« Fact Check | Main | Michelle Don't »

March 30, 2007

Comments

Hunting of the Snark, by Hilzoy.

There is a line in Obama's stump speech where he says he says he wants to be held accountable for universal healthcare by the end of his first term. While that's not enough for the wonks to wonk over, it's at least a pretty definite statement of direction.

A giant, green, ugly, horny monster? I saw that thing a couple of weeks ago. St. Patrick’s day it was.

Of course, I had had a bit of Guinness at the time so I couldn’t sign an affidavit or anything… But it was definitely green and ugly. I staged a diplomatic retreat before I confirmed the horny part though.

Aren't people saying some people have a problem with Hillary in part because she's a woman?

Re Obama and substance, perhaps it's an issue of venue - seems like I've seen a number of posts from e.g. Ezra Klein and Matthew Yglesias saying, "I saw Obama's latest blah and there wasn't any there there".

Chris Matthews is a giant dink.

Concerning Clinton, I am sure that some people would not vote for her because she is female, some would vote for her for that reason, and it may well be a wash. Nobody knows. And Matthews at times has a rather bloated sense of self-importance.

REgarding Obama. This is the start of the meme that will be out there. First it will come form the Democrats that support other candidates (especially Clinton) the if he wins the nomination, it will come form the Republicans. In fact, it is already starting in some Republican circles.

As you point out so well, I think he has made more policy statements, and actually done more in his short time in the Senate than Clinton has done in hers.

Why didn't Matthews talk about the silence about his race and how people will not vote for him because of that? Because there is silence, there must be that monster, but probably not a horny one.

but probably not a horny one.

hoody

hilzoy: i'm starting to worry about your s3x life.

Well, what is true is that by the end of the bruising Democratic primary the horny, green monster will have been found out to be some oppo-research punk in Obama's campaign staff spreading the anti-Hillary message.

Meanwhile, over at Hillary's horny headquarters, "voices" will be emitted through the heating vents and into the generally poisoned atmosphere by a talented group of vipers regarding Obama's less than weighty resume.

That's all BEFORE the Republican Party cranks up its savage machine and regains the hypocrisy edge in the general election sweepstakes.

Anyway, the voices in my head say it's teatime and they shout in the active voice.

Thorazine for the chattering class, anyone? ;-)

And Matthews at times has a rather bloated sense of self-importance.

"At times"?

Hey, Anarch, I was just trying to be semi-nice.

They See Things That Are Not There

Actually, so am I. If I click MAIN this post is not there. If I click another post then forward I get to it.

And the right sidebar stuff is way down on the left or even right under the comments.

Open tag somewhere that will be a real bitch to find.

Looks fine to me, OCSteve are you sure you're not hanging upsidedown from your ceiling reading this? :-)

Not yet. Its only 5:48 ;)

Perhaps Matthews' brain is being eaten by something he picked up from an incredible prostitute.

Not yet. Its only 5:48 ;)

Slacker!

So wait, is she horny or does she have horns or does she have horny horns or what?

If he was a little more inventive, he'd suggest the Democrat primary will be Obamamothra vs. Hillzilla.

I've heard of a Bat-poet, but not a Bat-blogger.

Could this monster perhaps be Chris Matthews' own Id? Or, if you prefer Jung to Freud, his shadow aspect?

'Cause, seriously... wow.

Also: "You only hear criticism of Hillary from smart, college-educated women."

I had no idea I was a woman! Thanks for pointing that out to me, Chris Matthews. I'll check myself in for gender reassignment consultation.

Francis: don't worry about my sex life; worry about Chris Matthews'.

Interesting stuff on Obama; whenever I claim that he lacks substance, other commenters refer me to another post you wrote, so you seem to have done your homework--you should get the word out, which I guess you're what your doing.

Lacking substance? Perhaps not. He, as a person, certainly doesn't; just listen to him. As for his campaign--well, sort of. It's not so much his lack of policy specifics that bothers me, those'll come. It's the encompassing message, the overriding rationale, whatever you want to call it. His message as far as I can tell--and I've read a lot of what he and his supporters have said about his candidacy--is that is he wants to create a new kind of politics, free of cynicism, and that he wants to spark civic renewal. That might turn on some progressives. Not me. It seems very soft, very timid, and quite possibilty moderate next to Edwards's hard-edged populism. Want to get rid of cynicism? Tackle income inequality, poverty, and corporate crime.

Is this merely a problem of communications rather than ideology? Not sure at this point, but it's a problem.

Jonah Goldberg's a journalist now, right? Anyway, The Editors are deeply patient and also excellent.

"you should get the word out"

I've seen links to the post in question in a variety of places, including Andrew Sullivan's blog.

People, listen up! I don't know what you are talking about — and I don't want to know. I'm keeping my eyes tight except enough to see what I am typing. But I refuse to read your character assassinating mean nastiness.

This is Ann Althouse. And I bring you a message. But first, did you know I voted for Clinton twice?. that I voted for Russ Feingold? I bet you didn't. It's because I'm moderate.

I will have you know that Garance used tricks on my mind to make me explode like that. I mean, not explode. To make me call her out as a character assassinator, I mean.

Because she is a character assassinating bitch!

Did I tell you that she used tricks of the journalism trade to make me blow my stack?

But she's not the only one with the mind tricks.

Did you know that Barack Obama can infiltrate your mind and take over your thoughts? It's true. Even the left-o-sphere's Mark Schmitt was willing to come right out and say Barack Obama is just like "Lex Luthor," and "very sinister!"

It's true. See? Right here:
http://bloggingheads.tv/video.php?id=192&cid=952&in=42:00

I blogged about Obama's mind-control powers here:
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2007/01/he-can-enter-your-space-and-organize.html

—Ann Althouse, Professor of Law

Damn. I thought (until I clicked and read the comment) that Ann Althouse really was commenting on Obsidian Wings, and I was interested to find out what she'd say.

But it's just someone with a blustering hotmail account and a jejune sense of humor.

Why, this is Sadly, No nor am I out of it.

I'm thinking delirium tremens.

Gone away and missed the news for a while. Anybody outraged about Dianne Feinstein arranging BIG money no-bid contracts for her husband's firm, or is it OK because you are Democrats?

DaveC- I know you have defended Halliburton's no-bid contracts as nothing wrong. What grounds do you have for objecting to anyone else's contracts?

But it's just someone with a blustering hotmail account and a jejune sense of humor.

Posted by: Jesurgislac | March 31, 2007 at 07:04 AM

And a bot, too - apparently: I've seen this identical post on about five other blogs already this morning. DNFTT Alert!

re Hillary:

I think the item to watch with Hillary Clinton is her new clubby relationship with Rupert Murdoch. There is nothing about the nest of vipers at FOX and his other rags that is going to make me feel good about her.

re Feinstein:

Sure, if their are any available committee rooms not booked for the next two years, she should be investigated.

It seems to me that the unifying theme in the Republican/Democratic hypocrisy sweepstakes is the amoral, reptilian corruption of the private sector.

You've got your Lying (Marketing) types, you've got your Cheating (Accounting) types, you've got your Stealing (Government contract) types and you've got your Investor Relations/Public Relations/Advertising types who manage to look at the other three types and tell everyone that, "hey, we're trying to run a business, here. We can't help it, bonus incentives being what they are, if we ignore our mother's advice to keep the lying, cheating, and stealing to a minimum."

All of those types seem to marry, buy lunch for, or otherwise canoodle everything in sight ...... Republican, Democratic, Marxist, Libertarian, Christian, Rosicrucian, Orthodox Vegetarian, what have you.

Of course, when the privately made o-rings fail on the Space Shuttle, it's the government's fault. When the privately-built police station in Baghdad is made out of baking soda and chewing gum, it's the government's fault; when the politicians privatize their constituents' money and it goes missing, it's the government's fault.

Ah yes, see how government corrupts all of we innocent souls, who without the incentive of government money, could keep the lying, cheating, and stealing among ourselves.

John Thullen: I've always wanted to know what a Rosicrucian is. Can you enlighten?

John more a delightener.

Ack, John's more a.

re: John T the Delightener's allusion to HRC and Murdoch/Fox:

This post at MyDD is a piece of that story.

Scott Simon had a report today on Weekend Edition that sounded a similar theme -- reporters are finding that "a lot of people are wondering" whether Americans will vote for a woman/ African-American/ man whose wife is battling cancer, whether evangelicals will vote for Giuliani, etc., but said "lot of people" seems to be just a stand-in for the reporters' own wonderings.

moe99:

The Rosicrucians, or Rosicrucianists, are an esoteric, hermetic order of adepts who will have me killed if I tell you what they are.

If they commented on blogs, they would comment like I do -- in an esoteric way with all meaning hermetically sealed.

Wikipedia tries to explain but it's all fairly muddy.

Mostly, Rosicrucians is a funny word. I think Michelle Malkin has started a club to keep a look out for them, because she disapproves of funny things.

Where there is too much light, there is too much certainty, which bores me. So I substitute "delight'.

I've always wanted to know what a Rosicrucian is.

Umberto Eco can help.

Anybody outraged about Dianne Feinstein arranging BIG money no-bid contracts for her husband's firm...

Would you settle for thoroughly peeved? Unfortunately I've had to keep recalibrating my outrage meter to accomodate state sponsored torture and election-fixing in the shining city on the hill, and, well, you know....

Anyway this may be news to you, but it's not news to me. In fact it's kind of pathetic watching the VRWC get all cranked up about something that "liberals" have been complaining about for years. Don't you guys have your own oppo research budget any more?

I'm glad she finally stepped away from the subcommittee, and I'd have been even happier if she'd decided not to run last time. In terms of sheer bloodthirsty venality though, she's got nothing on, say, Bill Frist. She's also smarter than he is.

...or is it OK because you are Democrats?

I eagerly await the day when I no longer feel obligated to vote for Democrats simply to support and defend the Constitution. Hasten that blessed day, DaveC. Take back your party so that I can denounce Dianne Feinstein with all the ferocity she so richly deserves.

Pretty amazing, seeing a green horny monster that isn't there. To my mind, however, that talent is nothing compared with the MSM's fantastic ability to avoid seeing things that are there.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad