Tuesday Trivia and Open Thread

 

"Lights Out" - Santogold

Sorry for my lack of production -- I was down all day in the former Confederate capital.  I am afraid my writing production is slipping.  I can't tell if it is a symptom of the end of cultural history, general ennui, or the fact that I haven't been drinking much lately.  (Not due to any commitment to clean living -- I just find that when I have a couple of drinks and sit here with my laptop, I have a distressing tendency to fall asleep.)  So just a couple of quick thoughts before returning to the culture discussion, which I continue to find interesting.

- Isn't this sort of thing a form of mental illness?  Seriously, why does an immensely rich guy who has achieved all kinds of success need to engage in this kind of bullshit?  There is something pathological about our masters of the universe class.  (h/t to Atrios.) 

- We had a discussion the other day about the blogger who had been hit with a $2.5 million judgment for libel.  I had given a pretty cursory analysis about why I did not find the case alarming and, indeed, on the basis of the offending blog post had a feeling that the case was correctly decided.  Paula points out this article in the NY Times today that confirms my reaction. 

- I think that there is much to be said for this description of why many Republicans -- against all reasonable judgment -- cannot resist the temptation to back Newt -- or any other non-Romney candidate. 

- On the other hand, Romney seems like a man who may be getting increasingly cranky at the thoughts of his ambitions being thwarted by the Pillsbury dough boy's egomaniacal right-wing older brother. 

- Evidently conservatives are having deep doubts about the wisdom of a primary campaign dominated by debates. 

- The other impact of the dominant role of the debates is to provide an abundance of free media to underfinanced candidates like Gingrich.  This, in turn, has diminished the need for a traditional campaign organization.  (Someone also pointed out to me recently that the process in Iowa for Republicans is much less complex than that used by the Democrats -- there is less need for the traditional "ground game" in this setting.)  . 

- Sullivan linked to this pretty good bit of advice about how to blog well.  I try my best to follow rule # 1 at least.

What's going on with all of you?

Comments

[big bad wolf]

i guess sullivan thinks factual accuracy is important for posts that have facts? if you're just writing about traitorous fourth columnists the rule doesn't apply? yes, i do have a long memory and i am not forgiving him that one.

yes, corzine has a problem. his money games past and present show that, but i think it was best shown by his actions leading to his car accident when he was governor of new jersey. there he is, the chief upholder and executor of the laws, without a seat belt, instructing his driver to drive 100 mph. he got off easy, to the detriment of those who'd later invest in MF. then again, had corzine smashed himself up worse than he did, some other ubermann would have lost the money for the MF people.

[big bad wolf]

SC, i find that, if one starts drinking earlier, falling asleep can be put off long enough to get more than a couple of drinks in.

[oddjob]

Isn't this sort of thing a form of mental illness?

I think it's called gambling addiction, no?

As to the importance of the ground game in the primaries, if nothing else this poor a level of organization in New Hampshire is yet another reminder of how ill-equipped to be president Newt Gingrich is.

That he would run for president while being this poorly organized at this late a date is a disturbing thing to me. I've read before that working in the Oval Office is like trying to take a drink of water from a fire hose. You can't work in an environment like that if you aren't an organized person. The shabby condition of his New Hampshire campaign is yet another reminder of how disorganized a person Newt Gingrich is.

(The Boston Globe has gotten restrictive about access to its articles, so I apologize in advance if any of you are being denied access.)

[oddjob]

Evidently conservatives are having deep doubts about the wisdom of a primary campaign dominated by debates.

That writer has a very odd perspective about who is a decent candidate.

[corvus9]

Fifth column, bbw, fifth column. Geez, get your facts straight!

[corvus9]

More seriously though, in that abstract I can actually see some benefit to an election cycle more dominated by debates. Candidates should be able to be judged by the public in an equal setting, so that the people can select the candidate they like the best, instead of having the candidate with the most institutional support and rich donor money get handed the nomination because they are the only ones who can afford a good ground game.

On the other hand, one of the reasons last time that I decided to get over my early disillusionment and be enthusiastic about Obama is that the quality of his ground game convinced me he had what it took to run the Federal Government. Organizational skills are important, and who can get their people to show up is who can get things accomplished in office. So it's bad that the basic qualities of leadership and organization are being devalued.

[oddjob]

Food for thought?

I hadn't considered this.

[big bad wolf]

sorry corvus, fifth column, fourth drink

[nancy]

Oddjob -- I've considered that, and have had numerous frustrating telephone exchanges with some poor Comcast phone-bank employee about its 'programming packages'. The ever-more-expensive contract boils down to holding sports fans hostage. I'm trying to convince the *blackmailed* in my household to just head to a cheery bar with a big-screen (or two) which would allow us to do the long-overdue, long-time customer exit. Paying for Fox and its horrid nonsense is absolutely loathsome and it's unclear to me how the FCC, which cared about Janet Jackson and her wardrobe malfunction, doesn't seem to want to assess for propaganda on the air-waves. I think they need a color-code 'bullshit and lies' danger alert system going from red to orange to yellow.

Total aside: this landed in my inbox today. What am I supposed to make of my responsibility here. So which am I? A moron or a sellout? Or both?

>:-|

[corvus9]

understandable

[big bad wolf]

nancy---you gotta get a new mailbox. although i have to say that, for a change, i agree with ian, if only only the broadest level. everything will pass, much of it roughly and unexpectedly. i doubt the promised land is on the other side.

[Sir Charles]

oddjob,

That's an interesting argument for a la carte cable -- not an issue I had really given a great deal of thought to.

nancy,

If I were called a moron or a sellout over there it would be a step up for me. I think the last time I made the mistake of venturing into that world I had been denounced as a moral monster.

Jesus, Ian has really gone off the deep end. I am not overly sanguine about the state of things in the developed world, but the fact of the matter is in much of the world living standards are improving substantially. My sense is that there is going to be some painful muddling through in the U.S. and in Europe, but that the notion that we are facing a future in which there are going to be hundreds of millions or billions of people killed in violence doesn't really strike me as likely. His commenters are even crazier.

(The apocalyptic reaction to the temporary cut in FICA taxes is almost comical -- it's the best kind of stimulus that Obama could get through a Republican House -- it's the kind of tax cut that will be spent in its entirety. Why don't these people get that?)

[corvus9]

I just skimmed that post Nancy linked to. Ian Welsh has lost his fucking mind.

I mean, I am aware that we are dominated by oligarchs who are twisting and destroying our democracy. I am! But my response is not to freak out about the lack of ideological purity of any specific act. It's whether or not that act improves the lot of human beings.

Hey, imposing a no-fly zone on Libya actually seems to have improved the lot of Libyans! I was uncertain about it at the time, but turns out it was a good thing. I don't even care about the legal justifications of it.

Hey, Obamacare is gonna start saving lives because it lowers access to health insurance and gets people care. Saving lives? Always good!

Lowering taxes on the middle/lower class gives families and individuals who have to watch their pocketbook more financial stability. Fuck deficits for now, that helps people out, and gets people working. That's good.

Now, are there things the Obama administration hasn't yet achieve that I want to see done? Well, I want to live in something between democratic socialism and anarcho-communism, so yeah! But that doesn't mean I am not happy with all the advances we are making, and I see very few fronts on which we are regressing (arguably some civil liberties stuff, but not the stuff people are usually talking about, and a lot of that is due to the changing public/private line created by rapidly advancing technology. also school reform. fuck school reform. bunch of bullshit to foster for-profit schools in place of public schools. Fire Arne Duncan!) More and better democrats, people. So long as we keep that up, the revolution will come.

...and I'm only on my second drink!

[Sir Charles]

Corvus,

See -- you were not meant to lurk.

[corvus9]

Thanks Sir Charles!

I have to say, even though I feel bad about it on some level, I love election seasons. All that horse-race shit? It just draws me out. Is anyone else rooting hardcore for Gingrich? I mean, I actually feel bad when the polls aren't looking good for him. I so want him to be the nominee. One, he would crash and burn against Obama, but two, fuck Romney. That plastic robot is just not someone you can root for on any level, just a bad, fake person. But Newt is an genuine, gleeful monster, and I respect him for that. Anyone catch his Bain response from Monday, the video for it? Did you see, the large, child-like Augustus Gloop grin that spread across his face as the reporter was asking him the question, the joy he took in attacking Romney? He seems to honestly love that kind of stuff. Romney is an uncaring robot, unworthy of even our hatred. I would much rather fight the dragon than the robot.

[Sir Charles]

Corvus,

It's funny you say that because despite all of the (deserved) contempt for horse race reporting, I am an election junkie and always have been.

I am finding this Republican race to be pretty much the most fascinating presidential primary season in my adult life. It just seems to defy all of the old rules.

I am definitely rooting for Gingrich for the reasons you state -- 1) the joy of seeing Obama kick him in the ass in a very unambiguous election would bring joy to my heart; and 2) I have a deep and special loathing for Romney. He strikes me as a horrible human being -- someone whose sole driver is a kind of substanceless ambition, that is in its way more egomaniacal than even Gingrich's obvious delusions of grandeur.

Romney also strikes me as akin to a large, muscle bound fighter -- a guy with slow reflexes and very little in his repertoire if things don't go according to plan. Gingrich, on the other hand, is a professional antagonist -- he lives for this kind of crap. Whether he can stay the course over the long haul remains to be seen, but I think if he takes Iowa, South Carolina, and Florida, that Romney is going to be reeling.

[oddjob]

Is anyone else rooting hardcore for Gingrich?

If I knew for certain he was going to lose spectacularly next November, yes I would absolutely be rooting hardcore for Newtie.

As it is I'm more holding my breath than cheering.

[oddjob]

He seems to honestly love that kind of stuff.

I don't doubt that he does. It comes to him so easily and it always has. What first brought him to national prominence in the 1980's the way he used his tongue as a legislator in the House of Representatives.

[oddjob]

“I’m just going by my gut. I shook the guy’s hand, looked him in the eye and he has no soul. I don’t see a conviction. I don’t see a leader. I feel like I’m talking to a robot. I’ve talked to all the other candidates and none of them gave me the vibe that Gingrich did. He is not a guy you want to go have a beer with,”

- Judd Saul, Tea Party member and GOP activist from Black Hawk County

I assume that county's in Iowa. This is also more or less Barney Frank's assessment of Gingrich according to what I've read in the Boston Globe.

(Hat tip, Sully.)

[Sir Charles]

I thought Romney was the robot.

[oddjob]

The more the merrier?

[Paula B]

I know I wouldn't want to have a beer with Michele. Romney probably doesn't drink beer. Ron Paul's cardiologist probably told him stay off the juice. Perry might forget to show up at the bar. Yikes, who does that leave for this ultimate litmus test for presidential mettle?

[Sir Charles]

Michelle Bachmann?

With a morning of sit-com like regret to follow.

[Paula B]

Wow, Time Magazine has named the OWS protester as person of the year. This movement has gone so mainstream, it can expect a counter insurgency soon. The Stay Away from Wall Street movement? The Just Stay Home movement? Don't Do Anything, We're Fine movement?

[Sir Charles]

Isn't time to accuse OWS of having sold out? Of having gone mainstram and gotten too commercial?

[oddjob]

I very much doubt Michelle drinks, either.

[Paula B]

If she does, I'm going to tell her mother.

[nancy]

Walcott is loving on the Newt as only he can do.

And who is Ian Welsh anyway? An awful lot of people seem to like what he has to say. After calling me either a moron or a sellout, in comments he seemed to conclude that I'm also a cocktail-party liberal with no conscience. 'this was not an article such people would like, since it requires them, as with us, to acknowledge our own failings.' I dunno. Doesn't seem a keen strategy to build a movement.

The last 'cocktail party' I attended was a backyard beer-tasting to raise money for the local animal shelter which sent out an emergency request last month asking for cat litter donations. Yeah. That's real rarified.

[Sir Charles]

nancy,

Wow I would have killed to have written that Wolcott piece -- so much awesome in such a small space.

Ian is a little left-wing blogger from the Great White North. I actually had a very pleasant dinner with him a couple of years back when netroots was in Pittsburgh. We hit if off splendidly.

Alas, that was before I revealed myself to be a vile reactionary and sociopath. I've taken a few shellackings over there myself, so don't feel too bad.

I'd excise the link, but I can't quite the hang of updating the blog roll.

[kathy a.]

heh -- great link on newt, nancy!

[nancy]

Sorry, Wolcott. I try to catch these things.

I thought this piece about our economy pretty much captures where we find ourselves. The stimulus failed because we looked at trying to recapture the bubble, rather than look deeper.

"Forget monetary policy. Re-examining the cause of the Great Depression—the revolution in agriculture that threw millions out of work—the author argues that the U.S. is now facing and must manage a similar shift in the “real” economy, from industry to service, or risk a tragic replay of 80 years ago."...

"Two conclusions can be drawn from this brief history. The first is that the economy will not bounce back on its own, at least not in a time frame that matters to ordinary people. Yes, all those foreclosed homes will eventually find someone to live in them, or be torn down. Prices will at some point stabilize and even start to rise. Americans will also adjust to a lower standard of living—not just living within their means but living beneath their means as they struggle to pay off a mountain of debt. But the damage will be enormous. America’s conception of itself as a land of opportunity is already badly eroded. Unemployed young people are alienated. It will be harder and harder to get some large proportion of them onto a productive track. They will be scarred for life by what is happening today. Drive through the industrial river valleys of the Midwest or the small towns of the Plains or the factory hubs of the South, and you will see a picture of irreversible decay."

[nancy]

Sir C -- I've taken a few shellackings over there myself, so don't feel too bad.

Oh, no. That was the figurative and collective virtual me to whom I referred. Not the actual virtual me. Ha. Ha. I'd never wander into Ian's crossfire. Or in my spouse's oft-uttered words (which he attributes to Pierre Salinger) "I may be plucky but I'm not stupid."

[Sir Charles]

I thought that was Daffy Duck.

[nancy]

:) I bet if we dig around enough we'll find Groucho.

[beckya57]

I love Wolcott. So much delicious venom, and all well-deserved.

Sorry I haven't been around much, but my job continues to eat me alive. Basically my life right now is work for 10 hours, come home, eat, play my uke for about 30 minutes, fall into bed, and then get up and do it all over again the next day. I can't wait for the winter slowdown.

nancy, that's a very disturbing link, especially because it rings so true.

[Sir Charles]

becky,

Hang in there. Hopefully you will have a slow down around the holidays.

[big bad wolf]

i bet if we look around enough most of everything can be traced to groucho and his brothers. i don't know if they anticipated the future or simply captured and lampooned the behaviors that persist no matter the change in structures. well, at least until ian causes the deaths of billions. ian, even groucho didn't anticipate.

[Sir Charles]

Well, there's certainly not a lot of yucks going on at that site.

Jesus, I know things are far from optimal in the world, but how you can have such a joyless enterprise going is beyond me. I at least get some laughs from my outrage.

[corvus9]

Some things in life are bad.
They can really make you mad.
Other things just make you swear and curse.
When your chewing on life's gristle,
Don't grumble! Give a whistle,
And this'll help things turn out for the best!

And,
Always look on the bright side of life! (repeat)

[low-tech cyclist]

"i bet if we look around enough most of everything can be traced to groucho and his brothers. i don't know if they anticipated the future or simply captured and lampooned the behaviors that persist no matter the change in structures."

Groucho as Rufus T. Firefly in Duck Soup:

"The last man nearly ruined this place,
he didn't know what to do with it,
if you think this country's bad off now,
just wait 'til I get through with it."

And as Prof. Quincy Adams Wagstaff in Horsefeathers:

"And I've been saying ever since I first commenced it,
I'm against it."

Sounds like the GOP field to me.

(Yes, I do love me some Marx Brothers.)

And since nancy's been kind enough to link to Wolcott, I can't resist quoting this part:

The Republican field reflects the weak-minded, strong-willed prejudices of its base, hooked up to Fox News as if it were an IV drip. So when rightwing bloggers complain about the candidates, they need someone to skywrite for them, "If they suck, it’s because YOU suck."

[nancy]

Here's an antidote and view from Bill McKibben, which I quite liked, to the 'progressives are either morons or sellouts' and 'well-deserved end of the world as we know it' movement.

Philosopher Alvy Singer, age 10, also had something memorable to say.

Optimist at heart here. Actually, I think Groucho was too, deep down.

[Crissa]

I always wanted to point out how miraculously one each of the science and home improvement channels were in each 'package' with other channels I don't care for, and the same for sports channels. I get twenty channels of sports I never watch because ... I don't know why, but they're in the package with the one or two science channels I want to watch.

Sure, it's probably good to give the science channel to the sports guy for free - he doesn't care after all - but be honest about it, wouldja? Ugh.

[kathy a.]

like that mckibben piece, nancy.

[Anonymous Lawyer]

In the open thread part of the proceedings: a California state judge has thrown out California's procedures for capital punishment. The decision is reportedly very detailed about the ways in which the state did not comply with state law in adopting these procedures.

California executions have been on hold for 6 years due to some other litigation in federal court. There will be an initiative on the November 2012 ballot to repeal the death penalty and replace it with life without the possibility of parole; that change would not release anyone, and would save $1 billion in the first five years. Since 1978, California has spent $4 billion on capital punishment, and executed 13 people. There are over 700 on the state's death row.