Thursday, May 27, 2010

Read Stuff, You Should

Have to do the tab dump...I get to contribute to the guest-Ezra tab dump over there, but there's only five slots for the four of us to fill, and there's more good things to read (that I don't have time to comment on or anything to add) than that...not to mention that I need as always to start with something not to read.  In this case, it's not exactly one that you've probably been sitting around wondering whether to look at it or not, but just in really don't want to read Zev Chafets' op-ed in the NYT last week explaining that Rush Limbaugh is The Most Incredibly Powerful and Important Person in the Universe Bar None...oh, and Chafets also happens to have a book out about Rush.  My guess?  David Frum is right, and you don't want to read the book, either.  At any rate, I hope you skipped the op-ed.

Now, on to the good stuff.

1. Andrew Sullivan on living in multiple worlds.

2. Rand Paul inspired blogging: Adam Serwer on freedom...and I'll add a little George Will, too.

3. Immigration/Arizona?  You're not going to do better than Michael Kinsley and Conor Friedersdorf, are you?

4. You know what I think: he's the best one out there, absolutely essential.  TNC.

5. Blogging the Pill, Roy Edroso and Amanda Marcotte.

6. Afghanistan, with Fred Kaplan, Matt Yglesias, and Kaplan again.

7.  Serwer takes on Andy McCarthy (the Bush apologist, not the actor in all those great movies).

8.  Do conventions affect local voting?  Seth Masket crunches numbers, says no.

9.  And Yglesias counsels conservatives not to fall for a fraud.


  1. George Will argues that the rightness of the CRA is proof that we can and should legislate morality. He is wrong. While the CRA was certainly moral, and the discrimination it outlawed was certainly immoral, it was fundamentally about increasing freedom.

  2. In your Washington Post article, you make a lot of assumptions. The biggest one perhaps being that you will find something to remedy "the lack of a serious offense by the president."

    Please remind me: when did your notion of democracy turn into something that does not resemble democracy at all? Barack Obama was voted into his presidency by a fair majority. Just because your party does not agree with his policies does not substantiate a need to impeach him. Why doesn't your party follow the typical lower-case d democratic method and create a political party that has a strong enough ideology to get the majority of the country to support it? Maybe then the country will consider the GOP's candidate as serious, instead of a laughable candidate like Palin who has little experience. And although FOX News is surely entertaining, Beck's and Limbaugh's rantings do not count as political ideology.

    If your predictions are right, then I owe you an apology. If they are wrong, however, you owe yourself an apology for looking like a dumbass.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Who links to my website?