tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post6724115511198845017..comments2024-03-09T03:20:20.004-05:00Comments on Tenured Radical: This Week in John McCain Land: The Case Against A Man Who Would Be PresidentTenured Radicalhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05703980598547163290noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-74958544291069351082008-10-07T22:15:00.000-05:002008-10-07T22:15:00.000-05:00RW Prof,I said nothing about Biden's statement bec...RW Prof,<BR/>I said nothing about Biden's statement because, quite honestly, I don't have a good enough grasp on that particular aspect of recent history to proffer anything meaningful. It very well could be dribble. Or maybe not. I just don't know. But Palin's comments I can indeed test against something I know. Why did FOX news ask her what she meant by it, if the answer is so obvious?<BR/>- 30'sAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-19507734983395823882008-10-06T08:02:00.000-05:002008-10-06T08:02:00.000-05:00Still waiting....Any libs out there want to have a...Still waiting....<BR/><BR/>Any libs out there want to have a go at defending Biden and explaining what he was talking about re the US and France kicking Hezbollah out of Lebanon? I mean he has 30+ years experience in the Senate, he must have been referring to something!davidjhemmerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15557657307865513144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-60044887347485105382008-10-05T14:52:00.000-05:002008-10-05T14:52:00.000-05:0030'sWhere in the constitution does it say all thre...30's<BR/><BR/>Where in the constitution does it say all three branches are supposed to be equal? That is popular to teach in 3rd grade social studies but it does not appear anywhere in the constitution and a lot of scholars would disagree.<BR/><BR/>As for Palin's "mystery" powers, it's not her fault the constiution defines the VP as president of the Senate then makes no further mention of this position.davidjhemmerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15557657307865513144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-75186323440414515842008-10-05T14:14:00.000-05:002008-10-05T14:14:00.000-05:00Dear all:I have special powers too! I just don't ...Dear all:<BR/><BR/>I have special powers too! I just don't talk about them all the time as Palin does.<BR/><BR/>TRTenured Radicalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05703980598547163290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-26349470252106038532008-10-05T10:06:00.000-05:002008-10-05T10:06:00.000-05:0030s strikerCurious, why didn't you address my othe...30s striker<BR/><BR/>Curious, why didn't you address my other remark about Biden and Lebanon? Do you admit that his statement was just drivel?davidjhemmerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15557657307865513144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-1006321233406205912008-10-04T21:14:00.000-05:002008-10-04T21:14:00.000-05:00I meant to also say that the implications of the s...I meant to also say that the implications of the second to last paragraph in my previous posting above suggests that Palin feels that as VP, she is somehow imbued with powers that go over and beyond the legistative and judicial branches. <BR/><BR/>Only she promises not use her special powers. But all three branches are supposed to be equal, aren't they?<BR/><BR/>Regardless of all that..it's all muddled and confused, as far as I am concerned.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-84988757165711262112008-10-04T21:06:00.000-05:002008-10-04T21:06:00.000-05:00RW Prof,I am hardly "uninformed". My guess is that...RW Prof,<BR/><BR/>I am hardly "uninformed". My guess is that I am many years older than most of the folks on this blog, and I know a heck of a lot of what the Constitution says. Now here is what Palin said (copied directly from the transcript):<BR/><BR/>PALIN: "No, no. Of course, we know what a vice president does. And that's not only to preside over the Senate and will take that position very seriously also. I'm thankful the Constitution would allow a bit more authority given to the vice president if that vice president so chose to exert it in working with the Senate and making sure that we are supportive of the president's policies and making sure too that our president understands what our strengths are. John McCain and I have had good conversations about where I would lead with his agenda." <BR/><BR/>My interpretation: She seems to be alluding to some other, additional "bit of authority" afforded to the VP, beyond simply the role of overseeing the senate.<BR/><BR/>She then went on to say that she could use that authority in support of the McCain agenda, which seems to primarily consist (of course) of energy independence, government reform, and special needs children. Her same old mantra. (Which she repeated frequently during the debate).<BR/><BR/>The next day, in a FOX news interview, she was asked what she had meant by "flexibility", and she replied: “The vice president, of course, is not a member — or a part of the legislative branch, except to oversee the Senate. That alone provides a tremendous amount of flexibility and authority if that vice president so chose to use it." She then stated that she had no intentions of “bleeding” her “authority over to the Legislative or Judicial branch" in promoting the McCain agenda, somewhat in contradiction of what she seemed to be suggesting during the debate.<BR/><BR/>Now, one doesn't need to be a Wittgenstein to recognize all of the above as being ambiguous, confused, muddled, etc. Any Joe Six-Pack can see it all for what it is. And believe me, I am the <I>original</I> Joe Six-Pack!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-88336125073627291992008-10-04T10:23:00.000-05:002008-10-04T10:23:00.000-05:0030's striker;You are the one who is uninformed not...30's striker;<BR/><BR/>You are the one who is uninformed not Mrs. Palin.<BR/><BR/>There's nothing bizarre about what she said. Article I of the Constitution deals with the legislative branch of government, not the executive branch as the lawyer Biden erroneously said during the debate. It states in part:<BR/><BR/>"The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided."<BR/><BR/>It doesn't just say "The VP will cast tiebreaking votes" it says the VP will cast tiebreaking votes AND shall be president of the senate, these are two separate duties of the VP. Most VP's don't ever serve in that function, there is instead president pro-tem. If Palin wants to try it out and try to give the presidency of the senate some kind of actual job, more power to her.<BR/><BR/>By far the most bizarre answer of the night was Joe Biden's explanation of how the US and France kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon and should have sent in NATO to keep them out. Nothing remotely like this has ever happened, noone seems to have any idea what the hell he was talking about. Very strange.davidjhemmerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15557657307865513144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-51571998693604815432008-10-03T20:37:00.000-05:002008-10-03T20:37:00.000-05:00Ah, well lookie here...this seems to explain in pa...Ah, well lookie here...<A HREF="http://thinkprogress.org/2008/10/03/palin-can-read/" REL="nofollow">this</A> seems to explain in part why she didn't mess up last night! Wish I had found this sooner.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-44165778267649757022008-10-03T18:03:00.000-05:002008-10-03T18:03:00.000-05:00Oh yeah, she rocked alright, in the sense that she...Oh yeah, she rocked alright, in the sense that she managed not too screw up like she did in front of Katie Couric.<BR/><BR/>But her answers (or non-answers as the case may be) are still bizarre and strangely inscrutible when you really try to understand what she's saying. <BR/><BR/>Like what's with the deal about a certain degree of "flexibility" in the powers of the VP over the other branches of gov't that are afforded by the Constitution? <BR/><BR/><I>Just what on earth is she really talking about?</I> (if anything).<BR/><BR/>And why do you obsess so much about Biden's physical appearance? What does <I>that</I> have to do with anything substantive?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-33018726092259658742008-10-03T11:49:00.000-05:002008-10-03T11:49:00.000-05:00Sarah Palin rocks!Can I just say, Joe Biden was be...Sarah Palin rocks!<BR/><BR/>Can I just say, Joe Biden was being very honest when he said Barack Obama was not ready to be president, that the presidency does not lend itself to on the job training. After Obama voted against the final war funding bill (Biden supporting it) Biden was being honest when he called Obama reckless and naive. When Obama promised to meet dictators without preconditions, Biden was being honest when he said that Obama was being dangerous and that he would "certainly not" agree.<BR/><BR/>Did the VP slot suddenly change all of Biden's opinions on these matters or was he just lying last night? Discuss!<BR/><BR/>p.s. Biden's botox job was terrible! His forehead didn't move, his eyebrows didn't raise<BR/>and that ridiculous huge smile with no facial movement above the nose looked scary. He should sue his plastic surgeon.<BR/>http://rightwingprofessor.blogspot.com/davidjhemmerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15557657307865513144noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-88274929323461655752008-10-03T08:57:00.000-05:002008-10-03T08:57:00.000-05:00A drive-by reminder to all illustrious historians ...A <I>drive-by</I> reminder to all illustrious historians who have their fingertips on the <I>human story. </I> <A HREF="http://thedivaworld.blogspot.com/" REL="nofollow">The updated paperback version</A> of "Until Proven Innocent" is now in stores.<BR/><BR/>This is the definitive account of the internationally-publicized Duke Lacrosse Hoax, coauthored by the incomparable <A HREF="http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/" REL="nofollow">Professor KC Johnson</A>.<BR/><BR/>Such Diva madness!Debrahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04567454727276881424noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-23829267889858717582008-10-02T13:54:00.000-05:002008-10-02T13:54:00.000-05:00TR,Thanks for all the links. On the very last poi...TR,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for all the links. <BR/><BR/>On the very last point of your post, this is an argument I've been desperately trying to make with a few hyper-conservative Catholics I know (btw: they are not moderates, nor are they conservative moderates or liberal conservatives---they're right-wing Catholics). <BR/><BR/>To wit, is it not true that native intelligence, temperament, and statesmanship override almost every <B>single</B> issue that one could make against/for a candidate?<BR/><BR/>For instance, right-wing Catholics use a pro-life argument that looks like it could apply to a monkey who shares their view on the one subject---i.e. abortion matters more than torture, abortion matters more than welfare moms, abortion matters more than war, abortion matters more than a presidents actions in a genocidal situation, abortion matters more than being a fascist, abortion matters more than whether the potential president has totalitarian tendencies, etc.<BR/><BR/>I mean, do we want a potential intemperate war monger closer to the control panel for nuclear weapons just because he is pro-life on the abortion issue (or, in this year's election, merely anti-Roe)?<BR/><BR/>Anyway, just to throw a few more wrenches into the gears. <BR/><BR/>- TLTim Lacyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02896230254720822005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-27740824625114378952008-10-02T06:45:00.000-05:002008-10-02T06:45:00.000-05:00Ralph, as is indicated by the dispute here about t...Ralph, as is indicated by the dispute here about the "truthiness" of TR's assertion about Sarah Palin and rape kits, one person's lie is another person's truth and (if I follow TR's reasoning correctly) it is very, very hard to tell the difference, so why worry about it?. So it is probably not a good idea (especially for a "card-carrying" ACLU member) to discourage freedom of speech because one thinks that what the other person says will be a "lie" -- in fact, as I said earlier, it's downright un-American. Ain't moral relativism wonderful?<BR/><BR/>And TR -- thanks for the pointer to the Human Events website -- I wasn't familiar with it. Pretty interesting.JackDanielsBlackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17285871354441074406noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-69102807056211029202008-10-01T20:07:00.000-05:002008-10-01T20:07:00.000-05:00Dear Scott,It is one thing -- and it is a small pa...Dear Scott,<BR/><BR/>It is one thing -- and it is a small part of the essay I actually wrote, which was about John McCain. If you want to see bad, horrible stuff, take a look at what they publish at the online version of Human Events. Retracting things is not the epitome of good journalism -- lots of folks repeated that thing, and I'm still not sure what is right and what isn't -- there just seem to be a lot of different opinions out there.<BR/><BR/>We all do our,<BR/><BR/>best,<BR/><BR/>TRTenured Radicalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05703980598547163290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-27754214861397097802008-10-01T19:45:00.000-05:002008-10-01T19:45:00.000-05:00TR, I understand that it didn’t originate with you...TR, <BR/>I understand that it didn’t originate with you, but just because it came from the NYT doesn’t meant it is correct. Yes it is up to them to retract it, but I thought you would do the same once you found out it was false. Is it ok the pass on a lie if a ‘paper of record’ does so? And only correct it when/if they do retract it, did you check to see if they did? That seems to me to be the actions of someone who wants the facts to fit their argument, not be factual.<BR/>There would be plenty of other arguments you could use to make your point that were factual and easily checked. The first time I heard this rumour I didn’t believe it (seemed too much), so I did some checking and found out pretty quickly that it was false. I think a lot of people just wanted to believe it as it fits their preconceived notions of what type of person Gov Palin is.<BR/>During this election there have been many false and misleading stories coming from all sides, ever since the announcement of Gov Palin there has been many false hoods passed off as truth (ie. Faking pregnancy to cover for her daughter, she was a member of the AIP). So when I hear something that sounds too good to be true (or too bad to be true) I try to confirm it from a few different sources on both sides of the issue. <BR/>I would have thought that you would have at least investigated it more to see if it is fact, when told it was incorrect to removed it, change it or at least put a note saying that it is disputed. Well it is your blog to do with what you like, I guess after reading for awhile I expected more.<BR/>Scott S.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-51845780532472867472008-10-01T15:55:00.000-05:002008-10-01T15:55:00.000-05:00Jack, I'm a card-carrying Republican member of the...Jack, I'm a card-carrying Republican member of the ACLU. Just wondering if it takes intimidation to get you to commit to telling the truth.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-19834542736084533612008-10-01T08:42:00.000-05:002008-10-01T08:42:00.000-05:00Dear Scott,First of all, I pulled the story from a...Dear Scott,<BR/><BR/>First of all, I pulled the story from a paper of record -- the New York Times. The story didn't originate with me: it's up to them to retract it if it is false. Second, Profane, in comment #2, printed a link to a story that questions this, which is the kind of editing process the blogosphere is supposed to produce.<BR/><BR/>I would suggest readers paste that link into their browser for further discussion on this issue.<BR/><BR/>And to you -- and RWP, whose snide comment I pulled -- if you disagree, or think I or any other commenter is wrong, you should do so (I hope with appropriate documentation where you can) but when you are belligerent or nasty, I will take your comments down.<BR/><BR/>TRTenured Radicalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05703980598547163290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-38057445684111168192008-10-01T06:24:00.000-05:002008-10-01T06:24:00.000-05:00Ralph, what I defend is the American right to free...Ralph, what I defend is the American right to free speech -- including freedom from intimidation. Are you liberals against that now? If so, somebody better inform the ACLU!JackDanielsBlackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17285871354441074406noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-54000404327523085802008-10-01T00:33:00.000-05:002008-10-01T00:33:00.000-05:00TR, in regards to this passage...(although what co...TR, in regards to this passage...<BR/><BR/>(although what could be more disturbing than the fact that when Palin was Mayor of Wasilla the town instituted a policy of billing rape victims for their emergency room care and for the cost of the rape kits used to collect evidence that would theoretically put their attackers behind bars?)<BR/><BR/>And the actual truth, not some fantastic lie as exposed here.<BR/><BR/>http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/274580.php<BR/><BR/>Considering this and other proof of this lie, just wandering if you will be writing a retraction? An apology? And maybe double, triple checking any accusations in future?<BR/><BR/>Scott S.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-72798111753159497282008-09-30T16:20:00.000-05:002008-09-30T16:20:00.000-05:00Brother Jack, You've come to a poor end when you d...Brother Jack, You've come to a poor end when you defend the right to lie until legal authority forces you to be truthful.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-57250340068332672552008-09-30T15:10:00.000-05:002008-09-30T15:10:00.000-05:00Well, here is the "Obama Truth Squad" story from K...Well, here is the "Obama Truth Squad" story from KMOV in St. Louis:<BR/><BR/>http://www.kmov.com/localnews/stories/kmov_election_092808_truthsquad.bec69e89.html<BR/><BR/>Any time you have law enforcement officials involved in a "truth squad" it is intimidating, to say the least.<BR/><BR/>Admit it -- if the McCain camp had pulled this stunt, you folks would be screaming bloody murder.JackDanielsBlackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17285871354441074406noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-3234874485715496912008-09-30T15:02:00.000-05:002008-09-30T15:02:00.000-05:00TR, you are supposed to be an academic. Try readin...TR, you are supposed to be an academic. Try reading my post again, and show me where I make "parallels between an African American man and a Nazi". What is twisted is your interpretation (explication?) of what I said, which is that the action of some Obama supporters in the law-enforcement community in threating free speech is unAmerican and similar to what the Nazis did in Germany in the 1930s.JackDanielsBlackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17285871354441074406noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-49854902582672564882008-09-30T13:20:00.000-05:002008-09-30T13:20:00.000-05:00JDB,But they are not intimidating anyone into not ...JDB,<BR/><BR/>But they are not intimidating anyone into not running anti-Obama ads. As best I can make out, they are simply publicly declaring in advance "don't knowingly post non-factual comments about our candidate, 'cause it's illegal to do so."<BR/><BR/>I did a lot of Googling on this issue, and all I could find are the statements of outrage issued by Blunt and other anti-Obama-ites. If you happen to have any links to objective sources of information on what was actually said, by whom, maybe it would be useful to post some of those. I couldn't find anything, and ran out of patience searching.<BR/>- NDLAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-36212542.post-50634834364088815052008-09-30T12:58:00.000-05:002008-09-30T12:58:00.000-05:00JDB,Are making parallels between an African Americ...JDB,<BR/><BR/>Are making parallels between an African American man and a Nazi? That's twisted, man.<BR/><BR/>TRTenured Radicalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05703980598547163290noreply@blogger.com