were caused by our lack luster response to our own lives; allowing imbeciles to run our affairs.

    Do we need more tragedy and destabilization before we move towards positive change?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I think the latter is unavoidable – like going through birth pains. The old must die before the new can live. It’s been always like that.

    But yes, we do forget quickly.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    #142 –

    Yes, the situation is impossible, or so it would seem at present. But not for long.

    We’re just as much affected by our internal politics as by larger, global-political trends. Eventually, the scale will tilt and we’ll become absorbed by world-related concerns. It’s only a matter of time.

  • Zedd

    I’m afraid the global community is just as addicted to our delusion as we are.

    The world needs a place where everything is possible, even if it doesn’t exist. America represents hope to the world. They will continue to allow us to lie to ourselves and them as long as possible because we all want for there to be a Utopia, Shangri-La, Heaven, Nirvana, to exist.

    I am afraid, that the type of change that we are looking for will be a long time coming. It will come, however, gradually, almost undetected. I’m guessing from the developing world. It will have to come from a culture that is not as indoctrinated with the ideals that we have and is naive enough to find new approaches. – Just a thought.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Yes, but we’re entering the age if disenchantment and ourselves are about to shed those ideals.

  • Mark

    Don’t know, Zedd. Gradualism doesn’t match up with my experience of change, generally, which has been dramatic through-out my lifetime. I don’t see why ‘the type of change that we are looking for’ should necessarily be slow in developing.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    It will come as convulsions and seizures, and with plenty of vomit.

  • Clavos the Impaler

    This is apropos of absolutely nothing that has been discussed on this thread, but it is very funny, so I can’t resist posting it.

    It’s from an article by Mark Steyn, published in The Washington Times, and titled “Talking the Talk:”

    In Britain, a research team at King’s College, London, has declared that the female “G-spot” doesn’t exist.

    In France, a group of top gynecologists dismissed the findings, asking, “What do you expect if you ask Englishmen to find a woman’s erogenous zone?”

    Carry on…

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    LOL…

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    lmao!!!!! That is hilarious!

  • Mark

    …wonder how the Italians will respond

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    It’s reason enough to break up the EU.

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    lol one of us appears to have had a little too much wine last night…

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    It wasn’t me. I’m still waiting for my check.

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    roflol!!!!

    (Really though I only mostly experienced ‘the approach’. I went on about 10 tours of the city, during which I grilled my victims…er, suitors, about sex rather than participated–I have a curious inner sociologist.)

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Amidst the fun banter on the thread, there is something of serious concern happening “diplomatically” — that is the latest skirmish between the U.S. and China. Several weeks ago I talked about Nixon Ping-Pong diplomacy and how the events of today hearken right back to the Kissinger policies on China.

    First of all, WHY are we selling arms to Taiwan? Isn’t our involvement there akin to having the EU make a deal with Texas? What if Germany entered into an arms agreement with Rick Perry’s Texas National Guard? Sound far fetched? Well, that’s basically what we’re doing with Taiwan. There’s much brewing in that part of the world and in our preoccupation with everything Holy Land, we’re watching Sino-American relations disintegrate rapidly.

    It seems to me that history is about to repeat itself. China’s livable acreage is shrinking at alarming rates. Barring a natural disaster of epic proportions, China is going to have to implement a colonization program like that instituted by European nations in the 17th century. So, keep on consuming petroleum, buying cheap products and allowing your mortgages to be purchased by Chinese financial institutions. We’re at their mercy. When they foreclose, it will be the rest of us who hold the empty bag. And, as history has taught in the last 100 years, it is usually a Democrat President that leads us into war. Think about it.

  • Mark

    Silas, look on the bright side; we need a period of conspicuous consumption of labor and commodities in general to get capital back on track.

  • Clavos the Impaler

    Silas, am I missing somethin in your analysis? I don’t get your comparison of Taiwan to Texas. The former is a sovereign nation, while the latter only has pretensions to being one.

    Seriously, where’s the parallel?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Any suggestions as to how to make the Sino-American relationship more equitable?

  • Mark

    Turn the regulation of business in the US over to the mob.

    oh wait…

  • Ruvy

    First of all, WHY are we selling arms to Taiwan?

    Silas, I would suggest to you that this is Obama’s rather feeble way of protesting the Chinese attitudes on “sanctions”, whatever they are supposed to mean, on Iran.

    I say feeble, because you are right to remind Americans who it is who really owns their mortgages. And, as you say, when the Chinese foreclose, you will be holding the empty bag.

    A Chinese journalist once told me “we Chinese are very interested in cash.” I believe him.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    You meant the Tongs?

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    A Chinese journalist once told me “we Chinese are very interested in cash.” I believe him.

    I would have believed him too.

    I would also have believed him if he’d said, “We Chinese have two arms, two legs and a belly button each and live in China.”

  • Mark

    conglomerates

  • Zedd

    Doc??? cricket, cricket, cricket….

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    How do you stop a zoo full of chest-thumping gorillas?

    Oh, more good news. It seems the entire US Navy is hooked up to the internet such that China only has to launch the right cyber attack (something that they have apparently been doing for years) to disable the entire Navy. Gov’ts are insane. I really don’t understand how people don’t wince at missiles as part of life.

  • Zedd

    Clavos,

    @158.. I understand, you meant the later. I think the Taiwanese would take offense to being referred to as posers.

  • Mark

    I thought a Chinese company owns the Navy.

  • Zedd

    Roger, Mark,

    Change is always gradual, it’s just that the party that is being asked to change doesn’t realize it’s taking place until there is a mob at their door step.

    Even in divorce, there is always one party who didn’t realize that things were so bad and another who has been stewing for years. :o)

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Correction, not the internet, but a network:

    “We have designed our navy so that it can’t operate without being connected to the network,” says Mulvenon. “It’s a vulnerability that we built in to our own system.” And China has figured this out. A senior US Navy officer put it dramatically: ”A successful attack on our systems, and our fleet is a useless pile of junk.”

    Sounds like something a minor character in a bad novel could have figured out.

    “This new set of intrusions is aimed at the heart of the US innovation industry,” says Mulvenon. “It’s a campaign to systematically transfer the intellectual property of the West to China. The goal is for Chinese companies to replace these companies in China, and then to challenge them globally.

    Ah, Capitalism, more thrilling than any amusement park.

    Are you people sure you want to go with this system?

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    I thought a Chinese company owns the Navy.

    lmao!

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    Cindy,

    Would this be of any use?

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Besides, Capitalism requires constant growth and some say that that is not a plausible way of sustaining the earth.

    Economic Growth Cannot Continue

    Continuing global economic growth “is not possible” if nations are to tackle climate change, a report by an environmental think-tank has warned.

    So, looks like Capitalism is not in the cards for the long haul. Why not shift your thinking now and be ahead of the ball?

  • Zedd

    Roger,

    “Yes, but we’re entering the age if disenchantment and ourselves are about to shed those ideals.”

    Yes you may be right. The problem I see (even now) is that we don’t have anything to replace them with. In this culture, we have been bombarded with cliches, persona, and manufactured positions (roles if you will) that I don’t see us actually being genuine enough to the point of becoming different. We will play environmentalist or peace lover. It will be like a trend or a thing to do. We’ll even dress like what we imagine them to look like. It will be great theatre but nothing of substance. That’s how we role :o)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Cindy,

    Could you refer Zedd to some of the sites which deal with alternative approaches? You have more experience with that than I do.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    #169 – I like your analogy, Zedd. Someone’s always getting caught with their pants down. Come to think of it, it’s Mr. Ecco’s idea too

    For example, the storming of the Bastille was but an icing on the cake.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Clavos,

    Thanks for answering me directly.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Alright!

    I never know from one comment to the next if I’ll even be allowed to post here anymore.

    :]

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Of course you can post, Jeannie. What has changed?

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger,

    I’ve been down that road before and it hurts.:(

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Plus what would you post?

    ha ha, just kiddin.

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Zedd,

    There are plenty of people who want to try something new and who are exploring ways to do that. There are all kinds of ideas and people doing all kind of things. Just go on my blog and there is a list of sites in the right margin. On facebook there are thousands of people and on Twitter etc. Social networks allow you to find and interact with interested people. I talk to great people every day. There is always someone there and a steady stream of new information and ideas. You should follow me if you are on facebook (which you can also do from my blog).

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger,

    I actually believe this might be real.

    It would explain many things about this country.

    :0

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Hi Cindy,

    :}I saw your post earlier…thanks

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Dr.D,

    That is funny. I will keep that site handy, just in case as I don’t happen to live nearby any dolphins.

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    (hiya Jeannie) 8-}

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I hope not, Jeanie (#183), but Pablo would surely believe it.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Besides, Capitalism requires constant growth and some say that that is not a plausible way of sustaining the earth.

    Where did you get the idea that capitalism requires constant growth? Constant growth is required only by the growth of population. If population did not grow then capitalist systems would establish an equilibrium between supply and demand. Contrary to the delusions of the left, capitalism itself is not a ponzi scheme, though some companies choose to operate that way.

    Dave

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger,

    I’ll be submitting a new article soon.

    What the heck, it can only get rejected until it’s readable, and I think you can all read me now.

    :] bye

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    And since we’re on the subject of escaping Mother Earth in case of an impending calamity, how about that little nostalgic trip with Dr. Strangelove.

    If this won’t bring us back to sanity, nothing will.

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Dave,

    Look at the world and tell me that with a straight face. look what has happened in the last 250 years. Capitalism has used up the earth. Well unless we become resistant to mercury, lead, and radioactive shit.

    though some companies choose to operate that way.

    You mean like all the public corps and….um, all the ones that aren’t public? Oh, I see your point then.

    If my company does not grow (and I know this, because it doesn’t) I cannot afford to pay the rent and for materials and salaries which keep increasing all the time. A few years back when I took over, I had to lay people off, give back space, and negotiate a lower rent than we previously had. This is because my company can’t grow. (There is no one left who knows how to do that part.) No growth meant that I had to make it smaller just to stay abreast of the rising costs.

    Dave, your business was handed to you, wasn’t it? Do you know anything about business Dave? What do you do there, draw fonts? Baronius is waiting for you to go take your foot out of your mouth on your other article where you make another wild claim about how businesses operate. You always avoid me when I catch you making some giant blunder.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Re #188,

    But the population does grow; in addition, there’s still a matter of bringing most of the world’s population to the kind of living standard we are (used to be, is a better word)accustomed here. So, there’s definitely plenty of things capitalism could still do – if it only would or could.

  • Clavos the Impaler

    Continuing global economic growth “is not possible” if nations are to tackle climate change, a report by an environmental think-tank has warned.

    So, looks like Capitalism is not in the cards for the long haul

    Maybe. Maybe not.

    Roger makes an excellent point about the desireability (necessity, really) of bringing up the living standard of the Second and Third Worlds.

    Only robust capitalist societies can do that, they’re the only ones (so far) that actually create wealth.

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    I don’t get your comparison of Taiwan to Texas.

    OK, Texas was a sovereign nation and will return to that status. So scratch Texas and replace it with Nebraska. Bottom line is we are owned lock, stock and Chinese rifle barrel. The time has arrived for us to pay the piper. There’s lots of rice and water chestnuts in our future and we only have ourselves to blame.

    Hide the cats, folks. Life is about to change as we know it.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Roger –

    You mentioned Dr. Strangelove – I watched it yesterday or the day before…and guess who was in the credits? Glen Beck! But with only one ‘n’….

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Are you kidding? How come?

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Look at the world and tell me that with a straight face. look what has happened in the last 250 years. Capitalism has used up the earth. Well unless we become resistant to mercury, lead, and radioactive shit.

    Cindy, Capitalism and Greed are not actually synonyms. Do you think that autocratic command and control economies wouldn’t have — didn’t — do as much or more harm? Too much concentration of power in too few hands is ALWAYS destructive, regardless of the economic system which is in play. The key difference is Capitalism is at least an open system where entire classes are not forcibly denied any opportunity to benefit from it.

    though some companies choose to operate that way.

    You mean like all the public corps and….um, all the ones that aren’t public? Oh, I see your point then.

    No, not at all. There are cooperatives like REI which are very successful in a capitalist environment and corporations like Whole Foods which operate in a very positive and responsible way. Some even go overboard in being good corporate citizens, like Google does.

    If my company does not grow (and I know this, because it doesn’t) I cannot afford to pay the rent and for materials and salaries which keep increasing all the time. A few years back when I took over, I had to lay people off, give back space, and negotiate a lower rent than we previously had. This is because my company can’t grow. (There is no one left who knows how to do that part.) No growth meant that I had to make it smaller just to stay abreast of the rising costs.

    I find it improbable that there is no way for your company to grow, or at least grow its gross profits. If your overhead goes up then you should pass those cost increases on to your customers. What kind of business shuts down because of general inflation in the economy? That’s just crazy.

    Dave, your business was handed to you, wasn’t it?

    No, it wasn’t. Our family business was sold in the 1950s to the Japanese and I have yet to see a cent from that sale and won’t for years to come and then it will be divided 37 ways.

    Do you know anything about business Dave?

    Yes, Cindy. I’ve started or been a partner in four different businesses.

    My current business is the result of decades of training and research and developing obscure skills which are marginally marketable, plus a hell of a lot of hard work.

    What do you do there, draw fonts?

    Yes, among other things. Have you seen the ads for the film Percy Jackson and the Olympians which are currently running? The titles use one of my font designs.

    Baronius is waiting for you to go take your foot out of your mouth on your other article where you make another wild claim about how businesses operate. You always avoid me when I catch you making some giant blunder.

    I have no idea what you’re talking about, Cindy. What you think are giant blunders are usually the product of your own bizarre assumptions and ignorance.

    Dave

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    But the population does grow; in addition, there’s still a matter of bringing most of the world’s population to the kind of living standard we are (used to be, is a better word)accustomed here. So, there’s definitely plenty of things capitalism could still do – if it only would or could.

    Exactly, Roger. There’s a great deal of growth inherent in the existence of developing markets. But that aside, capitalist systems really CAN be geared to a growth rate which parallels the growth rate of the population and of corresponding inflation.

    Dave

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Dave –

    Have you seen the ads for the film Percy Jackson and the Olympians which are currently running? The titles use one of my font designs.

    Hey – congrats!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, this has been the underlying premise, Dave, as well as basis of hope of many nations – the little engine that can.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    #197,

    You realize you and Cindy are going to have a slugfest I wish it could be only one round at the time. No need to pack a ten-round event into one measly comment.

  • http://mizbviewsfromthetower.blogspot.com Jeanne Browne

    Well, the last couple of pages of comments have been a long and winding road, which I’ve tried to follow but sometimes lost my way. Perhaps it’s because I’m still a relative newbie here and the rest of you seem to know each other well (have any of you ever met in the outside world?).

    I do want to add my two cents to some of the things I think Jeannie Danna was talking about regarding posting left-wing political articles and working with conservative editors.

    I’ve worked with a couple of difficult editors in the long course of my professional life and my issues were usually about receiving unclear assignments or enduring unnecessarily heavy-handed editing. There are some editors who just don’t feel they’ve done their job unless they virtually re-write your copy. I’m happy to say these folks are the exception, not the rule.

    Now, fun and fortunately for me, I don’t have assignments on my own blog or here on Blogcritics; I write what I want. And to my delight, I’ve had absolutely NO problem with any BC editor in any section about anything. My articles are published 98%–100% exactly as written, unless I’ve made an error I didn’t catch or used improper formatting. Only very, very rarely has wording been changed and generally the change was an improvement I appreciated.

    I’ve worked as an editor as well as a writer, and a good editor does not try to make other writers sound like themselves, altering a writer’s natural rhythm and style — unless the copy is a mess, then all bets are off. If your piece doesn’t get thrown back at you to rework yourself, it will no doubt return to you in a relatively unfamiliar form. Take your pick.

    But, anyone who submits copy (anywhere) that is sloppy in its language (or presentation), unclear in its message, undocumented in its facts, dull/wordy in its style, or which clearly has not been proofed for typos and other errors, is going to get (well-deserved) push-back from a good editor, regardless of his politics, beliefs or favorite foods.

    I also want to add that I have NEVER had a piece rejected by BC because of the nature of my opinions/ideas/views/whatever. It’s my distinct impression that all interesting, well-written articles on any subject, with whatever perspective, are welcome and appreciated.

    The Internet is providing an outlet for expression by anyone who wants to take keyboard in hand. But this is still a public forum, this is publishing, and whether or not one is a professional writer, we all have a responsibility to regard our copy with more care than as if we were zipping off an email to a friend.

    Good writing is not easy and it is essentially about re-writing. It takes care, time, precision, sometimes research, and always the ability to not fall so much in love with your own words that you can’t recognize when something is superfluous or inappropriate.

    It was the great Dorothy Parker who said “I hate writing but love having written.” On many days I’ve known exactly how she felt.

  • Clavos

    What an excellent (and appropriately, very well written) comment, Jeanne!

    Thank you.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Ah, Dorothy Parker, the forgotten dame of American letters.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Jeanne, #202

    That was a very well written comment, and I hope that you do submit more articles here to the political section of BC.

    I was encouraged to learn how to write properly by Clavos. In fact, I have been working towards this goal for the last year

    I need to learn from all of the people here. So, I say thank you for your advice.

    My point of contention yesterday was that I found it almost impossible to see that “Clavos The Impaler” was simultaneously “Clavos the editor.”

    I agree wholeheartedly with you, Jeanne.

    He is a wonderful editor and he also has the patience of a saint when it comes to dealing with me.

    I also am here to ask that Clavos edit the article that I wrote this morning, since he knows probably more than anyone here just how long it took me to write all of the other articles that I previously submitted.

    :] I’ll ask him now in a another comment.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Clavos,

    I apologize directly to you for the all of misinterpretations on my part.

    There is plenty of fresh air here! meant most sincere…

    Can I submit an article today, and can someone e-mail the instructions to me again?

    I can’t remember the total process so this step might take me awhile.

    The article is done and I think you can even read it!

    :] no snide or insults are in it.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    hope you say yes.

  • Mark

    Only robust capitalist societies can do that, they’re the only ones (so far) that actually create wealth.

    Clavos, how do you differentiate between such wealth and the surpluses generated under slavery and feudalism as examples of non-(as in pre)capitalist societies?

    Dave, …capitalist systems really CAN be geared to a growth rate which parallels the growth rate of the population and of corresponding inflation.

    And painted pigs can fly if properly crated. Call Command and Control Craters, LLC for all of your crating needs.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    It’s interesting we’re coming back to the same question third time around. Perhaps there’s something to be gained from exploring the possibilities.

  • John Lake

    Readers may find it interesting to know that editor Nalle successfully removed me from BlogCritics. He takes perfect submissions, accuses the author of spelling and grammatical errors, and insists on so much change as to be absurd. I can’t allow that kind of insult, so I am leaving.
    Instead of making his comments in the appropriate manner, he makes them in editorial mandates.
    So Look for me at Associated Content, who at least provide me with beer money.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    John,

    I really have to hold that tongue of mine right now .

    Please reconsider and submit your articles to Clavos with a hold; Yellow journalism is not his style.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger,

    Are you around here right now? I have a question regarding links.

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Dave,

    You just said that REI and Wholefoods are not interested in growth. Dave, when I was a little girl sometimes in a game where I was being chased and had no hope of escape, I would stick my head under a cover in a last-dash attempt to hide. There was some odd sense that if I could not see my pursuer, then s/he couldn’t see me.

    By the way, you just injected co-ops into Capitalism and the ‘good intention’ of the Capitalist are also apparently a must to get it to work.

    Do you really think that the entire population should be relying on whether Capitalists have good intentions or not? I mean the whole point of Capitalism rests on the SELFISHNESS principle.

    I can’t seem to get this straight. Is it kindness and good citizenship that make it workable or selfishness. The rules seem to be a bit schizophrenic.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Associated Content…

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Hi Cindy,

    8 ]

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    This a test…I hope I pass.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Go ahead, Jeannie.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Go ahead what?

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Hiya there, Jeannie. [-8

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    my eyes are wide open now 8=]

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Cindy,

    I watched that Dr. Strangelove last night ..the 141 in flight refueling Jet footage reminded me of years ago..

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    John,

    Readers may find it interesting to know that editor Nalle successfully removed me from BlogCritics…

    I’m a more inflammatory writer than you are, and present far more controversial views than you do. While I cannot comment on your submissions before publication, I can tell you that I’ve never had trouble with Mr. Nalle as an editor. He generally thinks I’m crazy, but he does not allow that opinion to get in the way of editing my articles.

    While I generally disagree with your point of view, and find your articles to be surfacy, that is to say that IMHO, they do not dig a great deal into the subject at hand, I would not view that as a reason to give you grief were I an editor. You write what you write. An editor’s job is to enhance and improve the work of a writer, whether he agrees with that writer or not, or likes the subject matter.

    I’ve never had trouble with Clavos either, and he does what I just described in the foregoing paragraph.

    That said, I second Jeanne’s suggestion that you submit your articles to Clavos with a hold.

    That does not mean that you shouldn’t also write for Associated Content. Beer money is always good….

  • Clavos

    Jeannie,

    Instructions will be in your mailbox shortly.

    Thank you, Jeannie, for all your complimentary remarks, but I have to say that the idea that Dave is anything but fair and professional in the completion of his editorial duties is totally false and misleading. In point of fact, Dave (and for that matter, every BC editor currently on staff) is a total professional, edits with complete impartiality, and, if anything (addressing Mr. Lake’s complaints), has a lighter hand than I in his editing.

    I too, have edited John Lake in the past, and I’m surprised, in light of the nature of his complaints about Dave, that he didn’t complain, because I edited his pieces quite heavily, and would again, if necessary. In fact, you know that (and just alluded to it, above), Jeannie — you and I together have completely reworked an article or two of yours in the past.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Cindy,

    I think I wrote a good article this morning, and it was the quickest piece that I have ever written.

    I really am finding my voice.

    Now, if I could just construct the proper sentence; then look out world.

    8)

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    OMG, Clavos,

    Thank you for putting up with this contentious woman.

    I really need for you to be the editor for this one, after that I’ll try to submit with more trust.

    8] hope you like my article! and I really hope that I can still work with the dashboard?

  • Clavos

    Okay,folks, let’s stop this right now.

    I’m very flattered by all the kind remarks as to my editorial performance, but please understand that I cannot and will not start editing everyone, just because y’all think you have a beef with Dave.

    As I said above: ALL BC editors are professional and impartial. I am not “better’ or more impartial than any of the others, and to say that I am is both misleading and simply untrue, so please stop it.

    And please, people do not put holds on your submissions, they will be removed by me or one of the senior editors, and in accordance with BC policy, your piece will be edited by whomever is first available, without regard to your “hold.”

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Mark, #208:

    The idea I was flirting with, the point of #209, is that perhaps there might be a way of preserving a (robust?) version of capitalism – which is to say, the profit motive – with equally robust ethical component. To assert the conceptual (or practical) impossibility is to assert basic incompatibility of the motives in question.

    The possibility I’m envisaging is an emergence and co-existence of a dual system of production – centralized and well as locally-oriented, and the notion that perhaps both modes are needed.

    I’m guided here by Cannon’s remark, #181, namely,

    “There used to be a Lefty saying: ‘Think Globally, ACT LOCALLY.'”

    I find it intriguing on more than one count. First, that perhaps the primary focus of action (in this context, as regards economic development) ought to be local. There’s a corollary, however, my second point, in that there is also a need for a centralized perspective/focus – if only to address issues of economic development that strictly local orientation mightn’t be able to handle.

    Unless of course one is willing to entertain the radical thesis that all obstacles to spreading the wealth and attaining relative prosperity worldwide can be overcome locally, which is to say, one community at a time.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Correction: Cannon’s remark #184

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    I thought I would switch topics just a little bit. I mention this only because Reuters pulled this story from its American website. I found it at Yahoo Canada. I suggest you read it there before Reuters wakes up and pulls it off that site too.

    Enjoy….

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    More accounting gimmicks.

  • http://ruvysroost.blogspot.com Ruvy

    And I couldn’t help noticing this story from my Facebook account. It’s my thigh-slapper of the day. Apparently, Sarah Palin is calling on Obama to ditch Rahm Emanuel, his Chief of Staff. From the article:

    I would ask the president to show decency in this process by eliminating one member of that inner circle, Mr. Rahm Emanuel, and not allow Rahm’s continued indecent tactics to cloud efforts. Yes, Rahm is known for his caustic, crude references about those with whom he disagrees, but his recent tirade against participants in a strategy session was such a strong slap in many American faces that our president is doing himself a disservice by seeming to condone Rahm’s recent sick and offensive tactic.

    The Obama Administration’s Chief of Staff scolded participants, calling them, “F—ing retarded,” according to several participants, as reported in the Wall Street Journal.

    I can’t stand Emanuel’s politics (to put it politely) but a guy who talks like this is a man after my own heart (attack). They must love that bum on the Hill! I know he is the kind of fellow who would understand my language very well…. ;o))

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Unless of course one is willing to entertain the radical thesis that all obstacles to spreading the wealth and attaining relative prosperity worldwide can be overcome locally, which is to say, one community at a time.

    That sounds right. Your federation could be used like the Zapatistas do it. Leadership by following, with delegates answerable to all the members of the local community.

    The only meaningful way to spread wealth is locally. Charity that amounts to hand outs is not satisfactory. Empowering each other on a local level is exactly what is needed, imo.

    I don’t see a reason why wealth could not be created locally. People would need land. With a gift economy things would have a chance to work themselves out.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I do understand that, Cindy. But I’m thinking of large-scale projects might be beyond the means or wherewithal of local communities.

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Charity that amounts to hand outs is not satisfactory.

    Further explanation. I am not opposed to freely sharing. But, charity alone is not acceptable, imo. Where the dominant culture brings free stuff to the ‘poor’, yet keeps people from achieving the the means to help themselves, it is undignified and it fosters a hierarchy of a sort. It is not satisfactory. It is often necessary anyway under Capitalism.

    I like organizations like Picture the Homeless, which is an activist organization started by homeless people. I hope some time to be able to go do a lot/building occupation with them. The point being that working side by side with people is, I think, the preferred way to set up any assistance.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    You’re putting words in my mouth. I wasn’t speaking of any charity as though a redeeming virtue of the central perspective.

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Well that is where the federation comes in, Roger. Do you recall how the Zapatistas do that? Delegates are chose within a local community small enough where all people can participate and where delegates can be directly criticized by (and immediately removed, if necessary) the community members. Even children have a voice equal to adults (which to me is important). Representatives are chosen locally and are intimate members of the local community. These delegates are sent to represent the locals at meetings in which decisions can be made in a the higher level of organization, but always the actual decisions rest with the local community. So the delegate does not act independently but acts rather as a bearer of the decision made at the local level. Information can be transmitted to everyone. With computers and the internet this should be pretty easy to do.

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    You’re putting words in my mouth. I wasn’t speaking of any charity as though a redeeming virtue of the central perspective.

    No, actually I wasn’t. I was trying to conjecture some other method (other than locally) and I couldn’t conceive of one without including that sort of charity.

    So, I was just speaking further to what I was thinking. I should have said that. Sorry.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    OK, then – because charity has no place here insofar as we’re talking “system” – for only provides for ability to rationalize. We’re on the same page here.

    When I spoke of “ethical component,” obviously I didn’t mean any of that – rather, a kind motivation which is mainly directed at the notion of the public/social good, combined with fair and just reward for one’s efforts (and I’m not restricting the notion of reward to mean monetary compensation.)

    We all want to be acknowledged and respected for our contributions to the well-being of others, don’t we? I’m not about to forgo the notion of “reward,” properly and sensibly understood, as important part of human motivation.

    We all

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    for it only provides for . . .

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Spread the love, Roger. Everyone needs and likes it. (Gotta run, bbl.)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Later then. Don’t forget.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    So Cindy, Mark,

    We should pick up on this discussion.

  • http://www.futonreport.net/ Matthew T. Sussman

    I quite enjoyed this part more:

    “I don’t make grammatical or spelling errors … here is the Nalle critisizm.”

  • http://thihttp://blogcritics.org/writers/maddy-pumilia/ngsalongtheway.blogspot.com/ Cindy

    Dave sounds like one of my old English professors. I.E. my way or the highway.

    Certainly not comments of an impartial editor.

    (Good deal Roger. What do you think about what I wrote?)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Did you mean “Nalle’s critinazism,” Sussman?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Well, Cindy. We seem to be stuck between localized and centralized type of action. The need for one doesn’t necessarily eliminate the need for the other. Both kinds may be required as they deal with and cut out different spheres.

    I hope Mark chips in shortly to enrich the discussion.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Pardon my omission, Matt. Your remark is on target.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Clavos –

    As I said above: ALL BC editors are professional and impartial.

    I submitted an article six days ago – is it normal to wait this long before it is published? I know it’s not you editing it, but IMO you’re more likely to read this question.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer/dan_miller Dan(Miller)

    I hope this is not true, although I have long suspected it.

    Dan(Miller)

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Is this an allusion as to why our editorial staff gives preference to “retarded articles”?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer/dan_miller Dan(Miller)

    Re #253. Nope, and I don’t think it does.

    Dan(Miller)

  • Clavos

    Glenn @# 251:

    The log on your article indicates that you created it on the 29th of January, but did not actually place it into Pending (i.e. submit it) until February 1, which was only two days ago, and in fact, the log also indicates that Dave did some editing on it on February 2nd, although he is not editing it at this time.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Clavos –

    Ah – sometimes I do get a bit dopey (just not with politics, right?).

    Thanks for the reality check!

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Glenn, I also emailed you yesterday about a problem with the length of the giant quote in the middle of the article and several other technical issues. Did you not get that email? Is the email address associated with your author account a valid address?

    As for John Lake’s article and my criticism of it, my intention in this case as always, was to help him produce a better and more effective presentation of his points, not to discriminate against him because of his politics. As I’ve demonstrated in the past I have no problem at all with publishing opposing viewpoints, but we do have standards and articles which are disorganized and unclear waste everyone’s time. Go read his article at the link he provided. As written it is not up to the standards of BC. That’s why we have editors and don’t just publish every article that’s submitted as is. My criticisms of the article were designed to help him make his points more effectively. Whether I agree with him or not, vague assertions and factual errors don’t make a good argument.

    What’s more, my criticisms of this article were sent to the editors list and were reviewed by the senior editors who seemed to find them perfectly reasonable. Lake also complained directly to them about my editing and only started posting about it here because they backed me and not him.

    As I said to our esteemed publisher on the editors list, it sometimes doesn’t pay to try to help people improve their work so that they and BC are not ridiculed for publishing it. There’s an attitude of entitlement which comes with blogging which is inherently incompatible with maintaining editorial quality, but I do think that we’re better off not publishing as much material rather than publishing any old crap that comes to us.

    Dave

  • Glenn Contrarian

    To all –

    I just got schooled by Dave on my as-yet unpublished article. That’s why he’s the editor and I’m not.

    Thanks, Dave – I just read the e-mail, and I will get my hind end back to work on the article.

    Again, thanks -

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Dave –

    On #258, that sorta reminds me of the old saw that the more we know, the more we realize just how much there is that we don’t know.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I must say that my experience with Mr. Nalle in his editorial capacity have been very rewarding. Despite our many ideological disagreements, his suggestions always have been directed at the clarity of the presentation and the language, never at substance or content.

    In retrospect, I can only say that it has been a rewarding experience, and that my writing skills have only improved as a result.

  • http://www.republicofdave.com Dave Nalle

    Glenn, the first step to being able to learn is to acknowledge that we don’t know everything already.

    BTW, drop me an email when you’re done with your article. I’m going to take a nap and try to sleep off some of this godawful allergy congestion, but after that I’ll edit some more.

    Dave

  • http://drdreadful.blogspot.com Dr Dreadful

    I’m going to take a nap and try to sleep off some of this godawful allergy congestion

    Just be grateful you don’t live in the San Joaquin Valley, Dave. I call this place Allergy Alley. There are entire city blocks here filled with nothing but allergy clinics.

    It’s said that even if you don’t have allergies when you move here, you’ll develop them sooner or later.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Allergies in the midst of a winter?

    That’s almost unheard of.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I’m being hopeful, Ruvy. Thus far, I haven’t been obnoxious enough to give Christopher any reason to censor me, and I plan to keep it that way.

    But I do agree with you that personal squabbles with the editor should not be aired in public. And to do so is more suggestive of whining rather than being able to resolve whatever differences may exist on a personal level.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    But seriously now! What are the prospect of my immigrating back to Israel?

    I’m getting stagnated here and could use some action.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger,

    Hi!

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    My article is done, but I’ll probably have to work on it more..and that’s OK.

    Because Clavos is working with me.

    :] yay!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Hi,

    I’m glad you no longer feel estranged.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Are you writing right now?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Clavos is good, as long as he’s not the Impaler.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Wait till this one comes out, before you say that!

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    I probably will give the S f M a heartattack!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Not really.

    What I should try to do is start another novel. Literature has so many more possibilities.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    why dose he go by that?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    “S f M”?

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Right about the sixties! I will read it immediately!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Oh, you mean JOM – just one man!

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    The SFM otherwise known as TRF.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    no!

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    OMG don’t even mention that word!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I see. Our senator in absentia.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    I have a really good idea for a horror movie.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    I have an idea about a futuristic novel – a la Ayn Rand but with a twist.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Leave it to Stephen King. I’m more George Orwell type.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    There is a woman, and she thinks she is talking to all these different people. But it turns out, that there is one computer in the back of a cell on death row…and there is one man sitting in front of it, typing all different names next to his comments…!

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger?

    Do you need to tell me something?

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    Scott Peterson?

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Come on! That’s my humor…

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Silas,

    Good to see you!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Sounds interesting. Cyber illusion and hyperreality – the sign of our times.

    If it’s unreal, it catches our imagination.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Seriously Rog,

    Where did you go?

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    That sounds like the condition I have!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Truth is stranger than fiction, ain’t that the truth.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    I was always told to only believe half of what I read, and I must have taken for gospel.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    It’s good advice, because only one half makes for our reality. The other half is ours for the making.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger,

    I better go now, before I get into some sort of trouble.

    :] see ya soon,I hope!

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    OK.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    GOOD I read that before signing off. sianara Roger

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Or in the words of Françoise Sagan, Bonjour Tristesse.

  • Baronius

    If I were John Lake, I wouldn’t have pointed to an article with this sentence:

    “With the new revelations from al Qaeda one conclusion, then, is that indeed, Iraq, and her leader Saddam Hussein, whom we hanged at tremendous expense of lives and dollars, had nothing whatever to do with the September attacks.”

    as proof that I didn’t need editing.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Why not point to this article, Baronius?

    When I Googled the URL, it showed up at the top of the list. #1

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    And, I’m able to read it?

  • http://delibernation.com Silas Kain

    I was always told to only believe half of what I read, and I must have taken for gospel.

    Perhaps if some only believed in half of what was written in the Gospel, we would all be better off. The problem is, which half?

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    #308,

    If that sentence, Baronius, was indeed part of the published article – which for some reason I am unable to access – it’s proof positive that it’s the editor herself who needs editing as well.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Not, the half that has been perverted for political gain.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    You know,

    Edited by me!

    :]

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    If editor need an editor, who is going to censor the censor?

  • http://mizbviewsfromthetower.blogspot.com Jeanne Browne

    Continuing in regard to all this editor chatter:

    It wasn’t until I was a staff writer on a corporate magazine that I learned there is historical antipathy between writers and editors in all forms of print. I always assumed that an editor was a writer’s best friend, the person who keeps you on track, gives you the kind of criticism your loved ones won’t, highlights parts of an article or book that need revision, and very last and least, actually changes your copy.

    My editor lived up to the historical stereotype, not my ideal. I spent many more nights than I care to remember crying my little writer’s heart out and trying to plan the perfect murder.

    However, after two years with this man, I was a better writer. I didn’t appreciate the techniques he used to make that so, but the fact is, his harsh approach helped me learn and improve.

    I still believe in my ideal of an editor and I think the BC editors, from what I’ve personally experienced, share my definition of the ideal and work toward that end.

    Writers, as a rule, are protective and downright defensive about our work. Of course editors exist who are impossible to deal with and demonstrate little kindness or tact. But if you’re willing to leave your ego parked next to your exterior back-up hard-drive, you can still learn from even the “meanest” editorial taskmaster.

    If you’re later given the gift of an editor who’s capable of doing the job with greater finesse, then lucky you. But good writers eventually learn to be their own editors, at least up to the point of submission.

    Here are a few things I didn’t really know to do (or how to do) until I was directed by an editor of any stripe:

    — Start by creating your title and also write the kind of brief, explanatory subhead BC requires, even if it won’t be published. It will help keep you focused, even if you come up with a better title later.

    — Write a brief outline of your piece, if doing so will also help you focus. I only do this now for the most detailed kinds of pieces, but I used to do it routinely for years.

    — DO NOT PRESUME PREVIOUS KNOWLEDGE ON THE PART OF THE READER. This is extremely important. So, for example, if you want to refer to a public figure for the first time in your piece, use his/her full name and title.

    — Avoid the lingo associated with your subject, or, if you do use it, make sure you explain it; this especially applies to abbreviations, industry terms, names of organizations, etc.

    — Make sure your lede paragraph (lede means first) sets up your premise in a way that will summarize your message and/or be compelling enough to engage the reader.

    — Make use of sub-heads throughout lengthy pieces to make the piece easier for the reader to follow, and also to provide the reader with a sense of moving through the piece.

    — The start of a new paragraph should be a clear pick-up from the previous one, so that the piece has its own momentum while still holding together.

    — Avoid uptight, phony language; write the way you speak (if you speak well). Similarly, avoid clinical terms unless they’re an essential part of the story, then make sure you define them. Make sure you have a broad vocabulary, but keep your language as simple as possible; indeed, the more complex your ideas, the simpler your language should be, so as to educate rather than intimidate the reader.

    — Have a clear beginning, middle and end.

    — Avoid extraneous language. Check to see if there’s a word that can replace a phrase; make sure each sentence is as clean as possible.

    — Keep a civil tongue in your head. If there’s something you’re angry or shocked or disturbed about, then state that in simple words, don’t show it in a snide, snarling use of language.

    — Be willing to leave good stuff on the “cutting room floor.” You probably can’t get everything you want into a piece, and even if you feel especially happy about a chunk of information or a clever turn of phrase, be willing to sacrifice it in order to keep your message clearer and shorter. (If it’s just too good to throw away, keep a separate sheet/file of stuff you couldn’t keep; there may be a perfect place for it in a subsequent piece.)

    — Unless it’s a stylistic choice, be careful about repetition: of ideas and words. Use a thesaurus to see if there’s a correct alternative to words you’ve already used.

    — Use quotes lightly, like a strong seasoning.

    — Make sure there’s a clear distinction between your stated opinions and facts, and cite fact-sources as frequently as possible.

    — Maintain a consistent tone throughout the piece. In “serious” pieces, make sure that any use of humor or sarcasm is both clear and appropriate.

    I’ll stop here, because these points are the biggies and I’m tired. Which reminds me, try to give yourself a chance to literally sleep on a piece and give it a fresh look the day after you’ve written it before you submit it to your editor.

    — If you don’t find yourself doing a fair amount of re-writing, you may not have sufficiently refined/polished the piece.

    Last but not least, in addition to running a spell-check, PRINT OUT THE PIECE AND PROOF IT ON PAPER. I don’t know why, but I find there are often things I miss on-screen, but that jump out at me on paper. And don’t forget that a spell-check can’t pick up an inappropriate or incorrect use of a properly spelled word. Proofing on paper, again, is the best way to spot that, as well as repetitions, etc.

    Okay? Bone up, there’ll be a pop quiz later this week…

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Dave, You should learn from Jeanne.

    DO NOT PRESUME PREVIOUS KNOWLEDGE ON THE PART OF THE READER. This is extremely important. So, for example, if you want to refer to a public figure for the first time in your piece, use his/her full name and title.

    Now, read this line.

    In an interesting display of political muscle, the SEIU has added a new tactic to its activism against the Tea Party movement with the launch of a website targeting three candidates in tomorrow’s Republican primary in Illinois

    What the acronym SEIU means, is not known to most people.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Jeanne,

    I am going to copy your post, and learn from it.

    Thanks, and I hope you stay here.

    It is good not to feel that you are ramming your politics down my throat, while telling me that you are perfect!

    I should call an abuse hot line..kidding

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Jeanne,

    These are excellent rules to write by!

    and,

    I really believe that Clavos/Clavos The Impaler lives up to the standards you mention.

    OK, I’ll try to keep a more civil tongue…

  • http://mizbviewsfromthetower.blogspot.com Jeanne Browne

    Jeannie – Glad you’re finding this helpful. The teacher in me enjoys writing all this.

    I would like to add a couple of very important things:

    You have to really love language and enjoy the challenge of communication to be a good writer, and part of that means being a good reader. Read whatever you like so long as it’s well written, but read!

    Strive for good writing in everything you write: emails, comments, greeting cards, notes to the cleaning lady…

    Take care to not allow your daily use of language to be corrupted by overuse of pop-culture words and phrases. And most definitely don’t fall into the use of the usual texting and tweeting language (it sucks!).

    Be vigilant about the quality of your speech. Practice brevity and clarity.

    Listen to the speech of others and learn to hear what’s right, wrong, interesting; develop an ear for lovely and funny and wise language usage.

    Refine your clarity of thought; if you can’t think clearly (not to mention objectively, critically, with a capacity for complexity), you can’t write well.

    And finally, allow yourself extended periods of silence so that what you’re absorbing sinks in.

    Writing is not a task or exercise or something you do in a vacuum. It’s a craft, sometimes an art, and hopefully a way of living and seeing the world. That may sound extreme; I’m not saying to take up the veil. I’m saying that awareness, alertness, consciousness of language as a regular state of mind is important and should be cultivated. Otherwise, you’re just writing things down, you’re not being a writer.

    All this in my less-than-humble opinion, of course!

    P.S., try very hard not to use nouns as verbs (I learned just this Christmas that people aren’t giving gifts anymore, they’re GIFTING!, dear G-d…) and don’t use that weird version of the present tense when what you’re referring to requires the past tense. These are my personal pet peeves, so feel free to consider it language proselytizing…

  • http://mizbviewsfromthetower.blogspot.com Jeanne Browne

    Clavos re #203 — Many thanks for the kind words.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Jeanne,

    The fact that you and clavos have the ability to teach is what I am looking for here at BC.

    I am sorry that you have to see the black cloud that descends over this place whenever the “other” swoops down in these threads to force his(power) on all of those that he dislikes.

    This is not any type of teaching that I will accept.

    Yesterday, a very accomplished writer was thoroughly insulted, and humiliated in front of everyone, right here in this thread.

    and I am going to speak up, because That’s the way GOD made me.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Also, to be told that unless your grammar and punctuation are perfect that your writing is crap! sorry for that word.

    We should all look at content, because that is the reason for the writing.

    Do you agree with me?

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Boy, our names are going to mess people up!

  • http://mizbviewsfromthetower.blogspot.com Jeanne Browne

    Jeannie Danna, re: #312 & #313 — About our names: yes, I think some folks are already a little confused, but it only shows that they’re not reading! There’s also a Baritone and a Baronius; that can be confusing, too. The moral of this story is: pay attention!

    About grammar and punctuation: these are the classic rules and guidelines of language, so they are important. And while even the best writers can make mistakes in these areas (or make style choices about them, a la Gertrude Stein and Gabriel Garcia Marquez (hope I got that last one right…) ), editors have a right to expect the cleanest, most correct copy possible and writers have a responsibility to provide it.

    As for perfection…that’s a ridiculous concept and I don’t have the strength to get into it.

    However, when you say “We should all look at content, because that is the reason for the writing,” I have to say no, I don’t agree with you, not in the way I think you mean.

    I take it that when you say “content” you mean information & message, without getting “hung up” on things like spelling, grammar and punctuation. But when writing is poor, it is irritating/distracting to the literate reader; when it’s filled with message but lacking style and precision, that is ineffective writing. It casts a very gloomy shadow over the credibility of the writer, contributes to the degradation of language (and there’s enough of that going on as it is), and strains the patience of the editor and reader. WHAT IS IMPORTANT IN WRITING IS THE CLEAR, AESTHETICALLY PLEASING PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION AND IDEAS. What writing is all about is…writing well.

    That which may be considered “good” or “bad” writing can be, to some small extent, a matter of opinion. But stupid is stupid and sloppy is sloppy; you know `em when you see `em, and it’s an insult to editors and readers who care about language.

    Yes, there’s been some public hair-pulling on this thread between writers and editors, but I don’t think that’s inappropriate, it’s process. As long as we’re all going to go waaaay off topic (does anyone recall that the article which started this thread was about the President’s State of the Union address?), this is at least a quality and pertinent topic in itself.

    Finally, the fact that a BC staff editor/writer like Clavos and a contributing writer like me are willing to teach is, frankly, a lucky break for you and other novice writers. BC is a magazine, not a writing class, and writers should be submitting presentable copy. The fact that said copy is apparently very often in poor condition and that BC has editors who are willing to tutor non-writers who want to have their say, is a gift. Try submitting poor copy to Slate or Salon or Huffington Post and see how much support/assistance you get.

    I don’t know what the deal is between John Lake and BC editors or any other writer and BC editors. Neither do I know anything about Mr. Lake’s prior track record as a writer. All of that is their business, and it became a “public” spat, because you and Lake brought it up!

    We could go on like this until bathing suit season. I for one am ceasing my posts to this thread and moving on to writing my own copy. Jeannie, you might want to consider that it’s time you did the same.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Jeanne,

    I have found that all of these threads go off topic, and I am now used to it. In fact, I like it! Try reading some of the strange threads under my articles.

    I think this is how we all feed off of each other’s thoughts and ideas. I have learned new ways to think, talk, and look at my life and about all of the lives here.

    Hell,I used to run away from confrontation of any sort, now I stick up for myself and those around me.

    BC has given me a spark to keep going towards my goal. I even said I would pay! and somebody(Roger) said SHHHH, don’t give em any ideas! ha,ha

    This, is why I was so pleased with your posting here this morning and I still am.

    I know my writing limitations more than anyone, since I own them. But no one here, has the right to call what I believe crap, just because I spelled it wrong.

    That is my point.

    I am going to start from scratch now,with my “Handbook for Writters” by Lynn Troyka, the blueprint you gave me, and the much needed guidance, that I am very fortunate to receive, from Clavos/Clavos The Impaler.

    :] You see why I fight so hard to stay here, don’t you.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    Interesting observations about the art of writing.

    I wholeheartedly recommend Francine Prose’s recent book, Reading Like a Writer.

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    And by the way, Jeanne Browne, Jeannie Dana is hardly a novice writer. You really ought to read some of the stuff she’d already published.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Hi Roger,

    Right now, this is the book on writing that I have,( you’d think it was helping, but It’s confusing me more!) and every library book I have ever taken out has ended up with a fine…:(

    I’ll be around after I finish, again.

    I think this is a conspiracy to keep me out of the threads! Just kidding.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Roger,

    The editors deserve credit also!

    :]bye

  • http://takeitorleaveit.typepad.com/ roger nowosielski

    No question they do, Jeannie, but it’s limited to crafting. Writing is an art that only a hard work, perseverance and talent can make come alive.

  • http://jeanniedanna.wordpress.com/ jeannie danna

    Man, we need one more Jeanne or Jeannie here! That would really be fun!

    Cindy, change your name for one day…

    Thanks Roger, but if I don’t go make something to eat right now, I wont have the strength to read one more comment!

    really leaving now.