« Worth Bearing In Mind | Main | Public Service Announcement »

September 30, 2006

Comments

My last refers to Ted's 10:18 post, btw. And I'd just like to point out to you all that it's very impolite to interrupt conversations that way.

"Meanwhile, Glenn Reynolds is blaming the media. No, really."

Of course. Glenn's knee compels a variant of this, from "whatever it is, I'm against it!," to "whatever it is, it's the media's fault!"

rilkefan: "I could reasonably call anyone a loopy poopy-head by the same argument?"

"Loopy poopy-head" characterizes a person as a noun, a "poopy-head." "Misguided" characterizes their particular opinion.

While you may feel that impugning someone's opinion in such a fashion is equally offensive and uncalled-for, that's the part that strikes me as somewhat idiosyncratic (although I'm assuming you're using "poopy-head" as a stand-in for something more genuinely offensive, out of respect for the posting rules).

It seems clear that you feel "deeply misguided" is fairly offensive. I'd say that although it depends on context, and that obviously "deeply" is an intensifier, that it's not all that much. But that's merely my personal opinion.

It's not clear to me that your stand on this usage is particularly provable, or a point to spend a lot of energy on, but YMMV, of course, as is your privilege.

Oh, and just because it bugs me when someone, however casually, and innocent in intent, impugns someone else's sexual preferences (except, of course, for those things that disgust me), I have to quibble with this, Hilzoy: "Also: sex itself is a wondrous thing, but I really don't think instant messaging is the best medium for it. "

That is, I certainly don't quibble with your right to think or believe that. And I can't honestly say that I have any personal experience in this, for better or worse.

But I do know that, in fact, clearly hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people think it's the bee's knees, or at least worth doing from time to time. As I said, this was obviously a toss-offed remark-in-passing by you, but, well, I can kinda imagine people who are actual enthusiasts, who have had meaningful experiences with loved ones engaging in this sort of play, reading your comment and being a bit disturbed by your judgment, so I hope you'll forgive me for pointing out that, well, it seemed a bit unnecessary. Different strokes, and all.

Anyone agree that's English?

Count me with Gary; your reading seems idiosyncratic to me too.

"Yes, he also points to Maguire's post about the timing, but highlighting a post isn't the same as endorsing it."

Glenn's been getting by on that far, far, far, far, far too long. It no longer flies, given the unbelievably large number of datapoints in the pattern.

Sure, I'll agree that Glenn doesn't genuinely endorse everything he links to, but I think he engages in plausible deniability a vast, if unproveable, percentage of the time. He's the past master.

Since, as I said, this is unprovable in most, if not all, cases, I won't argue it further, but I'm hardly the only person of this opinion.

And I'm relatively inclined to give Glenn the benefit of the doubt, compared to many, not that that proves a thing, either, of course.

"And I'd just like to point out to you all that it's very impolite to interrupt conversations that way."

I coughed, but I guess you didn't hear me.

General self-plug to all: I posted a fair amount over this weekend! Go-eth and readth it-th allth.

In my 10:23, "to overlook these necessities" should have been "these niceties."

It's amazing how talented my fingers are at typing entirely different words with some of the same sounds or letters from the ones my head instructs them to.

Gary,

If the pointer to Maguire was the only part of the item, I'd concur with your assessment, but what he seems to have there is a roundup, where it's not unreasonable to point to differing points of view.

"If the pointer to Maguire was the only part of the item, I'd concur with your assessment, but what he seems to have there is a roundup, where it's not unreasonable to point to differing points of view."

I take note that Glenn relatively rarely posts links to something he disagrees with that he doesn't note some disagreement with, or caution about, so far as seems noticeable. Other times his denials seem rather coy; this is, of course, purely a subjective analysis, and as I said, usually unprovable.

"Meanwhile, Tom Maguire smells a rat...."

My unprovable interpretation of that, based on years of familiarity with Glenn's style, is that it's pretty typical of him seeming to endorse something without overtly doing so, in a way that allows complete deniability should it prove useful. The post overall somewhat diverts attention away from Foley, suggesting there are other, more interesting, issues, like isn't-the-kid-at-fault-too? (Bill) and is-Foley-being-set-up?" (Maguire).

But that's just my subjective response.

So as regards this example, I offer nothing further; I've merely noticed that Glenn's pattern of linkage/deniability seems highly visible to many. Maybe we all misread him.

But Glenn could certainly avoid possible ambiguity if he desired to. He's not dumb.

Heh.

liberal japonicus: Doesn't deeply misguided mean that the person may believe that they are correct, but they are actually mistaken?

FWIW: I think so.

(Quakers use "deeply misguided" or "sadly misguided" to mean that someone is absolutely wrong, but sincere/well-meaning in the opinion held, so that may color my view of the phrase.)

CharleyCarp wrote:

And Raven, the "15 year old girl" was born on June 7, 1947. (Texas birth records are on the internet.) That doesn't make her 15 years old in 1971 now does it?
What's interesting about the above claim is that
  1. The Texas Government sells birth certificates for $22 to the individuals themselves and their authorized representatives, but not for free or to the general public -- so where did you find these "Texas birth records on the internet"?

  2. A Google search for "June 7, 1947" and "Robin Lowman" gets exactly one result, a family tree webpage that shows the marriage date "June 7, 1947" by one member (not Robin Lowman), and a Robin Lowman born August 16, 1963.... so did you perhaps read a bit hastily?

  3. The claim that Robin Lowman was born "in or around 1947" is made in one text (posted as identical comments on 5 blogs); no source is given, and no such precise birthdate.
So I'd be very interested to see you cite your source. Please.

Link omitted: family tree webpage.

Jesurgislac wrote:

The thing I hate about that kind of list coming from someone putatively on my side, Raven, is that looking down it I can see (just offhand, without doing any clicking or googling) it includes multiple instances of behavior that could certainly be described as tawdry or icky, but doesn't make the person who did it a "sexual offender"....
Fair enough, the list itself is titled sex scandals, and has both criminal and non-criminal cases. You can see which are which, and it saves time over re-typing just the criminal cases here (with all the links). I'm referring to cases like:
  • Edison Misla Aldarondo, Republican legislator, was sentenced to 13 years in prison for molestation of his daughter and her friend for eight-year period starting when they were 9.

  • Randal David Ankeney, Republican activist, arrested on suspicion of sexual assault on a child with force. He faces 6 charges related to getting a 13-year-old girl stoned on pot and then having sex with her. Also accused of sexually assaulting another girl.

  • Merrill Robert Barter, Republican County Commissioner, pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual contact and assault on a teenage boy.

  • Robert Bauman, Republican congressman and anti-gay activist, was charged with having sex with a 16-year-old boy he picked up at a gay bar.

  • Parker J. Bena, Republican activist and Bush Elector, pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography (including children as young as 3 years old) on his home computer and was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison and fined $18,000.

  • Louis Beres, chairman of the Christian Coalition of Oregon. 3 of his family members accuse him of molesting them when they were pre-teens.

  • Howard L. Brooks, Republican legislative aide and advisor to a California assemblyman, was charged with molesting a 12-year old boy and possession of child pornography.

  • Andrew Buhr, Republican politician, former committeeman for Hadley Township Missouri, was charged with two counts of first degree sodomy with a 13-year old boy.

  • Ted Bundy campaigned for the Republican Party. Infamous serial rapist who murdered 16 women.

  • John Allen Burt, Republican anti-abortion activist, convicted of sexually molesting a 15 year old girl at the home for troubled girls that he ran.

  • John Butler, Republican activist, was charged with criminal sexual assault on a teenage girl.

  • Keola Childs, Republican County Councilman, pleaded guilty to sexual assault in the first degree for molesting a male child.

  • Kevin Coan, Republican St. Louis Election Board official, arrested and charged with trying to buy sex from a 14-year-old girl whom he met on the Internet.

  • Dan Crane, Republican Congressman, married, father of six. Received a 100% "Morality Rating" from Christian Voice. Had sex with a minor working as a congressional page. On July 20, the House voted for censure Crane, the first time that censure had been imposed for sexual misconduct.

  • Richard A. Dasen Sr., Republican benefactor of conservative Christian groups, convicted of sexual abuse of children, promotion of prostitution and several counts of solicitation, enough to add up to a sentence of 126 years in prison.

  • Richard A. Delgaudio, Republican fundraiser and Bush pioneer, was found guilty of child porn charges.

  • Peter Dibble, Republican legislator pleaded no contest to having an inappropriate relationship with a 13-year-old girl.

  • Nicholas Elizondo, Director of the Young Republican Federation molested his 6-year old daughter and was sentenced to six years in prison.

  • Larry Dale Floyd, Republican Constable in Denton County, Texas Precinct Two. Arrested for allegedly crossing state lines to have sex with an 8-year old child and was charged with 7 related offenses. Age 62 at time of arrest.

  • Jack W. Gardner, Republican Councilman, had been convicted of molesting a 13-year old girl. when the Republican Party, knowing of these crimes, put him on the ballot.

  • Richard Gardner, a Nevada State Representative (R), admitted to molesting his two daughters.

  • Philip Giordano, Republican mayor sentenced to 37 years for forcing two 8 and 10 year old girls to perform oral sex on him in his City Hall office.

  • Mark A. Grethen, Republican activist, convicted on six counts of sex crimes involving children.

  • Mark Harris, Republican city councilman who is described as a "church goer," was convicted of repeatedly having sex with an 11-year-old girl and sentenced to 12 years in prison.

  • Howard Scott Heldreth, anti-abortion activist who gained fame during the Shiavo media-circus, was convicted of two charges of raping a child in 2002.

  • Mike Hintz, a First Assembly of God youth pastor, introduced by Bush on the campaign trail, and promoted his policies. Says he supports Bush's values. Two months later, this married father of four turned himself into police, charged with the sexual exploitation of a child.

  • Earl Kimmerling, sentenced to 40 years in prison after he confessed to molesting an 8-year old girl after he attempted to stop a gay couple from adopting her.

  • Donald Lukens, Republican Congressman, was found guilty of having sex with a minor - a girl he was accused of sleeping with since she was 13.

  • Pat McPherson, Douglas County Election Commissioner. Arrested for fondling a 17-year-old girl.

  • Jon Matthews, Republican talk show host in Houston, was indicted for indecency with a child, including exposing his genitals to a girl under the age of 17.

  • Nicholas Morency, Republican anti-abortion activist, pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography on his computer and offering a bounty to anybody who murders an abortion doctor.

  • Jeffrey Patti, Republican Committee Chairman, was arrested for distributing what experts call "some of the most offensive material in the child pornography world" - a video clip of a 5-year-old girl being raped.

  • Mark Pazuhanich, Republican judge, pleaded no contest to fondling a 10-year old girl and was sentenced to 10 years probation.

  • Beverly Russell, County Chairman of the Christian Coalition, sexually molested his step-daughter, Susan Smith, who later drowned her two children.

  • Tom Shortridge. Republican campaign consultant, was sentenced to three years probation for taking nude photographs of a 15-year old girl.

  • Fred C. Smeltzer, Jr., Republican City Councilman, pleaded no contest to raping a 15 year-old girl and served 6-months in prison.

  • Craig J. Spence, Republican lobbyist, organized orgies with child prostitutes in the White House during the 1980s.

  • David Swartz, Republican County Commissioner, pleaded guilty to molesting two girls under the age of 11 and was sentenced to 8 years in prison.

  • Robin Vanderwall, Republican strategist and Citadel Military College graduate, director of Faith & Family Alliance, (a Christian Coalition spin off), former student of Pat Robertson's Regent Universtity, member of Ralph Reed's inner circle who funneled money to from lobbiest Jack Abromoff to Reed, convicted in Virginia for soliticing sex from a 13-year-old-boy and on four other counts of soliciting sex from boys and girls over the internet.

  • Keith Westmoreland, a state representative (R), was arrested on seven felony counts of lewd and lascivious exhibition to minors under 16 (i.e. exposing himself to children).

  • Stephen White, Republican preacher. Was arrested after allegedly offering $20 to a 14-year-old boy for permission to perform oral sex on him.
The criminal cases -- sexual offenders -- are actually the lion's share of that list. I think that's relevant as showing a pattern of behavior.

Raven, are you saying that the Robin Lowman with whom George Bush had a relationship (and pregnancy) in 1971 was 8 years old? I think maybe you're the one who's being hasty.

This http://content.ancestry.com/iexec/?htx=View&r=an&dbid=8781&iid=TXBTH_1947_0008h05&fn=Robin&ln=Lowman&st=r&ssrc=&pid=4509585>link connects you to page 1944 of the Texas Dep't of Health, Bureau of Vital Stastics printout of 1947 births. You have to have a subscription to Ancestry.com, but if you give me an email, I'll send you the page.

You could also run Robin Lowman Garner through any of the better people search engines -- say privateeye.com -- and you'd get her address, phone number, and birthdate. I'm not going to cut and paste them here, but you can look yourself.

Raven: Fair enough, the list itself is titled sex scandals

But you titled the list "Other Republican sex offenders". That's what I objected to: you were participating in a smear campaign.

and it saves time over re-typing just the criminal cases here (with all the links).

Lengthy cutting-and-pasting of information available elsewhere is not considered good blogging behavior. Paste a taster and a link.

that list reminds me the Clinton Death Watch lists.

and, does anyone doubt that a list of similar length couldn't be constructed using people who are nominally Democrat-ic ?

Cleek: and, does anyone doubt that a list of similar length couldn't be constructed using people who are nominally Democrat-ic ?

I don't doubt it. Smear campaigns, however, are wrong as a point of principle, not just because the target can turn around and smear the targetter.

Covering up for Mark Foley sexually harassing kids wasn't even the worst thing that the Republicans in Congress did this year. (In the top five, sure. But voting to repeal habeas corpus and voting to make torture and oubliettes legal have got it beat.)

I haven't said anything so far because others have said it better and...well, already.

The only thing I can imagine that can have Foley's relationship to the Adam Walsh law make any sense is that maybe he couldn't stop himself and needed some external incentive to stop. Maybe this will come out as things unwind, but I'm not hopeful.

Now, if I can only decide whether Republicans are sexual degenerates, or unable to get their freak on, or (somehow) both. Because that's what's really important, here.

Now, if I can only decide whether Republicans are sexual degenerates, or unable to get their freak on, or (somehow) both

i'd go with "both"; it's the most-interesting choice.

So, can we take bets on whether Hastert will resign either as (a) speaker, or (b) from Congress altogether? I'm betting (a) but not (b), but one can hope.

I'll bet a double-sawbuck on "not at all", unless there's a felony conviction in there somewhere.

I see that Raven includes Ted Bundy, the serial killer, on the list because he (Bundy) campaigned for the Republican Party.

I can't hold this against the Republican Party.

Look, even serial killers are apt to believe their taxes should be, umm, slashed. And, God knows, a guy like Bundy might find something highly objectional about being tied up in the red tape of regulation. Things like that would make a person move from state to state searching for regulatory paradise.

That aside, I guess the point of such a list is to highlight hypocrisy. One does wonder about that.

However, lists like this make me wonder how anyone could handle the stress of committing such heinous acts while assuming a jaunty public face, and in fact crusading against sin.

The psyhchological compartmentalization is mind-boggling. There must be some kind of exquisite thrill for the perpetrators that they are really putting one over on everyone. It's grimly interesting from a human nature standpoint. The political angle is less interesting.

Regarding Bundy, though, I suspect a savvy Republican political strategist could blunt any bad publicity by coming up with some push polling along the lines of "Would you vote for a person (cough Democrat) who has bodies buried all over the county AND wants to raise your taxes?"

The electorate would be completely flummoxed. Too many choices.

To blunt any partisan bad feelings from my preceding comment, I happen to know that Jeffrey Dahmer came down on the liberal side of the political ledger.

Despite his dicey private life, he apparently was in favor of doubling the number of meat inspectors employed by the Department of Agriculture.

This is not to approve of Dahmer's hypocrisy in any way, but one must admit he at least
placed the public good first and foremost.

Darn it Thullen, just when I was going to suggest a good ad for Democrats that consisted solely of a black screen and the words:

Ted Bundy: Republican

There's still

Al Bundy: Republican

A bit dated, rilkefan. I suspect a fair share of the electorate wouldn't know what you were talking about.

Gary,

Per you http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2006/09/the_party_of_mo.html#comment-2324564210:38 comment, I agree wholeheartedly. Computers and texting are a regular part of interpersonal communication for a lot of Gen X and Gen Y kids (I cannot speak to younger). This extends to sexual conversations. It only takes one solid long-distance relationship to realize that texting has its benefits across the board.

Heck, NPR even shared a factoid on "Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me" this weekend that claimed more people text-sex than webcam-sex, which I thought was rather amusing.

argh. stupid end tag forgetfulness.

argh. stupid end tag forgetfulness.

Or even more effective, if somewhat confusing:

Al Gore: Republican

"Fair enough, the list itself is titled sex scandals, and has both criminal and non-criminal cases."

I was unaware that Lewis Libby's writing a novel, whatever his plentiful political faults, constituted a "sex scandal," but YMMV.

"Covering up for Mark Foley sexually harassing kids wasn't even the worst thing that the Republicans in Congress did this year. (In the top five, sure. But voting to repeal habeas corpus and voting to make torture and oubliettes legal have got it beat.)"

Look, I agree with Jesurgislac!

Slart: "The only thing I can imagine that can have Foley's relationship to the Adam Walsh law make any sense is that maybe he couldn't stop himself and needed some external incentive to stop."

It's a common, and superficial, more or less cliche, observance -- which doesn't make it any less true -- that people tend to obsess about that which actually worries them, and that a lot of folks obsessed with possible or alleged sexual offenses of others do so because of their keen awareness of their own impulses and temptations.

Preventing kids from any knowledge of homosexuality makes a lot more sense if you feel that the images and knowledge and so forth are frighteningly tempting (and will damn you before the lord, etc.) if you even glimpse them. For instance.

Heard about the dangers of art museums in Texas, by the way?

Argh, I've been not looking at the news for three days and this happens!

It is simple, sexually accosting young people is bad.

The politics is also simple, when you find out about it you get rid of the person and move on. No one is so important that they should be permitted to do that (even if they promise to stop). And if there were someone that important (an instance which I cannot imagine) it certainly wouldn't be some random Congressman.

You have to love Bizarro world, who's fault is it? Democrats!!

You have to love Bizarro world, who's fault is it? Democrats!!

gotta love the subtitle on that article:

    It seems they rather wanted to score political points than actually do something to protect the pages.

where "they" = ABC News.

Bizarro, indeed.

Cleek - I think the "they" = ABC News' source, which must be a democrat and, voila', it's the Democrats fault. I believe the poster clarified this in comments but I admit I had the same impression when I first read it (and so did a commenter to the post, causing the clarification).

But hey, if everyone gets the impression that it's both the Democrats' and media's fault, it's a two-fer in Bizarro World's eyes.

John Cole is shrill, BTW.

This letter points out that today's front-page story in the NY Times has the headline "Former Pages Describe Foley as Caring Ally" and goes on for many paragraphs about what a nice guy he was.

The letter writer's idea that there's "news" in the 11th paragraph does seem to be misinterpretation, though. "Mr. McDonald said he learned that Mr. Foley had sexually explicit Internet conversations with several pages who had left the program" does not mean that the pages left because of Foley.

It seems obvious to me that Rep. John Shimkus should be removed from the page board. By his own admission he kept the other page board members out of the loop.

Rep. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV) says she was "astounded" to learn of the emails on Thursday. And she says that had she known, she would have done more than Shimkus or other House leaders. Rep. Dale Kildee (D-MI) said on Saturday that he was never informed of the matter.
link
But Denny Hastert just stood up with Shimkus in a press conference and indicated he was going to continue at the page board.

Former Pages Describe Foley as Caring Ally"

Cause God knows the "Hate the Pages Caucus" is all powerful in the halls of Congress.

Cleek - I think the "they" = ABC News' source, which must be a democrat and, voila'

heh. yeah.

in that case, shorter RedState: "It's the Dems fault for not making the Repbulican House leadership, who had known about the problem for possibly 5 years, stop a Republican from trying to seduce 16 year old boys!"

Actually, its the Dems fault because they allowed the Republicans to be elected in the first place, and if they hadn't been so inept, then Foley would never have been in that position in the first place, and neither would Hastert, Reynolds, Shimkus, etc.

BTW, Hastert's opponent is getting a lot of activity and requests for comments the last couple days. Plus, he is getting a lot of contributions. Still a long shot, but it might become interesting.

"Cause God knows the 'Hate the Pages Caucus' is all powerful in the halls of Congress."

Some are merely members of the lesser-known Page-turners Caucus.

Constitution decimated, unemployment up, poverty up, CEO salaries up, uninsured medical up, home forclosures up, number of politcal appointees who aren't qualifed up, 330 trillion dollars in war debt up, torture up, geneva convention violations up, number of scientists screaming about climate change up, number of kids who fail reading comprehension up, religious mandates up, fear as a control mechanism up.

Heh, the Gay Old Pedophile party is leaving quite the legacy, eh? Don't think I can handle the excitement of the next two years. Pleeeese do something about your party, it used to be great.

Reagan was good. Do Reagan again.

"Cause God knows the 'Hate the Pages Caucus' is all powerful in the halls of Congress."

Some are merely members of the lesser-known Page-turners Caucus.

As I understand it, Foley has promised to turn over a new leaf . . .


. . . starting at the bottom of the page.

"Pleeeese do something about your party,"

Who are you talking to?

". . . starting at the bottom of the page."

Regrettably, some people wet their finger before doing that.

(Please don't hurt me!)

Backing up a bit
The only thing I can imagine that can have Foley's relationship to the Adam Walsh law make any sense is that maybe he couldn't stop himself and needed some external incentive to stop.

Though this could be correct, I'm not so sure. I think people have an infinite capacity to fool themselves, and I think it is equally plausible that Foley thought he was just being 'overly friendly'. I know this sounds impossible, given the nature of the IM messages (though one has to note that ABC does the pearl clutching routine and says 'the other messages are far too graphic') but given the amount of evil happening in the world, it would be even worse if people actually knew they were doing evil. One has to look at this frenzy (and I agree with both Jes and Gary on the relative rank of this in relation to other things the Republicans have done) and consider that it a kind of transference, where the media is going to give the Republicans both barrels, over and over, as a way of compensating for not actually covering earlier stuff correctly. Then in 30 years, we are going to be dealing with a whole new crop of Republicans making the claim that if it hadn't been for some obscure Florida Congressman, things would have all turned out right.

Gary: only the fact that I haven't yet figured out how to reach through my computer and out your screen, prevent me from hurting you.

That plus my innate civility, of course.

And I do realize that dr. ngo started it.

Eck.

Then in 30 years, we are going to be dealing with a whole new crop of Republicans making the claim that if it hadn't been for some obscure Florida Congressman, things would have all turned out right.

66 year old Future Me finds that an acceptable trade-off.

lj: one of the odder things I saw on TV recently, since I watch TV while eating meals and thus see things completely at random, was a story on a guy who had kept a series of women in a dungeon for months at a time, as sex slaves. They interviewed him, and he seemed genuinely not to understand why anyone would think that what he did was abhorrent. I mean, he had tried to make it more comfortable; that's why he'd built the dungeon instead of keeping them in some original even worse place. I think he said he never hit them or anything. The fact that he kept them in chains and never let them leave, and also raped them repeatedly, just didn't seem to register with him as bad stuff; he seemed to think they liked him, and just didn't get why what he had done was supposed to be so wrong.

It was truly spooky to watch.

hilzoy - I thought you were describing die hard Republican supporters these days,

"just didn't get why what [Bush] had done was supposed to be so wrong"

"just didn't seem to register with [Bush supporters] as bad stuff"

"seemed genuinely not to understand why anyone would thaink that what [Bush] did was abhorrent"

"Gary: only the fact that I haven't yet figured out how to reach through my computer and out your screen, prevent me from hurting you."

But I'm only talking about the printed page, of course! My passion for books and magazines is large!

What dr ngo was writing about, I can't say; the perv.

(And to hold me back from a good bad pun, on mere grounds of taste, would require at least one of us to be more into bondage than likely is so.)

Lovely. Drudge says it's the fault of "these 16- and 17-year-old beasts" who were "egging the congressman on".

66 year old Future Me finds that an acceptable trade-off.

Sure, you say that now, but would you have said that in 2000? ;^)

Am I going blind, or does John Amato provide no citation whatever for the source of those audioclips? (I'm not challenging them; I'm just saying that's not very good blogging, if so, although maybe I'm just somehow missing an attribution.)

But I'm only talking about the printed page, of course! My passion for books and magazines is large!

I believe you mean to say that you have a passion of extraordinary magnitude...

PS, dr ngo, Gary and hilzoy: right now, I'm really blaming the parents. Well, one of them at least.

What dr ngo was writing about, I can't say; the perv.

How can you say this?! {parenthetical aside - does anyone know the emoticon for injured innocence?} I was simply fulfilling my duty, as Historian In Residence, to remind people of an ancient wheeze on this general topic, originally attributed to (or said about, more likely) Oscar Wilde.

That anyone should take offense at it strikes me as wrong, a posteriori.


dr ngo: "does anyone know the emoticon for injured innocence?"

Just making stuff up now, but: 8X, 8O, and 8C all leap to mind, depending on the degree of injury.

This is why Japanese emoticons should be used. While injured innocence is not on the list, you could check out this list for some appropriate ones

I was simply fulfilling my duty, as Historian In Residence

So polluted is this thread that I initially misread this as I was simply fluffing...

Re: longterm effects of this election cycle on the Greedy old Perverts.
Unfortunately, what doesn't kill them, makes them stronger. I'm sure there are Republican strategists out there thinking that their plan for a one party oligarchy was derailed, not by the innate evilness of the plan, but by the incompetence of the current crop of leaders. So they will be back. The party of authoritarians, using the same conbination of fear, selfishness, and faux religion, will be back,but next time they might be led by people who are actually smart enough to wipe their own butts without getting shit where the public can see it. For the last ninety years or so the Republican party has won elections by appealing to the worst in human nature: red baiting, welfare queens, jingoism, etc., the same old appeal to the "tradtional American values" of bigotry, fear and selfishness. As long as the worst is there, there will be Republican politicians to appeal to it.

Slarti: The Daily Show last night described the Congressional pages as "the fluffers of liberty" so you're clearly not alone.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad