Going Rogue

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Ea

What joke is it that I'm not getting?

I believe she was referring to the original founders/drafters/creators of our constitution and government.

[Ea]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

sorry, I do that to focus on specific statements that I want to comment on.

so, we seem to have gone into a loop on people regarding people getting things for free

I don't know if it's a loop I'm not getting things for free, I'm paying my (rather elaborate) taxes. So does everyone else with an income, plus everyone pays the taxes on goods we buy (VAT). "Welfare" means very roughly that you pay according to your ability and get according to your need. Very roughly, mind. If you are able to work you will be in work, sooner or later. The welfare system I live in are a great safety-net - it's not quite so great to live from, and you're a loser if you do when there are work to have.

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by Ea

I don't know if it's a loop I'm not getting things for free, I'm paying my (rather elaborate) taxes. So does everyone else with an income, plus everyone pays the taxes on goods we buy (VAT). "Welfare" means very roughly that you pay according to your ability and get according to your need. Very roughly, mind. If you are able to work you will be in work, sooner or later. The welfare system I live in are a great safety-net - it's not quite so great to live from, and you're a loser if you do when there are work to have.

We have a welfare system here also. When I was young, it was considered shameful for an able-bodied person to get welfare.

Now........no shame for anything. Many families have existed on welfare for generations. Young girls having babies knowing they will get free housing, food for their babies, food stamps AND free medical care.

[Ea]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

Now........no shame for anything. Many families have existed on welfare for generations. Young girls having babies knowing they will get free housing, food for their babies, food stamps AND free medical care.

I was just hoping that people would understand that this is not the way it's generally viewed even in so-called "welfare states" such as the Scandinavian countries. True, some people treat the system like this - and I bet it's much the same percentage as in USA. Some things like health care, education, pension you can live on, and other social services are provided - but it's not a "free lunch". We pay and we are very much aware of that.

Social services smoothes over problematic parts of life. It's ultimately to the good of the country that people can work rather than be sick, or can be educated futher than their parents could save for. I know my country can't be compared to a much much larger country like USA, but I can see in recent history how much my country has prospered and grown richer. I can't help but think it's positive.

[Good Old Neon]

Priceless

Jon Stewart Explains To Conservative Pundits Why He Doesn't Like Sarah Palin

http://www.hulu.com/watch/109820/the...ed-nov-18-2009

[Ea]

Originally Posted by kennyc

I believe she was referring to the original founders/drafters/creators of our constitution and government.

Oh, okay. I think I'll leave this to the "USAsians"

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by Ea

Kindlekitten; I think it would be much easier to answer your posts if you didn't write answers within the quotes - please write outside them. But you stated (in orange):
"I couldn't tell you, I've never gotten anything for free. I don't understand welfare mentality, welfare families or anything remotely resembling that status."
Do you know that I have never gotten anything for free either even if I live in a welfare state? "welfare family"... eugh!


Um, I have once experienced someone deliberately hurt someone. I don't think you mean 'seeing'? It doesn't seem to cover all possibilities.

I can't say if I have experienced someone taking advantage of someone. I am being quite honest, but I don't think so. I can't remember or I don't know.

I do have a neurological condition, which makes it more difficult for me to recognise other people's feelings - not that I don't know they are there - it's like they're less visible than to most people. It might have hindered me in this case. It might hinder me in understanding you. I am not sure.

BTW, the term 'scattershot' matches what I was searching for. One reason I didn't feel they worked as arguments were that some issues you mentioned are reality to me, some I didn't get at all, and some where 'so what'. Too scattershot to form the basis of a common idea in my mind - that is, I wasn't sure what you were saying with the examples.

Do not worry about it. I was just trying to answer your questions. I'm only sorry that I couldn't do better.

[Good Old Neon]

The conservative, Andrew Sullivan's early review of Going Rogue:

Well, as promised the Dish is back to normal. I'm not. "Going Rogue" is such a postmodern book that treating it as some kind of factual narrative to check (as I began to), or comparing its version of events with her previous versions of the same events (as I have), and comparing all those versions with what we know is empirical reality (so many lies, so little time) is just a dizzying task. The lies and truths and half-truths and the facts and non-facts are all blurred together in a pious puree of such ghastly prose that, in the end, the book can only really be read as a some kind of chapter in a cheap nineteenth century edition of "Lives of the Saints." But as autobiography.

It is a religious book, full of myths and parables. And yet it is also crafted politically, with every single "detail" of the narrative honed carefully for specific constituencies. It is also some kind of manifesto - but not in the usual sense of a collection of policy proposals. It is a manifesto for the imagined life of an imagined Sarah Palin as a leader for all those who identify with the image and background she relentlessly claims to represent.

In this, the book is emblematic of late degenerate Republicanism, which is based not on actual policies, but on slogans now so exhausted by over-use they retain no real meaning: free enterprise is great, God loves us all, America is fabulous, foreigners are suspect, we need to be tough, we can't dither, we must always cut taxes, government is bad, liberals are socialists, the media hates you, etc etc.

I tried to write a fair account of Palin's various stories of her incredible fifth pregnancy, labor and delivery and to reconcile all the various facts we know and the various versions of the story she has told. Just for the record and because we have aired the public record on this before. I honestly however cannot make total sense of them in a way that I'm completely convinced by and so simply do not feel comfortable making any judgment on them in any way at this point. That's fair to her, my readers, my colleagues, and the innocent private people caught up in this circus.

I thought there might be some new facts in here that would illuminate my confusion and dispel the whole thing.


There is, rather, more barely-credible myth-making and descriptions of actions taken that really make no sense even on their own terms. But since we now know that Palin tells odd lies all the time even when she doesn't have to, we cannot hold her to common sense readings. The story she tells is largely incredible if you assume a rational actor at the center of it. But we do not have a rational actor in the center of it; we have an unbalanced, delusional, ambitious fanatic whose relationship to reality is entirely instrumental and can change from minute to minute. And so we cannot even say: that doesn't make sense so it probably isn't true. With Palin, anything is possible her world is so imaginary and magical. Much that makes sense with others may not make sense with her. And without external evidence, how can we tell which is which?

So what to do? First off, she cannot be given the benefit of the doubt. And the Dish will continue to monitor those odd lies that can be independently and objectively proven, as we have all along. But for those things we cannot prove objectively, we just have to leave alone at this point. I believe nothing she says is true unless I can verify it. But if I can't disprove her accounts of things only she and her family can know about, I should shut up.

Move on and forget about her? If only. Not just because she is a vital figure in this country's politics right now and one of the most dangerous demagogues this country has seen in a long time, but because I just want to know. I want to know what really lies under that facade.

I'm going to keep poring over transcripts, Nexis and anything else I can find to monitor this phenomenon - and its many tributaries and nuances and narratives. If you have any verifiable facts or objective evidence relating to "Going Rogue", you have my email address. Everything is in total confidence. No wild-ass theories (we have more than enough of them). Just facts that I can establish as objective and that illuminate any part of the story in front of us.

As Sarah Palin says she said to herself after her water broke in Dallas and contractions had started and she had given a speech while experiencing more contractions and skipped the reception before getting on a transcontinental air flight all the way from Dallas to Seattle, then Anchorage and then Wasilla,

"I still have plenty of time."

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by 93terp

Hmmm....look at the judgement displayed & used by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Rove et al. Where exactly did that get us? Perhaps a little more collective intelligence by that cabal would have served us all much better than their collective lack of intelligence, lack of any intellectual curiousity and disdain for rational & critical thinking.

Geez, man, that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the quote. Does EVERYTHING have to include some Bush bashing? Can't you at least confine Bush bashing to things that have to do with Bush? Or does Bush infect your entire political viewpoint? Bush is gone. Get over it.

Considering Buckley graduated from Yale University & lived a life of upper class priviledge, I don't put much credence into his quote above.

Funny - I would have said that it is precisely for that reason that credence is warranted.

He was also a staunch defender of the South's segregationist policies (so what does that say about his judgement?) and lived to regret it and ultimately reverse his position on segregation.

So...guy has the "wrong" position, later changes it to the "right" position, and that's some kind of negative reflection on his judgment? You would think he had better judgment had he not changed his mind? A whole lot of people from that generation never did, y'know.

[Lady Blue]

Originally Posted by Harmon

So...guy has the "wrong" position, later changes it to the "right" position, and that's some kind of negative reflection on his judgment? You would think he had better judgment had he not changed his mind? A whole lot of people from that generation never did, y'know.

How sad the effects would be if we NEVER changed our minds.

There is nothing inherently wrong with changing ones mind, and is proven admirable when one has a mind open enough to weigh information, look at a situation from other angles and ultimately find that an opposing view may be more worthy or desirable.


Put simply, often the realization of assholedom is the beginning of wisdom.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Good Old Neon

The conservative, Andrew Sullivan's early review of Going Rogue:
...

Thanks for that Neon!

[pilotbob]

Originally Posted by Harmon

Does EVERYTHING have to include some Bush bashing? Can't you at least confine Bush bashing to things that have to do with Bush? Or does Bush infect your entire political viewpoint? Bush is gone. Get over it.

If only it were that easy to get over the results of Bush's mistakes. Remember, he left office, but his legacy lives on.

BOb

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by pilotbob

If only it where that easy to get over the results of Bush's mistakes were as easy. Remember, he left office, but his legacy lives on.

BOb

Yes, he did so much damage to the country, politics and the presidency that odds are it will be at least a decade to get over, but the pain and legacy will continue long after that.

[93terp]

Originally Posted by desertgrandma

And to have a sitting president tell me that it will be passed regardless of what the country may want, is incredibly arrogant.

Now that's just rich! Again, you're entitled to your own opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts. Nearly every poll taken on the issue of health care reform has shown a majority of Americans support the public option. But we can't have inconvenient facts getting in the way, now can we....

To have the former administration institute torture, lie us into an unnecessary & unwinnable war, shred our civil liberties and give every advantage to the already uber-rich is beyond arrogant - it's criminal.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101902451.html

http://rawstory.com/2009/10/clear-ma...-postabc-poll/

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...lic-option.php

[desertgrandma]

Originally Posted by 93terp

Now that's just rich! Again, you're entitled to your own opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts. Nearly every poll taken on the issue of health care reform has shown a majority of Americans support the public option. But we can't have inconvenient facts getting in the way, now can we....

To have the former administration institute torture, lie us into an unnecessary & unwinnable war, shred our civil liberties and give every advantage to the already uber-rich is beyond arrogant - it's criminal.

Polls can be tweaked to show whatever results are wanted. They are meaningless.

When you can show me a poll that includes every citizen of the US, I'll believe it.

As for the "torture", we aren't dealing with a section of humanity that plays fair........after 9-11 not one terrorist attack occurred on US soil........until Fort Hood.

If any of that torture was responsible for the safety of this country, I say go for it.

I could give a crap for the treatment of people who think beheading innocents on camera and putting it on the web is the right thing to do.