tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post300937102848948911..comments2023-10-16T07:13:12.123-05:00Comments on A plain blog about politics: Read Stuff, You ShouldJonathan Bernsteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comBlogger38125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-66963072444301700072013-06-19T21:32:16.332-05:002013-06-19T21:32:16.332-05:00backyard, this is clearly none of my business, but...backyard, this is clearly none of my business, but I think you're almost certainly wrong about the "rule" - that is, letting Nazi derisiveness pass while your zombie prog rhetoric is called out (which - ymmv - is not how it goes around here, but I digress). I think its fairly clear that, like anyone trying to build such a community, Prof. Bernstein would prefer not to parse "Nazi" v. "zombie prog" but would much rather y'all just cut it out.<br /><br />Which brings me to a bigger point: its beyond absurd to think that Jonathan's objective here is to shake down conservatives. Just put yourself in his shoes: which serves his personal interest more?<br /><br />A community of all liberals, constantly rehashing warmed over talking points that one can find a thousand other places on the web, or a community of half liberals and half conservatives, intelligently debating the issues of the day? I'm not thinking in a philosophical or moral sense, I mean specifically <i>which is better for business</i>.<br /><br />One final thought: there was a time, backyard, when we used to think that imaginary victimization was the most unattractive aspect of liberals. How things change. CSHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-2708830154928052052013-06-19T18:59:38.928-05:002013-06-19T18:59:38.928-05:00I don't feel like I'm getting piled on and...I don't feel like I'm getting piled on and I do think Prof Bernstein is much more tolerant of my aggressive shtick than most Progressives. However, the following is clearly wrong:<br /><br /><i>there's no doubt they're intended equally, because how could it realistically, sustainably, be any other way?</i><br /><br />purusha has called me a Nazi for a while. I don't mind because very few Americans can hear Darwin applied to humans without being filled with disgust and rage. I haven't noticed much pushback concerning this habit of purusha's ... because there is more than one set of rules. Which is fine, but it certainly makes sense for me to try to raise the level of discourse by asking PB whether he thinks that his own insinuations/statements comport with his own stated rules. Because Progressives have worked so hard to distinguish themselves from cons, I don't think they can even see how they're behaving.backyardfoundrynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-67008608719411689752013-06-19T18:30:16.669-05:002013-06-19T18:30:16.669-05:00Backyard, this is obviously not my bailiwick, but ...Backyard, this is obviously not my bailiwick, but as a fellow traveler in the "frequent commenter, not preaching to the choir" category, I think I sympathize a little with your frustration, but don't agree with your conclusion.<br /><br />First of all, of course the rules are intended equally for all. Its possible they may not be <i>applied</i> equally, but there's no doubt they're intended equally, because how could it realistically, sustainably, be any other way?<br /><br />When it feels like they're not, when it feels like you're getting piled on, when it seems the conch shell is ready to come crashing down on your head - ask yourself: is there another liberal community that avoids liberal moral righteousness as effectively as this one? <br /><br />If there is, I've never seen it, which is about the best thing you can say about this place.CSHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-52643226082187657612013-06-19T16:58:46.517-05:002013-06-19T16:58:46.517-05:00OK, I'll stop with the zombie prog stuff.
Mo...OK, I'll stop with the zombie prog stuff. <br /><br /><i>More generally, please avoid generalizations that amount to personal attacks on broad categories of people.</i><br /><br />Does this include broadly implying that large portions of opposing parties are crazy or stupid based on ostentatious members of Congress? And does this also include, e.g. calling people "racist" because they are open about what level of immigration they consider helpful to current citizens? <br /><br />This is your blog, so you can do as you please, of course, but I'm wondering if your rules are only for people you disagree with. Which would be fine, because hypocrisy is totally normal.backyardfoundrynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-82422047699999972232013-06-19T16:44:24.364-05:002013-06-19T16:44:24.364-05:00purusha,
Keep your head in the game, bro. It was ...purusha,<br /><br />Keep your head in the game, bro. It was CSH who stated "celebrating the murder of fetuses (no one does)" and it was to that statement which I replied. I know that some internetters are incapable of moving past "point and sputter" (thanks, Steve Sailer) so you might best choose to ignore me.backyardfoundrynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-82301705270372679092013-06-19T15:47:15.066-05:002013-06-19T15:47:15.066-05:00Like I gave a corny shit that some 8th grade Nazi ...Like I gave a corny shit that some 8th grade Nazi thinks that Dems are incoherent on abortion. purushanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-88400106931826883842013-06-19T15:14:23.287-05:002013-06-19T15:14:23.287-05:00perusha: "You were trolling"
backyardfo...perusha: "You were trolling"<br /><br />backyardfoundry: "you're basically a zombie on this issue."<br /><br />I'm calling a strike on both of you. I give wide latitude around here, but personal attacks on other commenters are not welcome. Nor are back-and-forth pissing matches. <br /><br />More generally, please avoid generalizations that amount to personal attacks on broad categories of people. <br /><br />Basically, cut it out. Jonathan Bernsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-56913429253845006582013-06-19T14:45:56.016-05:002013-06-19T14:45:56.016-05:00purusha,
Oh, I see. You were trolling.
No, there...purusha,<br /><br /><i>Oh, I see. You were trolling.</i><br /><br />No, there are just a lot of topics that partisan progs cannot think clearly about. One is abortion. I consider the sinking feeling that pro-deathers might experience if it came to light that, e.g. second trimester fetuses are much more aware and less vegetable-like than we currently believe and how that would affect support for abortion. So the cons might be viewed as having some legitimate points and it would make sense to have a shred of understanding. As a partisan prog, you're basically a zombie on this issue and react to stimuli in the expected ways.backyardfoundrynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-21769837963527098022013-06-19T14:35:58.283-05:002013-06-19T14:35:58.283-05:00Well, let's not overstate the Bush thing. He d...Well, let's not overstate the Bush thing. He did win a second term and he did get his stupid tax cut. And his popularity is rising in the usual way (I heard he topped Obama in one poll recently.)<br /><br />But I accept that Carter was mostly an unlucky break. <br /><br />I don't think that the Kennedy situation was just some crappy accident; the story I've come across is that he was just an awful person who did terrible things. It was luck that he was still tainted.backyardfoundrynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-68158594685410184822013-06-19T14:26:43.823-05:002013-06-19T14:26:43.823-05:00no one seeks to emulate any of the things that mad...<i>no one seeks to emulate any of the things that made him such a bad president</i><br /><br />True. It's impossible to envision Obama allowing a big and protracted hostage crisis considering his KEALGSEO! attitude about terrorists.backyardfoundrynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-14986620888165002622013-06-19T14:26:29.659-05:002013-06-19T14:26:29.659-05:00Backyard,
In a way, I think it was. Carter's...Backyard,<br /><br />In a way, I think it was. Carter's gained the nomination, at least in part, due to many contingent factors. Granted, all nomination battles depend on contingent factors, much more so than do general elections, but 1976 was arguably unusual in that unforeseen circumstances played an especially large role. I will refer to JB for the effects of the nomination reforms, as he understands those much better than I do, however I think many Democrats were caught off guard by the way the new system played out. Ted Kennedy was still too close to Chappaquiddick, surely another blow for the importance of contingency. Although contingency is usually less of a factor in general elections, 1976 was very close as I recall and some have argued that several factors, including the timing of election day and Ford's decision to pardon Nixon, as well as Ford's debate gaff, may well have made more difference than such things usually do. Finally, of course, as Carter was a dark horse no one expected him to turn out to be such a total political nincompoop in either national or Democratic terms (You have large majorities in both houses, you still have liberal and moderate GOP people willing to work with you, and you don't even try to do anything with labor or national health -- really? You waste your time rearranging executive departments and meddling with budeting procedures -- really? You fiddle while the economy burns -- really? Carter -- hawk, spit.)<br /><br />So, yeah, it was a very bad choice. It was also very bad luck. The two things go hand-in-hand (as they do with the GOP and GW Bush).Anastasiosnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-21951926273273027372013-06-19T14:09:18.435-05:002013-06-19T14:09:18.435-05:00Responding to Anastasios and byf:
Yes, picking Ca...Responding to Anastasios and byf:<br /><br />Yes, picking Carter was essentially bad luck. It was a fluke of the transition from one presidential nomination system to another, and during the transition there was a great deal of randomness, with McGovern (helped in part by active Nixon Administration efforts, remember) and Carter lucking into two nominations they almost certainly could not have won before 1972 or after 1980. <br /><br />But it's not quite the same kind of bad luck as the GOP examples, because (thanks in part to his being a terrible president, and thanks in part to luck) Carter mostly has a terrible reputation among Democrats -- no one seeks to emulate any of the things that made him such a bad president. His term had consequences for short-term political balance, but almost none for the future of the Democratic Party and its politicians.Jonathan Bernsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-88989689166113129652013-06-19T13:57:35.355-05:002013-06-19T13:57:35.355-05:00I answered your beef question above with one searc...<i>I answered your beef question above with one search. Did you not see it? </i><br /><br />Oh, you got me there! Score one for the master race.purushanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-70091610994767411322013-06-19T13:56:37.066-05:002013-06-19T13:56:37.066-05:00Climate is the big one. I probably read too much ...Climate is the big one. I probably read too much into inner workings of individuals, but instead ought to say that that Republican denial seems to be highly correlated with Democratic acceptance of climate science.<br /><br />Likewise, 32 oz sodas are kind of evil to the body. While Bloomberg does have his thing about sodas, most folks aren't trying to set up bans of soda and red meat. Jindal pretends we/they are, because he knows his crowd and they can't wait to have him bash liberals over it. Whenever Michelle Obama says anything nice about vegetables, invariably Republicans go on at length about red meat shortly thereafter.<br /><br />There just seems to be to be some sort of reflex.theBitterFignoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-60141929531864428432013-06-19T13:50:42.775-05:002013-06-19T13:50:42.775-05:00I'm basically pro-abortion
Oh, I see. You wer...<i>I'm basically pro-abortion</i><br /><br />Oh, I see. You were trolling.purushanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-4529104287786609532013-06-19T13:43:27.325-05:002013-06-19T13:43:27.325-05:00Anastasios,
Yeah, I know Carter is a lot more to ...Anastasios,<br /><br /><i>Yeah, I know Carter is a lot more to blame -- he embodied the Democrats worst episode of bad luck in the last 40 years</i><br /><br />Was it bad lunch that the dems chose so badly by accident?backyardfoundrynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-53828135298201341142013-06-19T13:40:05.171-05:002013-06-19T13:40:05.171-05:00purusha,
I answered your beef question above with...purusha,<br /><br />I answered your beef question above with one search. Did you not see it? Do you need other examples? Are you avoiding it because I destroyed your snark with facts?<br /><br />I can judge Jindal without reference to his race. If I'm trying to answer the question of why it is that the 3% of Americans who call themselves Jewish comprise a third of the 400 richest Americans, most top execs in Hollywood, etc. then the founder effect and moderate inbreeding are going to have to be considered.backyardfoundrynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-50290124331336545192013-06-19T13:35:09.731-05:002013-06-19T13:35:09.731-05:00Thanks, JB. I have been wondering, lately, what m...Thanks, JB. I have been wondering, lately, what might have happened had the recession of 1992 been frameshifted twelve months to hit after the election. GHW Bush would have been re-elected, road out the recession, and left office probably quite popular, with such policies as ADA and the Andrews budget agreement celebrated among the GOP. There would have been no Clinton Administration, but also no Gingrich Revolution, no impeachment, no souring of the national culture. Given Quayle's problems, Bush I might have been succeeded by, oh let's say Jack Kemp. How long Kemp would have lasted ... well, who knows? But now we might be looking back at the Reagan Era like we think of the Jefferson Administration -- a sharp ideological deviation in one direction followed by a gradual return to the norm.<br /><br />So blame it all on Clinton! (Yeah, I know Carter is a lot more to blame -- he embodied the Democrats worst episode of bad luck in the last 40 years -- but there's just something about Slick Willy that cries out for blame).Anastasiosnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-24380300281198402062013-06-19T13:31:40.376-05:002013-06-19T13:31:40.376-05:00purusha,
I'm basically pro-abortion, but I ca...purusha,<br /><br />I'm basically pro-abortion, but I can understand the conservative view that a fetus should be considered a person based on something other than a woman's whim. And I think that serious progs should be able to approach the subject with that understanding.backyardfoundrynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-49683698366999492502013-06-19T13:16:49.535-05:002013-06-19T13:16:49.535-05:00Question for backyardfoundry: Jindal is Indian ---...Question for backyardfoundry: Jindal is Indian --- doesn't your fetish over race-based IQ variations have something very profound to say about that?purushanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-70008882517921861842013-06-19T13:12:07.649-05:002013-06-19T13:12:07.649-05:00which reason would the average prog say was good e...<i>which reason would the average prog say was good enough for a woman to have a state-funded abortion of a 14 week fetus?</i><br /><br />It always amazes me when Ayn Rand libertarians suddenly become Christian moralists.purushanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-58472521169870625112013-06-19T12:59:02.054-05:002013-06-19T12:59:02.054-05:00or even idealizing huge government (no one does)
...<i>or even idealizing huge government (no one does)</i><br /><br />I suspect this is because progs don't think that half of GDP going to government is huge. Or because progs generally respect no limitations on what elements of commerce the Congress can futz with. Progs have almost no grounding in public choice theory, so can see almost no government action as going too far.backyardfoundrynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-20956013473464153432013-06-19T12:52:02.886-05:002013-06-19T12:52:02.886-05:00No wonder I agreed with it so much!
Ford, GHW Bus...No wonder I agreed with it so much!<br /><br />Ford, GHW Bush, Bob Dole, Howard Baker, Pete Domenici, any number of governors.Jonathan Bernsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-39889920595097750512013-06-19T12:51:00.766-05:002013-06-19T12:51:00.766-05:00CSH,
It was "unborn babies don't matter&...CSH,<br /><br />It was "unborn babies don't matter" and not "celebrating the murder of fetuses." <br /><br />To put this in perspective, which reason would the average prog say was good enough for a woman to have a state-funded abortion of a 14 week fetus?<br /><br />I'm 19 and I want to party more.<br />My career in marketing is too important to me.<br /><br />Wait ... I don't think there are any reasons. backyardfoundrynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-51259911490338718212013-06-19T12:36:29.535-05:002013-06-19T12:36:29.535-05:00I should point out, most of what I said above abou...I should point out, most of what I said above about the GOP and bad luck comes directly from JB's previous observations. He can correct me harshly if I have gotten it wrong.Anastasiosnoreply@blogger.com