My apologies for the brief entry. Perhaps I’ll enhance it later today. But I wanted to give everyone the chance to discuss the departure of an American hero, Tom DeLay.
I’m a romantic, so I’m going to pretend that DeLay’s reasons for leaving are what he said. And not, say, the fact that his top aide pleaded guilty in a corruption probe just a couple of days ago.
These are both things that happened to happen by happenstance over the past week. Correlation doesn’t imply causation. Tom DeLay COULD have won his seat back, COULD have regained his power, and WILL be proven innocent of all charges. He just has to do… a thing… at a place… that keeps him from staying on at the thing… because of stuff… that’s not involved with those other things…





77 comments
neocleo
April 5, 2006 at 3:01 pm
1Nothin’ to say ‘ceptin YAY!!!
Chuckles
April 5, 2006 at 3:07 pm
2I have a regret about the whole thing. I just wish I could have voted him out. The problem is, when I moved back into town, I moved out of his district. Damn!
Also, his district is not just Sugar Land. No one ever mentions La Porte (on the other side of Houston, but still in his district).
ice weasel
April 5, 2006 at 3:27 pm
3Oh yeah and he’s leaving his beloved Texas because, well, because he really loves Virginia.
dee
April 5, 2006 at 3:40 pm
4From The Houston Press, back in 1999:
He had graduated from the University of Houston at the height of the Vietnam conflict in 1970, but chose to enlist in the war on cockroaches, fleas and termites as the owner of an exterminator business, rather than going off to battle against the Vietcong.
He and Quayle, DeLay explained to the assembled media in New Orleans, were victims of an unusual phenomenon back in the days of the undeclared Southeast Asian war. So many minority youths had volunteered for the well-paying military positions to escape poverty and the ghetto that there was literally no room for patriotic folks like himself. Satisfied with the pronouncement, which dumbfounded more than a few of his listeners who had lived the sixties, DeLay marched off to the convention.
“Who was that idiot?” asked a TV reporter who arrived at the end of the media show. When he was told the name, it drew a blank. DeLay at that time was a national nobody, and his claim that blacks and browns crowded him and other good conservatives out of Vietnam seemed so outlandish and self-serving that no one bothered to file a news report on the congressman’s remarks.”
Obviously, the congressman would have stayed in the race, but the minorities took all the good spots again!
Sharon
April 5, 2006 at 3:45 pm
5I watched his farewell speech, and his twitchy hands, over the web last night. What tickled me was how often and how forcefully he continues to hitch his fortunes to the Bush White House. I couldn’t tell if he was trying to use them to prop himself up, or to take them down with him. I sure hope it’s the latter.
Sharon
April 5, 2006 at 3:49 pm
6Good find, Dee! Have you been hanging on to it all these years? Yeah, I have vivid memories of the black and Hispanic guys beating down the doors to the local recruiting office back in 1970.
Steve
April 5, 2006 at 3:49 pm
7For some amusing collusion between DeLay and Chris Matthews, check Harry Shearer’s Eat the Press blog over at the HuffPo here.
Mary
April 5, 2006 at 4:15 pm
8Of course Tom-boy is right. My friends Juan, Ruben and Miguel couldn’t wait to join the Army but some how ended up in the Navy. Hmmmm…..
Personally, I hope that Delay’s and Frist’s troubles are just the beginning of the end!!!
Sharon
April 5, 2006 at 4:25 pm
9Of course, all y’all realize that DeLay gets to keep his $1.3 million campaign chest? I expect he will need all of that and more to pay his attorneys.
siobhan
April 5, 2006 at 4:35 pm
10Sharon, I noticed most of the stories on NPR yesterday specifically mentioned that he could use campaign funds for legal defense. Say, you don’t think he went through this whole hard-fought primary just to raise money for the lawyers, do you? I mean, that would be… no, perish the thought.
Sharon
April 5, 2006 at 4:39 pm
11Nah, it’s purely a coincidence that God told him to wait until after the primary to resign. Could he help it if people insisted on throwing money at hism?
[Siobhan, great minds think alike. I’m happy to know that I’m not the only cynic around here.]
Maximum Bob
April 5, 2006 at 4:40 pm
12Yes, that’s why none of us cared about the draft lottery: we knew that those greedy minorities would snatch up the cushy military jobs no matter how low our number. In fact, there were so few open positions that even someone whose father was George Bush had to settle for a position in the Air National Guard.
And it’s a shame there were no illegal drugs in the sixties, as they would have helped ease the pain of those turned away.
Sharon
April 5, 2006 at 4:40 pm
13Darn! How come Adam gets to correct his spelling and I can’t?
waterfowler
April 5, 2006 at 4:46 pm
14How come I feel like Rove stole my Hammer?
Harold
April 5, 2006 at 5:12 pm
15Hmmm…DeLay/Rice in 2008? Is he just stepping out of the spotlight for a little while to let the dust settle?
Maximum Bob
April 5, 2006 at 5:45 pm
16How about Douglas Rain (the voice of HAL in 2001) and Tom DeLay in 2008? We really need a ticket called Rain/DeLay.
waterfowler
April 5, 2006 at 6:36 pm
17I’ve heard enough from Hot Tub. Lame excuses. He’s fixin’ to get PAID.
Hot Tub Tommy
April 5, 2006 at 8:44 pm
18Mr. waterfowler, I believe I read somewhere that you’re from Texas, is that right? Well, I’m feeling negative vibes from you right now and I must say that’s not the Lone Star way! When your horse stumbles, falls and breaks a leg, you whip out your side arm, put your friend out of his misery, bite your trembling lower lip, hoist the saddle to your shoulder and start walking to where you were headed. You don’t quit… ever. So don’t quit on me now. I need you, and all your friends here, to look on the bright side of things. I ain’t been convicted of nothing. I’ve got $1.3 million in the coffers and that ought to buy me some serious jaw-boning from my team of barracudas. And if everything goes to shit and I get jail time, well, I’ve always got that Presidential pardon as an ace in the hole. Of course, I’m counting on W., Laura, Karl, Harriet, Scooter, the boys from Bahrain, and Condi (and the Venezulan donkeys) still wanting the video of “The Lost Weekend on Orient Beach” to remain out of the main stream media. I watched it again last night and I think it’s safe to say, I won’t be facing any serious down time. Before you know it, I’ll be out making speeches @ 50 grand a pop and puffing of nothing but Cuba’s finest. Don’t cry for me. I have a vast right wing conspiratorial fortune socked away in un-numbered accounts in Zurich, the Caymans and Dubai. In many ways, it’s a relief to be shed of those assholes in DC. My new life starts right now! Yeehaw! Rules are for suckers! Look out world! Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!
Former Representative Thomas DeLay (Soon to be on an island somewhere - but not San Quentin!)
ginny
April 5, 2006 at 10:20 pm
19I’m sorry, Bob, I’m afraid they can’t do that.
ice weasel
April 5, 2006 at 11:56 pm
20so…(gasing for breath)…perfect…ginny
tim
April 6, 2006 at 8:58 am
21Hey Chuckles, I used to live in Pearland. I also regret not getting to vote out “The Bug Killing Dwarf King Of The GOP Legislative Pig Pack”, as Marc Maron calls him. I guess I’ll have to settle for voting out “26 Marine-Killing Osprey Boy” Curt Weldon, and his buddy, Rick “The Mixture of Fecal Matter and Lube That Often Results From Anal Sex” Santorum.
These Republicans need to work on their nicknames.
siobhan
April 6, 2006 at 9:44 am
22So, I’ve heard more than one Santorum reference along these lines. Somehow missed the original incident/soundbite. Anyone who can point in the right direction?
Stephen
April 6, 2006 at 10:06 am
23Well, you know that Dick is having such a hard time recovering from the hunting accident that I wouldn’t be suprised to see him retire and Tommy tapped for the VP post. That would put him in a good position for ‘08
David
April 6, 2006 at 11:06 am
24Just remember, Delay is (was?) an aid to sustained personal sexual intercourse, rather as DeLay has been an aid to sustained political sexual intercourse. But not to fear - DeLay’s replacement in the House leadership seems quite capable of continuing to provide the body politic with a continuing sustained screwing. The only thing that has changed is the driver.
Kimberly
April 6, 2006 at 12:24 pm
25Siobhan-
Dan Savage (of Savage Love column fame) started a campaign to associate Santorum’s name with a sexual act/side effect that was as gross as he is. It took off, and for a while, when you google “santorum” you get the definition before youge anything about Rick.
-
siobhan
April 6, 2006 at 12:33 pm
26Kimberly, thank you. Because why would I ever think to try Google? must. get. coffee.
siobhan
April 6, 2006 at 2:09 pm
27Scooter sez: okay came from prez
Ann
April 6, 2006 at 2:39 pm
28And on the subject of taking politicians’ names in vain, there’s a movement on to make “napoli” a not-nice word, also:
“napoli (verb): To brutalize and rape, sodomize as bad as you can possibly make it, a young, religious virgin woman who was saving herself for marriage.
“Etymology: From State Senator Bill Napoli’s (R-SD) words on an acceptable description of rape that would merit an exemption from South Dakota’s abortion ban.”
So much for the claim that religion makes you stronger—Napoli thinks it makes you more susceptible to psychological damage.
But I digress. I can’t WAIT to hear what else Scooter has to say!
SeattleDan
April 6, 2006 at 3:14 pm
29I wonder how much longer Bush and the crew go around decrying the leaker of the news that he authorized wiretaps on US citizens.
Oh, probably forever.
cooper
April 6, 2006 at 3:33 pm
30Okay, off target, but not really. I hoping you guys were listening to Neil Conan and Talk of the Nation during the first hour. He switched to a feed from a question and answer session that Bush had today in Charlotte. The person asking the question, my good buddy Harry Taylor, asked a very thoughtful and complex question about whether Mr. Bush was ashamed of his domestic spying program, his opposition to women having the right to choose to end a pregnancy, his abysmal record on the environment and a whole litany of affronts to common decency. Unfortunately, Harry addressed that question to George W. Bush and, in the end, it was wasted on the President. W gave his canned response to his Terrorist Survellience Program, blah, blah, blah, and did not go near abortion, environment, or shame. Surprisingly, Neil Conan presented the exchange as an example that Bush can, indeed, think on his feet when confronted with a hostile questioner. WTF. I want my NPR dues back!
Ann
April 6, 2006 at 4:34 pm
31There’s no point in asking almost ANY politician a hostile question, or at least not whether said pol feels shame about something. Your friend certainly didn’t expect to create shame where none exists, did he?
siobhan
April 6, 2006 at 4:35 pm
32Cooper, I think it’s a lesson in asking questions - you have to keep your focus narrow. Even a respondant with good intentions has a hard time keeping track of a multiple choice - how many times have you heard someone partially respond and then say “and what was the other part of your question??” Those who want to skate out of a tough question just pick and choose the parts that are easy.
One of my recreations is writing letters to the editor. I’ve found that two or three sharp sentances almost always get published. Hitting every single point means that none of your points see the light of day.
cooper
April 6, 2006 at 4:39 pm
33Here’s a link to the President’s question and answer session -
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/06/bush.ap/index.html
Harold
April 6, 2006 at 5:05 pm
34Condoleezza Rice is definitely the queen of dodging the direct question. With Bush you can always allow that maybe he simply didn’t understand what you asked because you used big words or complex sentences. With Rice you know damned well that she knows what she’s being asked, but has made the decision not to answer - and instead she dodges the question with a long, complex, multi-layered response that covers lots of territory but never comes close to answering the question - and woe betide you if you attempt to interrupt. We saw this during her (long-delayed) 9/11 Commission testimony, and I saw another example on The Daily Show the othr day. If she ever becomes President, press conferences will be worse than useless.
siobhan
April 6, 2006 at 5:30 pm
35Cooper - so, who is Harry Taylor? I just read the transcript and see that it was more of a statement than a question. I think it’s great that he managed to get the opportunity, and he made good use of it.
(Crooks and Liars say “I wonder how Fox News - I mean the Secret Service - let him in”)
cooper
April 6, 2006 at 5:36 pm
36Ann, siobhan, Harold, all points well taken, especially the part about asking Bush tough, complicated questions with big words.
Hot Tub Tommy
April 6, 2006 at 6:50 pm
37siobhan, Harry is an acquaintance that is very much interested in environmental concerns. (Ice, you’ll be happy to know that he is the proud owner of a brand new Prius.) Approaching sixty, he’s done some thinking and is reprioritizing his goals in life. He sold me a commercial building back in 1994 and he’s just the kind of soft spoken, thoughtful and friendly guy that I took to right off. He walks the walk - builds Habitat for Humanity houses in his spare time. I sent him an e-mail congratulating him for his courageous statement to the President; called him a sleeper Patriot; told him we’ll need many more like him in the near future. He’s just an average guy who rose to the occassion. Bless him!
Landis
April 6, 2006 at 6:58 pm
38I think HT Tommy has had a fairly traumatic experience recently. He seems to be completely shedding his darker side - either that or he’s off his meds (or finally on them).
David
April 6, 2006 at 6:59 pm
39Cooper,
I agree that your friend actually did a good thing in raising the issues. I doubt he expected an answer, except for whatever canned response Bush has been trained to offer. Perhaps of greater value than seeing what a less-than-zero Bush actually is is what it revealed about Neil Conan and NPR, which is now no better than the rest of the MSM, and far inferior to Keith Olberman’s show. Christiane Amanpour and some other folk at NPR are holdouts for actual journalism, but the change in NPR as a news organization is pretty appalling.
Wonder if Bush has a clue that Leo Strauss is the godfather of the neocon right to indulge in noble lies? Since Bush likely doesn’t know who Locke was, or anything about Plato besides his name, I assume he simply believes in his right to lie, as has been the case his whole privileged life, and it’s simply icing on the cake that there is any kind of backdrop in the western intellectual tradition for the notion. Not sure whence the neocons look for endorsement of the right to indulge in noble treason. Perhaps Cheney looks at his navel.
Maximum Bob
April 6, 2006 at 9:14 pm
40Geez, are we all going to dump NPR because Neil Conan screwed up? Other than the BBC, it’s still the only place you can get decent news. And I hear tell they have some funny weekend shows.
Sharon
April 6, 2006 at 10:44 pm
41I wrote a long, thoughtful comment from school tonight, but because I forgot that I had to fill in my name and email because I was on a strange computer, my entire message got munged when I hit the ‘Reply’ button. Then some young whippersnapper tried to tell me that ARPA came before DARPA, instead of the other way around, and I let her get away with it because I’d already usurped enough of her presentation on the history of the Internet.
But I think what I intended to say was that it doesn’t matter how plainly and straight-forwardly you put a question to a politician–he’ll find a way around it. Just look at what happened to Helen Thomas last week. And I, too, have been disappointed in NPR News these last 5 or 6 years now. Too often the reporter fails to ask the obvious [to me] follow up questions. Too often they fail to call a lie a lie, on the grounds of presenting both sides of the “controversy.” I much prefer The Daily Show for hard-hitting interviews.
Hot Tub Tommy
April 7, 2006 at 7:10 am
42Dammit! My lawyer’s left-wing nephew survived the Rottweiler attack and is recovering in an Austin Hospital. Before the EMT’s picked him up, he must have stumbled onto the Abramoff cache out in the barn. Nuncio did a quick inventory and determined one laptop is missing, so obviously he’s at it again, sending out liberal claptrap and signing my name to it. I do not know or care about Harry Taylor and his attack on Bush. For all me, they can both be dipped in shit. Guido “The Neck” has gone to retrieve the laptop and to personally adjust the nephew’s medication and that should end that. I must be going soft - why would you even think for one moment that I would write such hog-wash? Wait a minute - I’m not soft; the whole rest of the world is soft - in the head! Bwaaa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!
Just Plain Tom DeLay
David
April 7, 2006 at 9:05 am
43Yes, I’ll dump on NPR when they deserve it. Sharon has the nature of and the time frame for the decline right. She’s also right about the better place for interviews, although one of the brightest spots on NPR is still Fresh Air. To entirely too great an extent, NPR is going the way of Bob Woodward. I suspect that had Al Gore become 43, the CPB, PBS, and NPR would all be far superior to what they have become, as would the FCC, along with everything else in any way affected by who is in the White House.
They have entertainment on NPR? Anyone we know?
I didn’t mean Christiane, dammit. She’s still fighting the good fight at CNN, isn’t she. She filled in for Charley Rose the other night, setting my CRS brain up for that goof. Dammit, what is the name of the woman I’m thinking of at NPR?
Save NPR - put a Democrat in the White House.
cooper
April 7, 2006 at 9:22 am
44“Dammit, what is the name of the woman I’m thinking of at NPR?”
David, you are, of course, thinking of that chocolate skinned, silver throated vixen, Lakshmi Signh. And who can blame you? Woo-Hoo! I can’t get her off my mind, either.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=2101212
Scooby
April 7, 2006 at 9:33 am
45I’m sad I missed Lakshmi during her days at my local WAER.
Neil Conan’s Tsunami interviews were memorable for how appalling they were. He seemed to either have no clue or empathy for the plight of the people on the other end of the phone.
siobhan
April 7, 2006 at 9:36 am
46Anne Garrels? Nina Totenberg?
Sharon
April 7, 2006 at 10:08 am
47Sing, Libby, sing!
Harold
April 7, 2006 at 10:38 am
48Sylvia Pujoooooli? (Sorry, that’s kinda phoenetic - didn’t look up the spelling, but I’m pretty sure it must involve at least five “o”s in a row.)
siobhan
April 7, 2006 at 10:47 am
49Sylvia Poggioli! How could I forget? I saw her at City Arts & Lectures in SF. The event was sold out - scalpers out front and all. Sylvia rocks!
Stephen
April 7, 2006 at 11:04 am
50Cooper,
I pulled up TOTN and listened to the clip you mentioned. I thought Conan was saying that Bush didn’t speak to a carefully screened audience like normal. I didn’t get that he thought Bush responded to Harry’s statement well. I like Neil, but he does seem to have a hard time “winging it” himself.
On a related note, I would like to say AMEN to everything Harry said. I also thought that Bush’s guttural “yeah?” and “finish your question!” statements, IMHO, reveal him to be as uncaring and disinterested in opposing opinions as I have feared he would be.
Murray
April 7, 2006 at 11:38 am
51Polititions can’t be candid. If they told the truth openly, their words would be held against them by oppositions candidates. Think of the stupid things that Jessie Ventura said. For the first while, he said his mind and people said what an idiot. Eventually he learned politition speak and fell into line with the rest.
If you want to know the truth it’s going to have to come from other sources.
Stephen
April 7, 2006 at 12:04 pm
52Murray,
Do you think most people want their politicians to be candid? Just curious. In my more cynical moments I think the general public just is just as disinterested in reality as Bush is. Politicians that speak their mind usually don’t get elected, even if they are right. That drives me crazy.
Reading this blog makes me think that maybe I am wrong and lots of people want to be engaged in the system. Then I start counting names…
*sigh*
Sharon
April 7, 2006 at 12:36 pm
53These days I’m constantly reminded of the line from “A Few Good Men”: “The ‘truth’? You can’t handle the TRUTH.”
Lemuel
April 7, 2006 at 1:05 pm
54Hi, I’ve emailed this blog a couple of times by using a laptop that belonged to one of my uncle’s clients. My name is Lemuel. I’m emailing from my cell phone as I am being driven down what has to be a badly rutted dirt road. I’m in the back of a pick-up truck, stuffed into a steamer trunk. There must have been another trunk also, with someone named Barry Mailer or Larry Naylor or something like that - I couldn’t hear him very well and he sounded like he had been drugged. He was babbling something about President Bush and humility and grace to feel ashamed of himself… It didn’t really make any sense to me, so I figured he was still kind of woozy. So am I. Anyway, we hit a big bump about 5 miles ago and his trunk bounced out of the back of the pick-up as we were going through one of the few south Texas desert towns. Talk about luck! His trunk split apart and I heard some of the townfolk shout in amazement as he stood up and brushed himself off.
I remember I was in the hospital in Austin; it seems that I had been attacked by some big mean dogs; dragged myself into a barn and slammed the door just before they attacked again; lights and sirens, we’re going fast on a smooth road like a dream; nice nurses - one was a pretty blonde - she gave me an IV line and injected something into the line and I slept and didn’t hurt anymore; someone pulling hard on my IV, I struggle, his shirt falls open, I see a gold chain and part of a tattoo on his chest - “…he Nec…” - he gives me a shot, but he’s a terrible nurse, but very strong I cannot fight he picks me up and I go black and I wake up in this trunk and Harry falls out and I’m still going down this rough road. Help me. Please.
Ann
April 7, 2006 at 2:19 pm
55Stephen, I’m afraid you are sadly right about whether the general public really wants politicians to speak the truth, but on the other hand I do think that leaders COULD speak the truth if they did it in an inspiring way. We’re all familiar with the anecdotes about WWII leaders who inspired the public to sacrifice for a shared cause.
No one wants to hear “Get rid of your SUVs, you lazy selfish pigs,” but “Together we can save our beautiful country by conserving” might have some effect. Has Dubya ever said that?
Maximum Bob
April 7, 2006 at 3:42 pm
56David, I asked if we were all going to “dump” (i.e., give up) NPR, not “dump on.” Feel free to dump on them all you want, but when the day is done, how many places are there to go for decent news reporting?
My concern is that every political blog I read seems to specialize in eviscerating any news source that doesn’t tell the story in exactly the “right” way. That’s a unrealistically high standard; the best I hope for is that the person or agency telling the story tries as hard as possible to get it right. I don’t expect that everything I hear is going to tickle.
siobhan
April 7, 2006 at 4:11 pm
57Sharon, I was thinking of that same scene this morning while ruminating (again) over Harry Taylor’s comments. It really is the mantra for our times.
Ann
April 7, 2006 at 4:43 pm
58Hey Cooper—this blog has a photo and admiring article about your friend Harry Taylor:
http://www.pensitoreview.com/
Of course I have no idea how to use HTML tags. Sorry.
P.S. Tell Harry I think he’s cute.
Ann
April 7, 2006 at 4:47 pm
59I also like what Jane Smiley has to say–and it turns out that I don’t have to use tags to post a link! Whoo hoo!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-smiley/notes-for-converts_b_17662.h tml
Sharon
April 7, 2006 at 5:30 pm
60MoveOn.org has set up a “Thank You Harry Taylor” website:
http://thankyouharrytaylor.org/
SeattleDan
April 7, 2006 at 5:47 pm
61Thanks for the links,Ann and Sharon. I sent along my regards to Mr.Taylor.Looks like there has already been over 11,000 responses.
siobhan
April 7, 2006 at 6:01 pm
62I also added my thanks. As I was composing my thoughts, I realized that the photo of Harry reminds me of the famous Norman Rockwell Freedom of Speech painting. Appropriate.
Sharon
April 7, 2006 at 6:05 pm
63Thanks for the Jane Smiley piece, Ann. I’m sending it to everyone I know, especially my family and friends in Texas, who might be able to pass it along to their conservative friends.
Sharon
April 7, 2006 at 6:12 pm
64Siobhan, except for the look on the faces of the people around him. One woman looks like she just sucked on a lemon.
Ann
April 7, 2006 at 6:17 pm
65Yes, Sharon, I was just going to mention that! I think she was saying, “Oh, no, he DID-unt!”
And Siobhan, that’s a brilliant comparison. Thanks!
cooper
April 7, 2006 at 6:39 pm
66Stephen, re your thoughts in # 50 above on Neal Conan’s intro to the Bush v Harry Taylor segment - I have to admit that I was not listening that closely to what was being said until I heard the words “Charlotte” and “Harry Taylor”. I have since gone back and listened to the clip and you are correct. I guess I was picking up on Neal’s tone. I also guess I owe an apology to Mr. Conan. I must have still been fuming about an outrageous statement by an Administration hack from a previous program that Neal let go by with out a challenge. My bad. Thanks for pointing that out.
Ann, siobhan and Sharon - thanks for the links. I passed them on to Harry.
Sharon
April 7, 2006 at 7:25 pm
67Cooper, ask him if he’s married. And if he is married, ask him what the long term prospects are.
David
April 7, 2006 at 7:37 pm
68Harold,
She’s the lady, and a terrific one. I’m not surprised by siobhan’s report. I would have paid a scalper.
Maximum Bob,
Thanks for the correction. Dumping NPR would be a terrible thing. NPR Headline News is what I find the most disappointing, that and the general drift away from the kind of journalism Bill Moyers champions. I do share your reaction to blogs that eviscerate any news report not in sync with the bloggers’ views. Truth comprehensive enough to facilitate insight and information people in power don’t want you to have - those are the hallmarks of good journalism. It does seem to me that people don’t really want to hear it until they get the fact that they need to hear it. Sometimes that can only come from a Walter Cronkite. Wish Sylvia were taking over as anchor of the CBS Evening News. Hope Katie Couric blossoms into a substantive journalist. One never knows.
The best news program at the moment, in my judgement, is Democracy Now. Amy Goodman is a first-rate journalist, and fearless, Lobster love her.
Maximum Bob
April 7, 2006 at 7:56 pm
69I believe that the woman sitting next to Harry Taylor was either booing or having a peak experience. I read somewhere that it was the former; if true, it is every patriot’s duty to spread the rumor that it was the latter.
cooper
April 7, 2006 at 11:39 pm
70Max Bob, having grown up in this region, let me hazard a guess. She is on a mission from God to boo and cast apersions, shame, and spite upon all that is not bound by the Holy chains of Jesus Christ All Mighty, Himself. And in doing this, she has her peak experience.
Forgive my cynicism. I’ll go to bed now.
David
April 8, 2006 at 12:33 pm
71Cooper,
That ain’t cynicism, that’s a willingness to face facts. And yeah, she would be getting off on exactly that if she is the representative Fanatic Fundie that you suspect she is. She probably would have qualified as a wetland under Gail Norton’s definition if she’d been sitting on the ground.
Murray
April 9, 2006 at 12:20 pm
72Stephen,
I think that the public wants politicians to speak the truth as long as it agrees with them.
Here are Murray’s 5 laws of politics.
1. Do what ever is necessary to win.
2. Your primary job once elected is to be re-elected.
3. Because of rule #2, your primary function is campaign fundraising.
4. Never take a stand on a political issue; doing so will piss off at least half of the people. If you are forced to take a stand, over simplify the issue and put it in emotional terms, remember, the public doesn’t think, it feels.
5. Occasionally you must legislate, (an annoyance) and to do so means you must vote on an issue. This is your order of priority.
1. Contributors (see rule #3)
2. Impressing friends, mistresses etc.
3. Party
4. Whim
5. Conscience (don’t worry it almost never comes to this).
David
April 9, 2006 at 10:10 pm
73Murray,
Distressingly valid. The ones who do take principled stands either get marginalized or crucified.
siobhan
April 9, 2006 at 10:30 pm
74Here’s the thingabout here: At FA, 1) I’m never the most cynical person around, and b) it’s always entertaining. A rare combo.
siobhan
April 9, 2006 at 10:30 pm
75and, III) consistency is highly overrated.
Stephen
April 10, 2006 at 10:26 am
76Murray,
WOW, that was distressingly accurate. I’m going to go sit in the corner and cry for a while.
Siobhan,
I heard Car Talk talking about some great Tahoe spots. I was hoping they would mention yours!
David
April 12, 2006 at 12:40 pm
77On the virtues of changing one’s mind, especially (hint, hint, Mr. President) when reality intrudes with all its matter-of-factness (cf. Robert Frost).
“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson
“Do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself.”
Henry David Thoreau
[Damned, do I ever hope I got all of the above right, lest I otherwise be compelled to slash my wrists in a moment of profound literary shame.]