November 5, 2008

On nobility

Patterico:

Good men do bad things, and in the pursuit of ambition, they almost always do. Barack Obama is not perfect, by any stretch of the imagination.

What’s more, I think he will damage this country with bad policies. I’m not going to pretend otherwise. Inevitably, he is going to take actions that I think are disastrous, and somebody will come back and say: “Hey, Patterico! I thought you said Barack Obama was a good man!” Yes, but I never said he wasn’t going to do horrible things. It’s quite clear he will.

What’s more, there is no way in hell he is going to do away with the poisonous atmosphere in Washington, and anyone who thinks that he can is a fool. It will be amusing to watch him try.

But I make no apologies for saying he is a good man. He is my President. He is our President. And while he hasn’t always done good, I do believe he is fundamentally a good man and a patriot who wants to make this country a better place.

Precisely the kind of self-righteous civility that fried McCain. Want to be clapped on the back for your decorum? Fine. Just say so.

But let’s not pretend you are being honest or principled. Graciousness is one thing; praise is another.

This “good man” was involved in ACORN blackmail schemes. With an attempt to fraudulently undermine the Second Amendment by gaming court rulings. He got rich off of schemes that led to the mortgage crisis — then stood by and let others fix it in order to keep his hands clean during the final stages of an election. He has thrown in with race hustlers,”reformers” who believe that domestic terrorism was a valid form of expression, odious foreign potentates –

There is nothing at all noble about praising a man and a party who reviles you simply because in doing so you appear noble. Jews have tried that. And it’s often ended with skeletons and ash, or the twisted wreckage of a bus in Tel Aviv.

In this case, it will end with more McCains — and so more Obamas and Reids and Pelosis and Olbermanns.

If that’s nobility, I’m not interested. Yes, Obama is my President. But that doesn’t mean I’m forced to forget all he’s done to get there — and all that’s been done on his behalf, either by the savage supporters who went after Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin, or by the “objective media” that sold its soul for a shot at establishing the government it desired.

A good man?

A good politician, sure. A dedicated husband and father, yes. But a good man?

Sorry. But good men don’t lie, cheat, steal, and throw longtime supporters by the wayside just so they can rise to power — even if they’ve convinced themselves they’re doing so for some Greater Good.

Because the fact is, in this country, they’re not supposed to get to decide what that is. We are.

The rest is hubris.

****
update: For those coming over from some of the sites linking this piece, my follow-up post is here, and it explains in greater detail why I think Patterico’s position is not only wrong but dangerous.

And no, I don’t think Patterico in general dishonest or unprincipled. Quite the opposite, in fact. But in this instance, I believe he made a calculated and ostentatious decision to take the high road, and in doing so he forced himself to call someone a good man whom he knows to be quite the opposite (and has in fact suggested as much on a number of occasions).

In so doing, he has given cover to reprehensible behavior. If he believes such pragmatism will win elections, fine. Me, I’d rather lose the next few rounds if it means resurfacing with classical liberal principles intact and at the core of every campaign we run.

Posted by Jeff G. @ 11:15am
285 comments | Trackback

Comments (285)

  1. Oh. I just went over there before reading this, and said “I told you so” in advance of him finding out O is not a good man at all.

  2. Oh is not who he thinks O is.

  3. And if you do bad things as a leader, you might as well be a bad man, for all the difference it makes in outcome. Pol Pot meant very well indeed.

  4. pure post-partisan pablum…Honor posturing palaver…

  5. it’s like the homeless guy who asks me to give him a
    a-cigarette
    b-money
    sure/i might give you something something
    just spare me the stories of
    “my cousin went to the bank w/my check”

    save it

  6. Ok, I got my laugh of the day reading a comment” on the Catalano piece

    “Look at the vote – if you can’t compromise and learn to work within the system, I believe it is you that have been shown the door. Patriotic Americans want to work with other Patriotic Americans to make this country better for ALL of us”

    There’s more, but it’s a hoot.

  7. So, who is this Galt fellow everyone’s talking about, anyway?

  8. “A good man?

    A good politician, sure. A dedicated husband and father, yes. But a good man?”

    Bingo. We don’t know the man to call him a good man. Power is what posessed him to run for that position. And I’m not even faulting him for that. Hell, somebody has to run for president, but don’t sit there and tell me he’s a good man. Or anyone who runs for the most powerful position in the free world. Good/Bad? It makes no difference. He wanted power. The only question for the voter is do I agree with his/her policies. Words like good/change/hope are bullshit, imo.

  9. Not that O is Pol Pot, but he is infected with ideas of “justice” that are inimical to human nature and end up choking virtue.

  10. I’m prepared to be an Alinskyite for liberty. I’m not quite sure how to go about infiltrating.

  11. “Yes, Obama is my President.”

    You’ve got him Jeff.
    I plan to just ignore him for the next 4 years as much as his tax policies will let me.

  12. In contemplating this moment, and my reaction, it occurs to me that, to support The Obama, you must be either naive and ignorant, or evil and the enemy. There can be no middle ground.

  13. In my circles, a good man, when he finds out that his brother lives in a box, sends a couple bucks his way until he gets back on his feet. Or if he finds out that his aunt is about to be evicted from he slum because of immigration confusion, and if he has the keys to the world, he tries to grease the skids a little.

    Obama is not a good man, and no one with any sense would say he is. He is a black man though. And him fucking his staff member and then sending her off to Martinique kind of blunts the good family man theory as well. But she had nice nips. “Has” if she’s still alive.

  14. “Precisely the kind of self-righteous civility that fried McCain.”

    McCain said during the primaries “I’d rather lose an election than lose a war.”

    Well, now we get to lose the war. But McCain gets to rest easy because his ‘honor’ is intact.

    Well, so was Hector’s right before Achilles dragged his corpse around Troy . . .

  15. Technically, Obama isn’t black enough. Given his half-whiteness and all.

    And that’s according to his senior adviser on race, as well.

    48,000 Google pages can’t be wrong:
    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=obama+black+%22one+drop%22&aq=f&oq=

    so, cheer up, Jeff!

  16. Actually, it seems to me that this election was decided by the Media, that is, the media’s bias was enough to put Obama over the top. And, by the way, if you think that the press’ habit of shielding “The One” from criticism and investigation of wrongdoing is over now that he’s won, think again. Already they’ve moved on to the next stage of enabling: resetting expectations.

    In the AP article linked to above, the author Liz Sidoti goes out of her way to emphasize what a tough job their poor benighted hero will have governing the country. And so it will be for four years: every minor victory will be hailed as a great triumph, and every abject failure a minor setback, which, they’ll contend, was George Bush’s fault anyway. And no unsavory aspect of their messiah will ever, ever undergo any scrutiny.

  17. “you must be either naive and ignorant, or evil and the enemy”

    I’m not sure about that. Honest to goodness socialists/communists/collectivists that voted for him and support him are fine by me. I disagree wholeheartedly with their political stances and will fight to the end to oppose them, but I don’t think they’re evil, just incredibly wrong. The naive and ignorant? Legion, unfortunately. Also the gimme, gimme, gimme’s.

  18. It will be amusing to watch him try.

    Well then don’t blink because you might miss it.

    Or maybe you’ll assume you somehow missed it when in reality Obama is not going to be reaching out to anyone but his own.

  19. I stopped reading patterico years ago because of this kind of twaddle.

  20. Noah, you are 100% correct.

  21. Well put and well done, Jeff. Open eyes are needed, not blind praise.

  22. Leftards of all stripes really come in only two flavors: Stupid (well-meaning) and Evil (power hungry fascists). Captain Bullshit was raised by lefty radicals to BE a lefty radical. I believe he is incapable of “moving to the center” or otherwise making decisions that are good for the country. He is, at heart, a corrupt Chicago politician, with all the baggage that goes with the title. Hw is of the fascist category of leftard. He is not my president.

  23. The Left has always been very good at one particular thing, committees, forming them, running them, setting up the underlying rules that govern them.

    Starting at the 1968 convention, while the “street theatrics” distracted the nation, the real revolutionaries took up the task of slowly changing the rules governing the committiees that actually run the “Party”.

    One of “Ric’s Rules” is “the ants will find the sugar”. The changes to the rules made sure that only the most ruthless and aggressive ants could gain and hold onto the sugar. After that nature took it’s course and “will to power” became the way to rise.

    The first major results were seen in 1992. It was however premature and 1994 resulted. Those lessons have been learned. There will be a drive to make sure no Gingrich or Gingrich revolution can happen. “Never again” is not just a slogan for the “Holocaust Jews” only. The first 100 days of Obama will be some “interesting times”.

    What we call “the long march through the institutions” is the same adjustment of the committee rules applied to other institutions. It has the makings of a new “Water Empire” based on energy this time.

    Call it “The Evil Empire Strikes Back” if you need a cultural reference.

    Today I have dark thoughts and foresee dark times ahead. I pray I’m wrong and fear that I am right.

  24. Or maybe you’ll assume you somehow missed it when in reality Obama is not going to be reaching out to anyone but his own.

    Thor, at least, will get a reach around.

  25. And he shall be Levon
    And he shall be a good man…

  26. Pathetic and not very outlawish to say the least.

  27. This “purification” thing.

    It’s a *good* thing, right?

  28. pure post-partisan pablum…Honor posturing palaver…

    A “good man?”  Maybe Patterico can, for just one moment stand inside Stanley Kurtz‘s shoes.

  29. Thor, at least, will get a reach around.

    Not a chance. Then they (trust fund hammer boi being just one of many useful idiots not belonging to a specific grievance group, thus not being at all priviledged) will think they matter and will expect further attention or withhold their unrequited affectations – possibly even get vindictive.

    Can’t have the little people getting all uppity. Not when their are great works to be accomplished.

  30. Take what solace you can in the fact that the portable collapse of wide swaths of the US financial firmament in late Sept. and early Oct. likely cost McCain the election. Until then, it appeared he would have carried Fla. and NC, if not IA. and a few others.

    If Lehman and AIG hadn’t gone tits up there is a good chance that the graciousness would be coming from O!

    also, it might be helpful to recall that graciousness and Michelle Catalano and Patrick Frey and all the rest are hardly the fucking problem here.

    It is coming up with someone who can annunciate pratical and beneficial conservative ideas and then execute them–despite the inevitable heat he/she will face.

    The right blogosphere was pretty busy the last few years on things other than holding elected officials balls to the fire to come up with some plan for victory in Afghanistan. It might have been handy if someone on the right noted that the entire US economy had become a levered carry trade.

  31. What we call “the long march through the institutions” is the same adjustment of the committee rules applied to other institutions. It has the makings of a new “Water Empire” based on energy this time.

    They’re very patient, Ric. They’ve learned from their mistakes. It might not happen in that first 100 days, but it will happen.

  32. “Call it “The Evil Empire Strikes Back” if you need a cultural reference. ”

    So you’re saying, under Obama, the country gets its ass whipped, looses a hand, finds out its Founding Fathers were actually secret/stealth Sith Lords, and the economy gets frozen in carbonite?

    Ok.

    I got it.

  33. The right blogosphere was pretty busy the last few years on things other than holding elected officials balls to the fire to come up with some plan for victory in Afghanistan. It might have been handy if someone on the right noted that the entire US economy had become a levered carry trade.

    To be fair, some did, but that’s a pretty esoteric trend to decode and not one for your garden-variety blogger.

    I think you’re right, though, about the dextrosphere not taking Bush to task for his outrageous spending spree.

  34. geoffb,
    Can the “Return of the Jedi” be Romney/Palin 2012?

    I mean, we gott’a black dude now. What’s a mormon matter?

  35. jeffersonian, you are right and point taken.
    But….Krugman and other leftie poli-econ sorts, I have a minor migraine just thinking of the turds, did. They constantly harped on stuff like this.

    whats worse is they were right—not on the political angles, but on the pending risks associated with the trade deficits, lack of savings and the like.

    we need someone who can run for the white house and not have this exposed flank.

  36. Had McCain explained the financial crisis — instead of going with the easy “corporate greed” schtick — he might have carried it. But he was afraid that attacking FandF would be seen as “racist.”

    Stupid, and ultimately costly.

    Too, Catalano and Frey aren’t the problem per se. But posts like the two on offer today most certainly are part of the problem. Somebody spends eight years telling you you’re a racist warmongering hater, you don’t respond by kissing them on the ring and pretending you’ve done so out of some manner of nobility.

    You haven’t. And you’ve suggested that such behavior works.

  37. “Can the “Return of the Jedi” be Romney/Palin 2012?”

    Or Palin/Jindal. Or Palin/Steele.

    BTW JBean #32 that was me, I quoted a rule by Ric Locke but I cannot ever claim to be him.

  38. I cracked up reading Patterico.

    He lists as faults in Obamas campaign: Wright, Ayers and Rezko, grisly forms of late-term abortion, race baiting, credit card fraud, thug tactics to suppress free speech, broken promises, lying about McCain, “and much more”.

    Then dismisses that rather impressive list with: “The fact is that John McCain did some things that weren’t too savory during this campaign as well, and as the saying goes, politics ain’t beanbag.”

    Moral equivalency! Are you fucking shitting me!!

    McCain loses the fucking election because he refused to talk about all that shit,in the name of an “honorable campaign”, and he is still no better than Obama.

    I am more concerned about the betrayal of conservatism within the Republican party than an Obama Presidency today. You know, the ones that made us take McCain up the ass, and moan convincingly.

    Now, Obama is the new center, and anyone right of McCain is an extremist.

    And we “extremists” may lose any representation by the dominance of the ruling party and their Chicago politics writ large.

    I wonder what kind of web logs will, in the future, have Echelon aimed at them?

  39. Jeff, I have no problem with graciousness in defeat, nor, presumably, do you.

    I dont agree entirely with Frey and Michelle–at least, not Michelle–but I simply refuse to engage in the wounded petulence you can see on some right-of-center blogs today. Obama is the POTUS. I hope he doesnt suck like Carter did. Regardless, I dont want to be like the malinformed, but effective, scum of DU and Kos.

    More importantly, I am entirely congruent with your premise of launching a new war of ideas against those who seek to redefine liberty and democracy in the name of their vision of a collective good.

    Den Beste re-emerged and made a lot of sense on the issue in a post today; what he said, if i had to be quoted.

    i come in peace and prepare for the coming fight. You have a fine blog and I don’t seek to put you or the crew off their feed. I am thankful for the small things today.

  40. …” you don’t respond by kissing them on the ring and pretending you’ve done so out of some manner of nobility.”

    Our betters before us gave King George the ultimate finger when he and his appointed aristocracy stole our economy and permitted liberty only on their terms.

    The result was “unpleasant” for King George and his… and king barack and his can have the fucking same.

  41. “Or Palin/Jindal”

    Friggin Dream Team baby.

  42. Pingback: Kayak2U Blog » Blog Archive » Recriminations

  43. mcgruder,
    You started to cowboy up there for a minute and then went all wobbly. We ain’t in little league, walking the line, slappin hands, muttering “good game, good game.”

    Major League Baseball.

    Glad you’re in the fight though.

  44. You said it, Jeff. Damn straight. He isn’t a good man, just a politician who used everything and everyone to get his way, starting with chucking his mentor off the ballot to take her seat in his first political campaign.

    And I’m sick and tired of people saying he ran a brilliant campaign. He did nothing but show up and look good. The media ran a brilliant campaign for him by whitewashing (or refusing to report) all of his unsavory dealings and relationships and painting him as some sort of unconquerable god. For goodness sake, he needed a teleprompter at campaign events. If Bush did that, the media would have been beside themselves with giggles.

  45. And Palin will get the presidential nomination. Maybe the VP slot again with Jindal as the nominee. Her brand was ruined by being associated with McCain.

  46. Woops. I meant “And Palin will not get the presidential nomination…

  47. I feel a lot of sympathy for conservatives who are unhappy about the election outcome. We have all rooted for a losing side during an election, and it can be a bit depressing to see the side you dislike triumph. So I don’t take pleasure in the misery of rightwing commentators. With a few exceptions.

    Plus, I like to eat my own poopie.

  48. Andy, I suppose you never had a negative thing to say about Bush after his last two victories, or any other time in the last eight years, right?

    Wasn’t it you that worried the evil Bushitler wanted to start the Apocalypse because he was a Christian and couldn’t wait to invade Iran and get the thing started?

    No? Well then it must have been th millions like you I must be thinking of.

  49. The sheer amount of sucking up by pundits to the Obama campaign, now t hat the election is over, is sickening. Obama’s campaign was brilliant ? Well yes, if you consider the fact that it was supported by the mainstream media, who did everything they could to not ask ANY question which might upset the apple cart or derail his presidency. Half this country elected a cypher/empty suit and thinks they did it because Obama was so amazing. He wasn’t. He was average. He couldn’t answer a question without putting his foot in his mouth and I guarantee when he’s staring over a table at our friend in Iran, he won’t have a teleprompter.

    Was the campaign well organized? Yes, I’ll admit to that. But how tough is it to win an election with the press covering your ass and an organization you had all kinds of ties to was participating in widespread voter fraud? Obama showed its not that hard.

    And I’ll say it again- McCain was possibly the worst choice. He was lukewarm, the entire time. I would have liked to see Guilliani handle all the Obama history, like Wright and Ayres. I have little doubt Rudy would have gone for the jugular.

  50. Pipe down, Andy. You’re most likely lying through your teeth. BTW, what were the, “most ridiculously cartoonish hysterical exaggerations”? And hatred? You mean like the kind that was visited on Bush for the past 8 years? That kind of hatred?

  51. Spare us the feigned sympathy, Andy. No one believes your shit when you write: “After reading your blog’s absurd and hateful crap, full of the most ridiculously cartoonish hysterical exaggerations…”

    After eight fucking years of nothing but hate, invective, hyperbole, and bile coming from the left, you don’t deserve any consideration. Everything from Bush assassination porn to criminalizing policy differences has been spewed by your party/ideology. Your side still gets a collective boner fantasizing over putting the Bush Cabal on trial for war crimes. Fuck you.

  52. I’ll bet Dumbledore never said Grindelwald was a “good man” who was just led astray by his pursuit of the “greater good.” At least, he probably never did after they broke up and had that epic wizard battle, anyway.

  53. Andy is an asshat. Alliteration, and all that.

  54. McCain’s civility didn’t fry him, Jeff. Events did. Absent a miracle, there was no way a Republican was going to win in this cycle.

    I draw no moral equivalency between Obama and McCain, and if I failed to litter my post with enough qualifications and caveats to make that clear, let me be clear about that here. My point is this: McCain and his supporters sometimes stretched the truth, sometimes to the breaking point. I don’t think he did it as often as Obama, but he did do it. Now: were someone interested in demonizing McCain, they could say: “Good men don’t lie in the pursuit of power.” But that’s not true. Reagan did. McCain did. Clinton did. Obama did. It’s not moral equivalance to note that you can be a good man and still run a campaign that engages in some bad actions.

    You accuse me of seeking a pat on the back. You can think what you like. I don’t like a lot of what Obama has done. But I think he and McCain are fundamentally decent men, with flaws. Dean Barnett agreed. Allahpundit agrees.

    Someone said I gave Obama blind praise. I don’t think they read my post.

    You imply I want to roll over without fighting Obama’s policies. That makes me wonder whether you read my entire post.

    I think Obama is horribly misguided. He will appoint judges who will screw up jurisprudence beyond repair. He will hurt our economy with burdensome taxation and regulation. He will employ some tactics I don’t like.

    But I think much of America perceives him as fundamentally decent, even if many of us perceive serious flaws.

    I can’t make you agree with me. Nor can I make you give me the benefit of the doubt, and assume I’m being sincere, rather mouthing noble sentiments I don’t believe in to get a pat on the back from people I don’t even like.

    But I can tell you that I plan to fight this man’s policies, even as I assume until it’s shown otherwise that he is doing what he thinks is best, even if I disagree with him.

    I’d rather let the left have the monopoly on demonizing the other guy.

  55. “I’d rather let the left have the monopoly on demonizing the other guy.”

    It’s not demonizing to speak the truth. Repeating that truth over and over again until the message, so successfully obfuscated by the mainstream press during the campaign, finally comes to light is not demonizing anyone. Obama is not a good man regardless of how many people you may site saying they believe so. To say he is simply a good man with misguided ideas is to give him more credit than he has earned based on what we know of his past.

  56. andy, my man.
    I don’t think we can take you seriously.
    Why?
    Well let me say this–There is nothing, NOTHING, on the right like Huffington Post, where they have to disable comments to keep their site intellectually viable when Cheney gets ill or someone with vaguely GOP connections dies.

    No really. Hateful crap? Andy, look at some (actually, a lot) of the HuffPo’s comments and posts about Israel.

    Dude.

    BTW, I’m a Bush Basher, cold-water GOP skeptic who admits we got our asses tarred.

    but the difference between the right and the left online is that our lunatics are marginalized; your lunatics are in the movement.

  57. I would have liked to see Guilliani handle all the Obama history, like Wright and Ayres. I have little doubt Rudy would have gone for the jugular.

    If Rudy’s convention speech is any indication, you’re spot-on.

  58. Patterico,

    Obama is a “the ends justify the means” guy. That is, evil means are justified if the motives are pure.

    McCain believes the means have to as principled as the ends, thus his “honorable” campaign.

    I’ll need help on where: “McCain and his supporters sometimes stretched the truth”, is comparable to outright lying, cheating, stealing, and intimidating that Obama and his supporters engaged in non-stop.

    Regardless, there is a fundamental difference between men of honor and those that believe the ends justify the means. If you refuse to understand that, don’t complain about an increasingly corrupt government.

  59. Please keep this up. By 2012, we should be able to sweep what’s left of you into one neo-Confederate South and start looking for folks who want to start a real opposition party.

    You folks are lost and the way out of the maze is not a right turn and it’s not demonizing a man in a manner so inconsistent with 50+% of your countrymen that they will look at you like you speak Mandarin. “race-hustling?” “Ayers” ACORN. The American people heard it and rejected it.

    Patterico is right on this and you should build your opposition to Obama under his concept, rather than the already defeated one.

  60. Something tells me that Chowards endorsement will not meet with Patterico’s approval. Wonder what that might be?

  61. You folks are lost and the way out of the maze is not a right turn

    It’s not a maze, it’s a clearly marked highway. We got on it by turning left, under the banner of “compassionate Conservative”, and have to go back right to be where we should be.

    Unfortunately, our Republican leaders will probably take the oppositions advice on how to win. They are that stupid.

  62. you should build your opposition to Obama under his concept,

    The new Totalitarianism: Same as the old Totalitarianism.

    See, thuglicans? If you want to be a real opposition force you have to start within the Obama progressive/socialist/redistributionist/nanny state construct where debates will be held about how much carbon to cap, how many taxes to raise, how much health care to be created, how little oil to be explored, how high the progressive tax goes on those lucky rich people, how many useless liberal talk radio shows will need to be crammed up the asses of corporate broadcasting (FOR THE FAIRNESS!) and how much money can be cut from defense spending and still convey the appearance of giving a rat’s ass about defending our citizens.

    Your opposition, you see, will bedefined by the Obama administration. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

    !O!

  63. I take a lot of pleasure in knowing that those few bloggers who stoke the flames of hatred and turn American against American are right now freaking out and counting down to the apocalypse.

    What do Kos and the like have to freak out about?

  64. I’d rather let the left have the monopoly on demonizing the other guy.

    This Baracky person is the dirty socialist tool what gave money to a church what told everybody America started AIDS. He’s sort of a piece of shit I think all on his own without needing no demonizings. Baracky is not up to the job and really Mr. Patterico your idea sounds like hey I got this CBS sitcom on tivo and dayum it sucked I think I’ll give it four years and see maybe if it clicks. No. Take him off your list and watch something more better cause the only damage his hopey changey marxisms does what you can mitigate is how much of your time you let his dirty socialist ass waste.

  65. And like really what’s the big rush to affirm that hey everybody I’m a good American and even if my president is a dirty socialist tool I loves him cause I pledge allegiance to the flag for liberty and all that when you damn well know that asshole is already eying your shit what you worked really hard for. It just makes me sad that my own president wants to fuck with me and my little country.

  66. Apologies for the lengthy cut and past. Machievelli:

    Concerning Things For Which Men, And Especially Princes, Are Praised Or Blamed

    “IT REMAINS now to see what ought to be the rules of conduct for a prince towards subject and friends. And as I know that many have written on this point, I expect I shall be considered presumptuous in mentioning it again, especially as in discussing it I shall depart from the methods of other people. But, it being my intention to write a thing which shall be useful to him who apprehends it, it appears to me more appropriate to follow up the real truth of a matter than the imagination of it; for many have pictured republics and principalities which in fact have never been known or seen, because how one lives is so far distant from how one ought to live, that he who neglects what is done for what ought to be done, sooner effects his ruin than his preservation; for a man who wishes to act entirely up to his professions of virtue soon meets with what destroys him among so much that is evil.

    “Hence it is necessary for a prince wishing to hold his own to know how to do wrong, and to make use of it or not according to necessity. Therefore, putting on one side imaginary things concerning a prince, and discussing those which are real, I say that all men when they are spoken of, and chiefly princes for being more highly placed, are remarkable for some of those qualities which bring them either blame or praise; and thus it is that one is reputed liberal, another miserly, using a Tuscan term (because an avaricious person in our language is still he who desires to possess by robbery, whilst we call one miserly who deprives himself too much of the use of his own); one is reputed generous, one rapacious; one cruel, one compassionate; one faithless, another faithful; one effeminate and cowardly, another bold and brave; one affable, another haughty; one lascivious, another chaste; one sincere, another cunning; one hard, another easy; one grave, another frivolous; one religious, another unbelieving, and the like. And I know that every one will confess that it would be most praiseworthy in a prince to exhibit all the above qualities that are considered good; but because they can neither be entirely possessed nor observed, for human conditions do not permit it, it is necessary for him to be sufficiently prudent that he may know how to avoid the reproach of those vices which would lose him his state; and also to keep himself, if it be possible, from those which would not lose him it; but this not being possible, he may with less hesitation abandon himself to them. And again, he need not make himself uneasy at incurring a reproach for those vices without which the state can only be saved with difficulty, for if everything is considered carefully, it will be found that something which looks like virtue, if followed, would be his ruin; whilst something else, which looks like vice, yet followed brings him security and prosperity.”

    This part has always struck me: “. . .it being my intention to write a thing which shall be useful to him who apprehends it.”

    Somewhere else, Machievelli writes that he is addressing a “knowing audience” and his topic is not how good rulers rule good people, but about how bad (evil) rulers rule evil people. Hence, the “him who apprehends it” in the above are members of his audience who can see what his manual addresses: the machinations of getting and keeping power among the corrupt.

    I think Jeff’s response to Patterico’s post is a recognition that Obama, in his (Jeff’s) view, can be said to have run a “brilliant” campaign (for instance) only in a Machiavellian sense. And, according to the interpretation I’ve suggested, this makes Obama not a “good” man nor even a decent one. And McCain’s refusal to engage that reality is the reason for his loss.

  67. arg. “paste.” cut and paste.

  68. “You folks are lost and the way out of the maze is not a right turn “

    The election is over, they won, and we still get “concern trolls”? Sheeesh.

  69. What happy said; with pie . . . and coffe. I’m going to need to be alert.

  70. Pingback: Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler » On Nobility…

  71. We are supposed to take political recommendations from a concern troll named Coward? No thanks.

  72. I don’t like a lot of what Obama has done. But I think he and McCain are fundamentally decent men, with flaws. Dean Barnett agreed. Allahpundit agrees.

    So?

    There are probably 50-some-odd-million people you can get to agree with that sentiment. I’m not one of them. And even if I were, I wouldn’t write a long post making sure everyone knew it.

    I don’t think he’s a decent man at all. I think he’s learned what he knows from a host of unsavory characters, and he has himself become one. I am not interested in “demonizing” Obama. I am, however, happy to describe him, his associations, his philosophy, and on and on.

    From that, I am perfectly happy to conclude that no “good man” holds positions that track with a pal who once thought “eliminating” 25 million Americans was the best way forward.

    Obama is a thug, from what I’ve seen. That he’s a polished thug is just a matter of cosmetics.

  73. gregorbo –

    Precisely right. Machiavelli was writing a parody (in the Linda Hutcheons sense) of a rather standard literary genre. The entire book deconstructs before your eyes, in fact. To those who pick up his cues, it is clear that the “advice” he is giving is that, in the end, getting and keeping power from a corrupt position is bound to fail.

  74. And his thuggy Baracky voters what call and I don’t even know you and you say to me hey are you guys celebrating out there? Um, no. Just another busy day I say tactfully. Actually we’re gonna have a beer later what’s in the fridge but still that’s presumptuous I think. I think I’ll go get the ball rolling on that.

  75. The color of the sky as far as I can see is coal grey I think. Dirty socialist grey.

  76. A quiver in my lips as if I might cry. But not really.

  77. If we get hit by al-Qaeda after Obama’s inaugurated, he’s my president, period. Same as with Bush after 9/11, for those brief months of unity. To paraphrase Oliver Cromwell, we are Americans, that is one good thing.

  78. Datadumb, your presence belies your words.

  79. I don’t have conditional disdain for my dirty socialist tool president.

  80. Feets. Grey is the color of average. It is the color of mediocre.We will be told it is the ‘New Red’.It will still be grey.Mediocrity will be piled atop mediocrity and we will be told it’s ‘change’.

  81. SI, Obamas reaction to a domestic terror attack, after sage council from Biden, will likely be to send Iran an apology and a few billion dollars.

    I don’t see myself climbing aboard that kind of “patriotic” platform.

  82. Jeff’s absolutely correct: call the thing what it is. This dissimulation is making it impossible for us to breathe, much less have an honest discussion. It’s orwellian and self-deceiving. It’s not 1980; it’s 2008, and this has been the first real war of the Information Age. We have to wake up.

    Obama’s most decidedly NOT a good man–not with all the slimey crap his campaign has been pulling in his name. If he were truly a good man, he would have forbidden it. No, he’s not good. He’ll win by any means necessary. He and his inner circle are totalitarians and thugs.

    And it was NOT a brilliant campaign. That’s a cheap, glib, thought; like saying ‘Our hearts and prayers go out to those who perished…’. Obama’s campaign might be considered brilliant only by those who are morally and ethically diseased. Fraud? Lies? Intimidation? Theft? Vandalism? Do our elites really admire such baseness? Do the ends so justify the means in our society that immersing yourself in shit is admired? If Obama’s filthy campaign was so brilliant, then McCain’s clean campaign must defy superlatives.

    We are in a perilous position and we had best start to realize it. After 30 years of indoctrinating university students, the Left is in a position to severely shut down dissent–to such a degree that we might not be able to enjoy another free election. Illegal tactics worked. You’ll see them again–especially if pundits call them ‘brilliant’ and applaud them.

    I tip my hat to McCain for trying to be noble, but it was both unrealistic and patronizing. It’s a relic from an earlier era. When your opponent’s giving you the finger in public, you don’t walk up and give him a long, lingering kiss. You concede, and thank your supporters, and leave with dignity.

    The first order on the agenda is to stop calling them liberals. We are liberals; they are Leftists, or Progressives.

  83. The second order on the agenda is for dave to go fuck himself.

  84. I wish I had the guts(I guess that’s what political phenomenum means), to lose a war in Iraq when the MSM, my Democratic party, and every other global surrender chimp was cheering for it. Oh that’s right, it’s no longer worthy of mention any longer. I wish I were smart enough to understand that lowering the capital gains tax has always increased US Treasury revenue, but it’s better to raise it because it’s somehow fairer. I wish I had the intestinal fortitude to tell AIPAC that I’m for an “undivided” Jerusalem one day, and psyche, take it back the next.
    Oh, and then there’s that evil Bush who did nothing for the lower income voters…oh wait! They must have lied to the exit pollers!!!

  85. The second order on the agenda is for dave to go fuck himself.

    If datadouche’s hands could talk, they’d tell a frightening onanistic tale.

  86. In fact, jeez, for real, he’s my president period? no I don’t think so. Baracky already done said that September 11 was a wasted opportunity and me I’m not gonna rah rah I don’t think as Baracky makes the most of his opportunity when people aren’t even buried yet what Al Qaeda killed. Creepy dirty socialist tool. Who thinks like that?

  87. Pingback: Daily Pundit » Jeff Goldstein Understands Exactly How I Feel

  88. The MSM won this election.

    tony
    south haven,mi

  89. actually, I read stuff like yours and happy’s here and am just ‘researching’ the Right Wing

    Yeah, well thanks for reciprocating, allowing us a glimpse into the mind of a moonbat:

    Ah, you could join Timothy McVie and try to forcibly take this new President down…or better yet as a Drama Queen do a Booth on the new Lincoln…but alas Pussy Whipped is what PW stands for. You with your fear factored martial arts, unfounded fear of AntiSemitism (from an Obama pro-Zionist crowd no less with larry summers at the top of his list), and this gets personal: your writing shows poor character development of low income Americans within your shallow short stories.

    The above examples of ungracious treason all show you as a self-important smug racist neoFascist.

  90. lee, be grateful he kept it brief. His usual incoherent drivel is normally two or three times as mendaciously tedious.

  91. “gaming court rulings”? You’re not even trying to make sense anymore.

  92. Sorry, was busy rereading Jeff’s post to see where dave saw a death threat against the new administration or anything like that.

    I need my leftard glasses, clearly.

    AFK, pasta tiem.

  93. You still here, Josh?

    I expect my gas tank full tomorrow morning, bitch.

    I let you slide today ’cause I know you were up late celebrating. Tomorrow’s a regular work day, though.

    Free gas. Get on it.

  94. #84 & 94
    Thanks for proving my point.

  95. Josh, gaming is the verb, if you’re unable to parse that.

    See, I’m helpful!

  96. Well, Jeff, you’ve just articulated one of the reasons why I stopped reading Patterico a loooong time ago.

    Yes. he can write real purdy…it’s his thinkin’ that can be all messed up. Any guy (Obama) who’s been working with people who are trying to get me and you killed is not a good man by definition. Anyone who calls that same guy a ‘good man’ is either fool or a suicide…or is also trying to get me killed. Patterico is just such a fool. I’m a principled man, that way.

  97. ‘There are probably 50-some-odd-million people you can get to agree with that sentiment. I’m not one of them. And even if I were, I wouldn’t write a long post making sure everyone knew it.”

    Well, there’s probably millions of people you can get to agree with the sentiment that Barack Obama is a bad man. I’m not one of them. And even if I were, I wouldn’t write a long post making sure everyone knew it.

    If you feel entitled to give me advice on what posts I should and shouldn’t write, I’m sure you won’t consider it too presumptuous if I return the favor. People are watching how Republicans react to this loss. If you think petulance is going to go over well with the electorate, I think you’ve misread why this election went the way it did.

    We don’t have to “forget all [Obama has] done to get there,” and indeed, in my post, I tick off a number of things he did that I didn’t approve of:

    “Some commenters have disagreed, citing Obama’s support for grisly forms of late-term abortion; his attendence of a church with a pastor who said anti-American things in some of his sermons; his relationship with unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers; his disturbingly close relationship with corrupt individuals such as Tony Rezko; his broken promises; and his many falsehoods about John McCain. They point to his campaign’s inappropriate use of the race card; his disabling of credit card verification checks; his minions’ attempts to silence free speech with threats; and much more.

    “There is something to all that, and I don’t think we should pretend these things didn’t happen, or give Obama a false halo.”

    That isn’t forgetting what he did.

    I guess where we disagree is that this all makes Obama a Bad Man. I happen to disagree with that notion. He seems like a decent man — at least, for a politician — who, like every other politician out there, has done some unsavory things in his rise to the top. I’m not going to pretend that stuff didn’t happen, but neither am I going to act like it’s the worst set of tactics any politician has ever used.

    Nor am I going to assume the worst motives on your part for expressing what you feel. I’d appreciate it if you returned that favor.

    Fundamentally, I will be fighting him tooth and nail on virtually everything he tries to do. But I don’t think showing some class shows weakness. Your mileage may vary.

  98. If he broke the law, would that make him a bad man? What about if the press ignored it? What would that make them?
    http://tinyurl.com/6at9sh

  99. I think the issue isn’t, y’know, the tactics per se–even if he used them to a much greater degree than previous candidates may have.

    It’s that he has really questionable reasoning and when it boils down to it, we don’t know much of anything about him. He seems like a decent person, sure. He hasn’t had a McCain-esque outburst and cussed someone off the Senate floor or called his wife a cunt in front of cameras, and he has all these nice little stories about he’s been nice to people one-on-one (which is rarely difficult to do–be nice one on one, that is, especially when you have money to waste and a reputation to worry about).

    But he’s been sycophantic to really NOT nice people, and evasive about why he did such things. That’s what makes me think of him as probably not a good person–interpersonally, yes, he’s a cut above other people MOST of the time, when he’s not being a passive-aggressive grouch (waffles!), but he’s also comfortable with chillin’ with people who aren’t interpersonally nice, agree with their reasoning, and use their tactics of crushing people from a distance so he isn’t directly faced with the human wreckage of his strongarm tactics.

    Anyway.

  100. Hmph. brb. Ok I just saw my petulant face in the mirror and I’d hit that. Petulant but sort of wistfully vulnerable and those sad sad eyes beckon in a way that reflects loss more than need I think. For real. I should go out tonight.

  101. . People are watching how Republicans react to this loss. If you think petulance is going to go over well with the electorate, I think you’ve misread why this election went the way it did.

    You need to replace “petulance” with “defining the enemy” (and yes, the Democrat leadership is an ideological enemy) to be intellectually honest within your own parameters. you know, this; “Nor am I going to assume the worst motives on your part for expressing what you feel. I’d appreciate it if you returned that favor.” Petulant seems pretty loaded to me.

    Have you noticed how far taking the high road and displaying class has worked out for Republicans in general and President Bush in particular? We need to become much more combative if we are to survive in the present field of battle. Sitting back and clicking your tongue at the carnage wrought by the vicious liberal attack machine isn’t going to cut it anymore. We have to get our heads right, our game faces on, and go for the throat if this country is to survive as the last best hope for mankind.

    But by all means, throw the beast a bone and hope he doesn’t eat you anyway. Just don’t imagine yourself superior to those actually stepping up to vanquish the dangerous fuck.

  102. “Sorry. But good men don’t lie, cheat, steal, and throw longtime supporters by the wayside just so they can rise to power — even if they’ve convinced themselves they’re doing so for some Greater Good.”/b>

    A-fucking-men!!

    By the way, whats with all this “historic” talk? Why not drop the pretense and just say,” Holy shit! A negro won the presidential race!! A NEGRO!! Holy fucking shit on a stick! Can you believe this shit?!! Back to you in the studio, Blaine.”

  103. That’s one of those comments what will be nice for a social historian digging through online archives one day to come across I think.

  104. A good man would not have diabled the AVS for credit card donations, this enabling election fraud. A good man would not have told lie after lie, just because he knew the MSM woldn’t report them.

    A good man does not, for purely political purposes pretend his country is losing a war that it is clearly winning.

    And a good man would not support that babies who survive abortions be left on a table to die. Nor oppose all restricion on abortion.

    This makes the meaning of good meaningless.

    Yes the public is watching, Patterico. Show some courage and leadership. There are options between being nasty and being supine. You don’t need to be such a wimp.

  105. double, then triple, smarm from the self righteous patterico

  106. It’s hard to imagine what the Hologram would have to do for patterico to consider him a bad man.

  107. The following is what I just posted on Patterico’s site. I’ve met him and he really is a decent and honorable man:
    ——————————————————————-
    Patterico

    I’m late to this thread, so if this has been covered, my apologies.

    Issues of culture and morality is something I write about/think about a great deal. And while I can understand you hewing to the tradition that says, “Game finished, both sides shake hands and go on with the day”, I think your willingness to move from a neutral position to a sweeping positive one about Obama, the man, is premature and more than a little problematic.

    I am not here to examine your motives, only to tell you of my perception of your pronouncement.

    I will not dispute that absent any contrary evidence that Obama is a good man – in the micro – husband, father, grandson. But that goodness doesn’t necessarily translate into “good” or “honorable” in the macro. And there we have evidence of Obama’s lack of character, in the kindest terms.

    Am I speaking of rhetorical flourishes? Political promises? Exaggerations on the campaign trail? No, I’m talking about the structural way the campaign was handled and Obama’s complicity in one of the dirtiest, fraudulent and dishonest campaigns I’ve experienced.

    What is the manner of the character of a man who makes the charge (allows his campaign) that Bill Clinton is a racist? Bill Clinton? What is the manner of the character of a man who allows his campaign to mock McCain’s physical disabilities that came as a result of his torture? What of the nuclear attacks on Stanley Kurtz including what amounts to a DOS attack on the radio station on which he appeared? McCain was always quick to publicly denounce what he thought were unfair attacks on Obama, but there was deafening silence from The One over the vicious, scorch the earth attacks on Sarah Palin and her family, especially the “Trig is not Sarah’s baby!” stuff.

    And what of Obama’s deliberate disabling of basic credit card security? What of the character of a man who facilitates millions and millions of tainted dollars?

    Such a man is more than merely “flawed”. We are ALL flawed. How we approach our flaws … try to fight them versus embracing and expanding on them … is our moral measure.

    We all have a moral bank account, where our behaviors constitute deposits and withdrawals.

    Obama is overdrawn and a speech, no matter how elegant and filled with “can’t we all get along?” moves him immediately into the black.

    I don’t forget his deliberate designation of all opponents as “racist”. He owes this country a sincere apology in that regard.

    But I’m not holding my breath because my measure of this man is that he is not a good man. I would hope for a half way decent leader, but that would no more redeem his character than all the good leadership and deeds in the Nixon presidency made up for Richard’s deep flaws.

    I await this generation’s Woodward and Bernstein to look into the fraud of Campaign Obama. That is my audicity of hope.
    ———————————————————–

  108. “Petulant seems pretty loaded to me.”

    Yeah, well, so is telling me that I am saying something just because I want a pat on the back.

  109. I say nicey nice stuff like that when I’m around liberals like at work and stuff. If I had your job I bet I’d say stuff like that a lot more even.

  110. How much of Obama’s 600 milllion was raised illegally? Let the investigation and betting begin.

    Does anyone think the MSM in the tank wasn’t worth at least 10 points? The MSM stole what McCain didn’t give to the Dems and McCain gave them a lot.

    The people were conned. The realization will set in within 18 months.

  111. Pingback: Jeff Goldstein Understands Exactly How I Feel at Bydio

  112. “McCain was always quick to publicly denounce what he thought were unfair attacks on Obama, but there was deafening silence from The One over the vicious, scorch the earth attacks on Sarah Palin and her family, especially the “Trig is not Sarah’s baby!” stuff.”

    I guess you missed this, then:

    Sen. Barack Obama said firmly that families are off-limits in the campaign for president, reacting to news that GOP running mate Sarah Palin’s 17-year-old daughter is pregnant.

    “Let me be as clear as possible,” Obama said. “I think people’s families are off-limits, and people’s children are especially off-limits. This shouldn’t be part of our politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin’s performance as governor or her potential performance as a vice president.”

    Obama said reporters should “back off these kinds of stories” and noted that he was born to an 18-year-old mother.

    He didn’t have to say that he was born to an 18-year-old mother.

    That is the statement of a good man. You guys want evidence, there’s your evidence.

    And you don’t even seem to be aware he said that.

    I’m sure y’all can spin that as a politically wise answer, said only to benefit his campaign. You can spin anything away that way. There might be some truth to it, but he didn’t have to respond that way.

    Guys, I’m telling you, this is not helping our image. It really isn’t.

  113. That’s bold I think. I’m not making any predictions. Baracky will do bad things and this little country will suffer but the way liberals work is they emphasize group suffering. It won’t matter what non group spokespeoples think. Stupid individuals. We don’t want nobody nobody sent.

  114. Patterico

    In your job I’m sure you’ve witnessed sentencings were the criminal’s family gets up to say what a really swell guy he is, just got a little side-tracked, because of his upbringing and all that bad environment he was subjected to….

    Indeed, the perp may really be a nice guy to his family

    didn’t keep him from pulling stickups though

  115. Patterico

    And Obama backed up that statement how? What people did he fire or push away over it? What behavior did he exibit to back up his words?

    Don’t cherry pick, sir. Obama is not stupid.

  116. The MSM stole what McCain didn’t give to the Dems and McCain gave them a lot.

    Looks like he is still giving.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2008/nov/05/john-mccain-sarah-palin
    The Republicans need to trade his sorry ass for Lieberman, it this is true.

  117. and again, Patterico, a good man to his family is not always a good man to everyone else.

  118. “This shouldn’t be part of our politics. It has no relevance to Gov. Palin’s performance as governor or her potential performance as a vice president.”

    You will notice he didn’t point out that the stories were lies and slanders.

  119. I’m as much glad McCain got his ass kicked as I hate we have a dirty socialist heading for our White House. Politics really creep me out sometimes. Either way the gay NPR people would have won.

  120. The presidency is not a campaign.

    The Clinton’s pretended it was, and for the most part they got away with it. The media will attempt to cushion Obama as they have done since his appearance on the national scene.

    Obama’s administration, and the Democrat Congress, are going to come out of the gate with some serious speech code/fairness doctrine moves.

    He’s the president. Not a good man. I won’t pretend I am going to think of him otherwise until I see some numbers on vote and fund raising fraud.

    Yeah. Right. There will be no Woodward and Bernstein taking any critical look at the Second First Black (even if he’s not considered authentic by some real black people) President . Further, there won’t be any DoJ looking at the past election, no Congress interested in merely criminal much less high crimes and misdemeanors.

    And once the guys in the caves and palaces sleep it off, they’ll start planning ops for 2011, when the manpower ramifications of this congress’ and administration’s agenda and leadership are beginning to really sting.

    I think the “endless campaign” schtick will pile up sooner rather than later. And Mr. President Elect Obama better start thinking beyond unsealing divorce records and having Chris Matthews for a BFF.

  121. How about this:

    Name a single national Democrat whom you consider to be a good man (or woman).

  122. Hayden Panatierre

  123. Guys, I’m telling you, this is not helping our image. It really isn’t.

    Whose image? As perceived by whom? If you are talking about Republicans as perceived by the non-aligned, you are correct. I perceive a Republican Party right now that doesn’t seem to give a rat’s ass if they ever win another election, as long as they adhere to some idiotic code of honor.

  124. Name a single national Democrat whom you consider to be a good man (or woman).

    Joe Lieberman.

  125. Bill Orton, former congressman for the third district in Utah is a good man.

    Got him stabbed in the back by the Clintons going into ’96, though.

    He was leading comfortably in his reelection run here in central Utah when Grand Staircase was announced. He didn’t even get a phone call – found out about the announcement watching TV.

  126. B Moe beat me to Mr. Lieberman

    Funny, but I have the opposite feeling about Billy Jeff than Obama. BJ is a personally flawed man, but I have never sensed any viciousness in him. And he really did govern more moderate than far left. In the macro, I may not have agreed with him, but I don’t believe he was out to “get” people.

    I just wouldn’t leave him alone anywhere near my daughters.

    From the past, I always thought the world of Daniel Patrick Moynihan.

  127. Who told this joke?

    “Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?
    Because her father is Janet Reno.”

    John McCain

    That’s real frickin’ nice, huh?

    I suppose one could say: a good man doesn’t mock someone else’s child for a joke. And indeed, that is a truly tasteless joke.

    But John McCain is more complicated than that. He was never my first choice, but he was a genuine hero and has taken some courageous stands. He too is a good man and a patriot. Even though he made that ugly, tasteless joke.

    Of course, those on the left will see only the bad in him, just as y’all seem intent on seeing only the bad in Obama.

    Is this really how you want to spend the next four years?

    Again, I say: take the happy warrior stance. Oppose the policies. Point out the bad stuff the guy has done. But recognize the good in him as well. It will gain you credibility with people you need.

  128. BTW Patterico

    When I used to be more involved in local politics, I worked on campaigns for Democrats (moderates) for city council seats.

  129. With his bad heart and all I bet Clinton kicks off soon. There’s really no place in this world for him anymore.

  130. “I perceive a Republican Party right now that doesn’t seem to give a rat’s ass if they ever win another election, as long as they adhere to some idiotic code of honor.”

    I perceive a Republican party that doesn’t understand why it lost this election.

    Hint: it wasn’t because we weren’t nasty enough.

  131. maybe you missed it, Patterico, but McCain mocks himself.

    A tasteless joke is… tasteless. But how does it compare with approving a campaign ad that mocks a person’s physical disability?

    Again, DEPOSITS and WITHDRAWALS on the moral bank account.

    McCain was never my first choice and I know I would be poised like a hawk over policies with him, but he ran a far more honorable and HONEST campaign than Obama.

  132. Mr. Patterico you are way too look at the fluffy bunny for me today. Dirty socialists are for real very dangerous especially the ones with the personality cults. Baracky don’t care if you think he’s a good man or not. It’s never crossed his mind.

  133. “He didn’t have to say that he was born to an 18-year-old mother.

    That is the statement of a good man. You guys want evidence, there’s your evidence”. Patterico

    Oh please, Patterico. He said it because it was politically astute to do so. As a lawyer, I am embarrassed for you.

    Now deal with his AVS election fraud, his lies about Ayers and votes for infanticide. Good grief.

  134. Name a single national Democrat whom you consider to be a good man (or woman).

    Jack Reed. I know him. And despite the fact that I disagree with him on a raft of things, I like him. I’ve worked with him and he’s worked with me, on things we agree on. I voted for him yesterday, FWIW. I know he loves America. I know he has his constituents best interests at heart, even if he’s misguided in places. I respect him.

    I don’t even begin to feel that way about Barack Obama. All I know about him is what his thin record tells me and what I can gather from his associations over the years. What I see, I do not respect. I have no reason to respect him. I hope he earns my respect, as George Bush did (and I didn’t respect him when he was elected) but I have very serious doubts. With Bush, I doubted his ability. With Obama, I doubt his motivations.

    Also, Lieberman and Zell Miller, has been Democrats though they may be.

  135. Patterico

    The Republicans lost it because too many are corrupted by DC and tried to be Democrat-lite so they could get entrance to all the best parties.

    McCain lost it because as Senator he has been too congenial with the opposition and his campaign never could gel into a singular, coherent, Republican theme.

    His campaign should never had had to try and vet Obama, that was supposed to be the media’s job.

    The only reason McCain didn’t end up like McGovern was because of Sarah Palin, the only one that could bring out the crowds and volunteers.

  136. Hint: it wasn’t because we weren’t nasty enough. Patterico

    It’s not nasty to refrain from saying he’s a good man. It’s smart. And honest. And quite fair.

  137. I suppose I might could think of Obama as a good man (and then wait for him to prove me right or wrong based on the acts he undertakes) if I weren’t already persuaded he is a con-artist of the first order.

    Whether he is a con-artist primarily vis a vis the electorate or merely with himself about himself (see Shelby Steele’s take: thus only secondarily with regard to the electorate) makes no difference to my judgment of him, as I think no con-artist can be a good man.

    Events, that is to say, Obama’s actions and behavior in office, may persuade me that I have been wrong to think him a con-man up to now. Nothing he has done to date, however, has pulled me up short to say, wait a minute, this Obama fellow really is a genuine man, self-reflective, honest, knowing his limits, a man with a decent respect for his opponents, open as to his past, willing to stand and be counted on principle, willing to be questioned and answer at length about his principles. Not one thing.

  138. Hint: it wasn’t because we weren’t nasty enough.

    No, it’s because they weren’t principled enough and they didn’t govern according to the principles they claim to uphold. It also isn’t because Obama is a good man. He ran as a blank slate. We elected nothing over a Republican war hero, who happened to outpoll a generic Republican. There’s a serious lesson to be learned there.

  139. Somehow even though John McCain seems to have made a tasteless joke about Janet Reno and Chelsea Clinton…. Hillary Clinton seems to like McCain better than Obama.

  140. happyfeet – You kill me.

  141. Sdferr

    Obama made some of the right noises in his acceptance speech … ie the “reaching out.” But those pretty words mean nothing with behavior to back them up.

    I’m neutral … Obama MAY grow as a leader…for America’s sake, I hope so. But I haven’t seen anything in his BEHAVIOR yet to belie my initial assessment that he is a Chicago trained machine thug. A smart, cunning and sly thug, but still a thug.

    Let’s see if the office of the President can work a little magic on him. Sometimes people can rise to an occassion.

  142. John McCain’s political ideology isn’t diffucult to grok, Mr. Patterico. Yep, I agree, he is a hero and an unabashed patriot. He’s also a career politician in a collegial body which has long been showing signs of disconnect both from its constituency and more importantly its founding principles.

    I don’t think Mr. Obama is a terrorist. But I don’t understand how a man whose philosophical pedigree is the sum of a Leftist mother, a card carrying communist, a blazingly racist/marxist demagogue, and finally the husband/wife terrorist team of unrepentant and avowedly “still in the struggle” deep penetration wacademics could possibly be embraced by a national party in the first place.

    Chicago is a pretty sick town. And I am all done laughing off the “ivory tower”. They have put a bullet in the brain of America, and this last election is a clinical indication that all that gray stuff on the wall is going to be missed…

    The man is an agent of change. I’m thinking more Lenin than Jefferson.

  143. whoops…should be:

    But those pretty words mean nothing without behavior to back them up.

  144. Dar, I had already made the substitution. :-)

  145. Good men do bad things, and in the pursuit of ambition, they almost always do.

    See, I don’t think that’s true. I don’t think McCain did anything particularly bad in pursuit of his ambition and I could easily apply Patterico’s thoughts about Obama to McCain. But not to Obama.

  146. Good men do bad things, and in the pursuit of ambition, they almost always do.

    and I shouldn’t have to point this out to a lawyer

    Not all “bad things” are the same. That’s why the law differentiates between infractions, misdemeanors and felonies!

    McCain makes a tasteless joke = bad
    Obama facilitates illegal contributions = bad

    Who approve profits by making those two behaviors equivalent?

  147. CRAP (dyslexic fingers tonight)

    “Who above profits by …”

  148. The only reaching out Baracky will be doing to me is when he reaches for my wallet.

  149. JD, I’m guessing you will also get your door knocked on by “Youth for Change”, or “Soldiers for Obama”
    or some such.

    Preliminary steps to see how much attention you warrant.

    What, you thought Obamas cult was going to fade away into the night?

  150. lee – The concertina wire I was looking at online earlier today may help in keeping those people away from my front door.

  151. “Petulant seems pretty loaded to me.”

    Yeah, well, so is telling me that I am saying something just because I want a pat on the back.

    HA! See, now that is petulant…

  152. JD, I think I’m going to go with the “thanks, I already have a current copy of the Watchtower” template.

    Don’t want any black choppers landing on my lawn. DAMN KIDS!!

    I denounce myself, those choppers could be any color.

  153. Lee – I was a bit morose earlier, and calculated that it would cost me over $13,000 to run concertina wire 8′ high, all the way around our property.

  154. Hiilary Clinton is a good man…

    I denounce myself

  155. Pit Bulls would be cheaper if you can keep them from eating the neighbors.

  156. if you can keep them from eating the neighbors.

    where’s the fun in that?

  157. And my daughters …

  158. Being called a “good man” can be the most damning of praise

    That said, I’d like to get to know Obama better before I call him a good man.

    Patterico can say and wish whatever he wants about Obama. The proof will be in the pudding.
    Unfortunately I had to give said pudding to someone who filled out all the boxes on the IRS form better than me. Proof is now a relative thing I guess and is more like pudding than ever

  159. Good, gracious, me! Patterico is full of logical fallacies tonight, isn’t he?

    I can forgive almost anything except for intellectual dishonesty.

    Your position is intellectually, morally and philosophically indefensible, Patterico. Give it up before you embarrass yourself. None of the facts or evidence or proofs support your chosen position as you’ve stated it in your article. You have intentionally and a priori ignored or dismissed any facts that disprove your thesis statement. You have even ignored the evidence of your own eyes and ears. That’s dishonest. Ignoble. Immoral. Dishonorable. Reprehensible, even.

    Re-examine your premise(s). There’s no worse lie than the one you tell yourself. If the premise is wrong, the thesis is invalid on its face. All else that follows is total crap….no matter how pretty your words and rhetoric and oratory are to your readers and listeners.

  160. People are watching how Republicans react to this loss. If you think petulance is going to go over well with the electorate, I think you’ve misread why this election went the way it did.

    What people? And who cares?

    I’m not reacting petulantly. I’m reacting as someone under no obligation to mouth false pieties. I’m not a Senator, after all.

    Go ahead. Say Obama is a good man. The trolls here will take your side and extol your goodliness and bravery in the face of my petulance and evilness. Just like they used to with the Maverick.

    Until it was time to slaughter him.

    You and I learned different lessons is all, Patterico. I don’t much care anymore what “undecideds” think about my tone. I’m not a team player. And if the GOP can’t stick to its principles, fuck the lot of ‘em.

    I want people to begin to understand the foundational thinking that gave rise to this country. If it puts them off that I don’t happen to think Barack Obama a good man, fine. They aren’t my target audience anyway, because they’re too concerned with decorum to face descriptions that I don’t have the time or inclination to euphemize for their comfort.

    My suspicion is that a number of conservative bloggers had pre-planned how they’d react to an Obama victory — with the fast majority of them having decided to “take the high ground.” Again, fine.

    I just don’t happen to think lending legitimacy to the thuggish tactics of a con man and a thief is a very good idea — particularly when “people are watching to see how we react.”

    Because the people who are watching to whom such things actually matter, namely, those who got away with thuggery this election season, are hoping we react like you have, I’d bet.

    Oh. And this is for Josh, et al.

  161. A good man doesn’t ask the Iraqis to hold off on their whole “national security” thing until he gets to be president so he can take credit. That’s pretty ignoble, narcissistic, and creepy if you ask me.

  162. Fundamentally, I will be fighting him tooth and nail on virtually everything he tries to do. But I don’t think showing some class shows weakness. Your mileage may vary.

    It does.

    Because to me, pretending that a bad man is a good man isn’t showing class. It’s enabling bad men to remain bad men.

  163. oh, btw, anyone who would like to do some troll smacking, I have “Josh” and “timb” infesting my site, here and here…and a few other places…

    I’m going to bed. Happy hunting.

  164. “I’m not reacting petulantly. I’m reacting as someone under no obligation to mouth false pieties. I’m not a Senator, after all.”

    Neither am I. And I’m under no obligation to mouth false pieties. That’s why I’m not doing it. I’m saying what I think, just like you and everyone else here.

    But it’s *so* much fun being told that I’m saying what I’m saying because I’m a Big Phony and not because I believe it.

    “Go ahead. Say Obama is a good man. The trolls here will take your side and extol your goodliness and bravery in the face of my petulance and evilness. Just like they used to with the Maverick.”

    Oh, please. There’s nothing “courageous” about me saying what I’m saying. I’m saying what I think. You’re saying what you think. Only fatuous toads like Andrew Sullivan think it’s “courageous” for a conservative to say something that is not doctrinaire right-wing material. Not everything you say falls in that category, and the same goes for me. Let’s not pretend that anyone here is particularly courageous — or, more importantly, that any of us is claiming to be.

    You can paint me as someone claiming the mantle of “courage,” but I reject it. It is, as I say, Sullivanesque bullshit. I completely reject it.

    “You and I learned different lessons is all, Patterico. I don’t much care anymore what ‘undecideds’ think about my tone. I’m not a team player. And if the GOP can’t stick to its principles, fuck the lot of ‘em.”

    There are people on the other side of the political fence whom I respect. They’re in my family; they’re my friends; they’re my colleagues. There are a lot of good people in that crowd.

    When you ask this crowd, on this page, whom they consider to be “good men” among Democrats, they mostly turn to “Democrats” who have chosen to give speeches on behalf of Republican presidential candidates at GOP presidential conventions.

    I have a broader view of who can be counted as good people. As good Americans. As patriots.

    I’m getting tired of the crowd that says that anyone who disagrees with them politically is an asshole. I used to think that crowd consisted only of Democrats. Y’all are doing a great job of convincing me that there are plenty such cretins on our side as well.

  165. “Because to me, pretending that a bad man is a good man isn’t showing class. It’s enabling bad men to remain bad men.”

    Well, as long as we’re all certain that I’m “pretending,” then.

  166. Pingback: Daily Pundit » Obviously

  167. But it’s *so* much fun being told that I’m saying what I’m saying because I’m a Big Phony and not because I believe it.

    You gave the game away when you talked about how you wanted to be seen as classy.

    I don’t believe you believe a man with Obama’s eager and deliberately sought ties to racists, anti-semites, domestic terrorists (and would-be eliminationists), etc., is a “good man.”

    And if you do, well, more’s the pity.

  168. Warren sez:

    “Your position is intellectually, morally and philosophically indefensible, Patterico. Give it up before you embarrass yourself. None of the facts or evidence or proofs support your chosen position as you’ve stated it in your article. You have intentionally and a priori ignored or dismissed any facts that disprove your thesis statement. You have even ignored the evidence of your own eyes and ears. That’s dishonest. Ignoble. Immoral. Dishonorable. Reprehensible, even.’

    Great. Now I’m dishonest and immoral too. JUST LIKE BARACK OBAMA!!!!

    You can demonize me all you like, Warren. I’m not going to play the Andrew Sullivan martyr card. I’m not going to turn into a fucking John Cole or Commissar and become a crazy leftist just because idiots like you decide that I’m “dishonest” and “immoral.”

    But I can warn you, Warren, that what you’re doing is stupid. You’re taking people who are your allies and TRYING to alienate them because they’re not PURE enough for you. Because, like Brit Hume and Allahpundit and the late Dean Barnett and the rest of us dishonest and immoral creatures, we’re not COURAGEOUS enough to say that Barack Obama is the EVILLEST AND MOST FASCISTIC MAN IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD!!!!!1!! (Hitler possibly excepted.)

    It won’t work with me. I’m not going to react emotionally and turn my back on my political principles just because people like you are trying your damnedest to turn everyone reasonable away from the party.

    But you will lose others. Hell, that’s OK. FUCK ‘EM! We don’t need their votes!! We did, er, just FINE in this election without them!

    You and Jeff can be Pure and not care what observers think. I think you’re playing a fool’s game.

  169. “You gave the game away when you talked about how you wanted to be seen as classy.”

    Uh, that’s not quite what I said. I said that “I don’t think showing some class shows weakness.”

    John McCain gave a classy concession speech last night. But you decried my post as “[p]recisely the kind of self-righteous civility that fried McCain.” Which suggested to me that you felt his concession speech showed weakness.

    I don’t think any Republican could have won this cycle. But I did think, watching McCain’s speech, that if he had been consistently that classy, he would have had an even better chance.

    You clearly disagree. You apparently think McCain wasn’t nasty enough, and that’s why he lost. I’m basing that on your quote.

    I strongly disagree. That’s all.

    I think I’ve hit the wall. I’m not sure I have anything new to add, and I can tell I’m not persuading anyone, so it may be time to give up.

    My fundamental suggestion is for people to be charitable towards the positions other people espouse. Don’t assume they are espousing those positions for bad reasons if it’s reasonable to believe they could be doing so for good reasons. I don’t always live up to this ideal, but I still think it’s a good ideal.

    This may be falling on mostly deaf ears, but maybe it will get through to somebody.

  170. There are people on the other side of the political fence whom I respect. They’re in my family; they’re my friends; they’re my colleagues. There are a lot of good people in that crowd.

    When you ask this crowd, on this page, whom they consider to be “good men” among Democrats, they mostly turn to “Democrats” who have chosen to give speeches on behalf of Republican presidential candidates at GOP presidential conventions.

    I have a broader view of who can be counted as good people. As good Americans. As patriots.

    See? There you go again with that moral preening.

    You asked commenters here for a national Democrat, then juxtapose those commenters’ “cretinous” partisanship against your own open-minded embrace of Democratic friends and family and colleagues whom you respect.

    Give it a rest, for Chrissakes.

    My best friend is a hardcore lefty. We have lengthy long-distance calls in which we move effortlessly from politics to baseball, etc. I respect him, he respects me, blah blah blah. But I don’t respect his politics, because I think they pose a danger to the country.

    But that’s not what you asked. You asked about national Dems.

  171. C’mon Patterico. You cannot ignore the substance of the political arguments criticizing yer choice of verbiage – i.e., that Obama is not most specifically not “good” by virtue of the evidence of blah-blah-blah [cited] – by offering a defense of O’s behaviour in parenting, or his oratorial skills, or his symbolic importance to an ugly piece of the American past (though indeed, one of its most glorious moments: hey, that’s America), or whatever …nor by appealing to yer need for peaceful relationships with Democrat friends & family who choose to ignore (whether actively or blissfully) O’s issues …nor by sophomoric hyperbole, which I see you’ve just added.

    You’re just too damn smart for that.

    You simply got dinged for calling him a good man in the context of your political observation, after you yourself have been observing for months that “good” isn’t exactly the correct appellative within that political context. So just own it.

    That said: it is *still* okay if you want to wish him well, and note the historical context of his victory (especially if you “need” to for “relationships” etc.). **I** wish the sob both well and long, good health (with Biden, and Pelosi in the line of succession, I’m actually sincere about it).

    But calling him good *in the political context* is sappy. ‘N ya know it.

  172. You clearly disagree. You apparently think McCain wasn’t nasty enough, and that’s why he lost. I’m basing that on your quote.

    I strongly disagree. That’s all.

    I think McCain was too afraid to be labeled as nasty; telling the truth is not a “smear” — and worse, a potentially “racist” smear. By conflating the two — or, at least, by allowing progressives to do so — you are part of the problem. Simple as that.

    My fundamental suggestion is for people to be charitable towards the positions other people espouse. Don’t assume they are espousing those positions for bad reasons if it’s reasonable to believe they could be doing so for good reasons. I don’t always live up to this ideal, but I still think it’s a good ideal.

    And? Who here wouldn’t agree with that?

    But your suggestion is that this is something YOU are doing and something that I am not. So. Explain to me the “good reasons” Obama had for allying himself with BLT. Just for starters.

    I try not to ascribe to bad faith what might only be bad judgment. But how anyone can study the calculated perfidy of Obama and conclude that he is good is beyond me.

    I’m not going to react emotionally and turn my back on my political principles just because people like you are trying your damnedest to turn everyone reasonable away from the party.

    Yeah, that’s what I’m doing with all my blather about classical liberalism: turning people away from the party.

    You’re trying to win votes. I’m trying to change minds. You stay “classy.” I’ll stay focused.

  173. No, it isn’t McCain wasn’t nasty enough.

    It’s that he didn’t want to speak about anything potentially “controversial,” such as the fact Obama had no idea wtf he might have been talking about re> the economy.

    There is a difference, and I’m thinking Jeff is in the latter category. Similarly, there’s a qualitative difference between Obama standing idly by as his supporters make fun of a cripple, dig into a hapless plumber’s life, etc., etc., and Sarah Palin pointing out the fact that yes, Obama was in fact friendly with a domestic terrorist.

    Please, Patterico. Don’t pull the moral equivalency crap on this. HOW would McCain taking a stronger stance on actual issues concerning the legitimacy of Obama’s experience and past be equivalent to some of the things said or done in Obama’s name?

  174. Patterico, I take it at face value you think O’s a good man AND it does a conservative’s image no harm and maybe some good to allow that O is a good man. The only difficulty there is, he’s actually not.

    That’s why i said you will find out in your own time.

  175. Fine.

    Among national Democrats, I’d say most of the people I read about on a daily basis are good American patriots.

    Some are nasty and venal, like Chuck Schumer.

    But as much of a fool as I think Joe Biden is, I think he’s a good man and a patriot who does what he thinks is best for his country. My Senator Dianne Feinstein is unbelievably misguided on any levels, but she’s a good woman and a patriot who does what she thinks is best.

    I’m a Supreme Court watcher, and I think Anthony Kennedy can go to hell. He cares about himself and nobody else.

    But David Souter, who never gets anything right, is a good man. He is very smart. He does what he thinks is right. He’s a patriot. He’s pretty weird. But he’s a good man.

    Stephen Breyer is a mushy-headed guy who can’t ask a question in under three minutes. He drives me crazy. But he’s a good man who is trying to do what’s right.

    I could go on and on and on. It’s not just Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman and it’s not just my family and friends. I honestly think it’s weird that so many people here seem to think that if you’re a Democrat, or a lefty judge, that you’re just plain evil and unpatriotic and Bad.

    I can tell you like to call that moral preening. Well, you call it what you like. I’m a pretty hard-core conservative on issues, but this demonizing the other side is creeping me out. But I’m sure it’s just me. I’m sure there aren’t any other Americans who feel the same.

    And if there are — tens of millions of them — then who cares? Fuck ‘em!

    Now THAT kind of thinking CAN’T lose!!

  176. He may “grow” in office. I tend to think there will be no major revolution in his character, his understanding, or his principles.

  177. But Patterico, you seem unwilling to allow that there are some mush-headed ideas that bring about evil, at least in the lesser-charged old-fashioned meaning of the word. Ideas that believe in subverting the individual to a grand collective do not have a very good reputation.

  178. I honestly think it’s weird that so many people here seem to think that if you’re a Democrat, or a lefty judge, that you’re just plain evil and unpatriotic and Bad.

    I think it’s weird that you think people here believe that. People here think Obama isn’t a good man. That’s not the same as saying most Democrats are evil or unpatriotic or Bad.

    And this site has no history of making any such general claims.

    I can tell you like to call that moral preening.

    Are you giving a summation? I didn’t call that moral preening. I called your attempt to turn “name a national Dem” into “some of my best friends are Democrats” by way of demonizing some of the commenters here moral preening.

    Well, you call it what you like. I’m a pretty hard-core conservative on issues, but this demonizing the other side is creeping me out. But I’m sure it’s just me. I’m sure there aren’t any other Americans who feel the same.

    Demonizing Barack Obama, you mean. With “demonizing” here defined as “not thinking him a good man.”

    And I’ve no doubt other Americans feel as you do. But the question is, are they right to do so.

  179. And O’s ideas of patriotism are different than what we probably learned in childhood, a love of the republic. He was taught it was wrong, bad, evil, racist; his idea is to break the USA down and build it into a different kind of country.

  180. “I think McCain was too afraid to be labeled as nasty; telling the truth is not a “smear” — and worse, a potentially “racist” smear. By conflating the two — or, at least, by allowing progressives to do so — you are part of the problem. Simple as that.”

    Yeah, because I didn’t bother “telling the truth” about Obama on my blog for the last several months because I was so scared of being called a racist.

    Bullshit. I just worked on getting the FACTS out there.

    My fundamental suggestion is for people to be charitable towards the positions other people espouse. Don’t assume they are espousing those positions for bad reasons if it’s reasonable to believe they could be doing so for good reasons. I don’t always live up to this ideal, but I still think it’s a good ideal.

    And? Who here wouldn’t agree with that?

    But your suggestion is that this is something YOU are doing and something that I am not.

    OK. You tell me how charitable you were being towards me when you said this:

    Want to be clapped on the back for your decorum? Fine. Just say so.

    But let’s not pretend you are being honest or principled.

    Fine. Let’s not pretend you were showing any willingness to give me the benefit of the doubt with that quote.

    Also, Jeff: when I said:

    “I’m not going to react emotionally and turn my back on my political principles just because people like you are trying your damnedest to turn everyone reasonable away from the party.”

    You reacted as though I was addressing you:

    Yeah, that’s what I’m doing with all my blather about classical liberalism: turning people away from the party.

    You’re trying to win votes. I’m trying to change minds. You stay “classy.” I’ll stay focused.

    I wasn’t addressing you. I was addressing Warren, who called me immoral and dishonest. Go back and read the comment and you’ll see it’s quite clear.

  181. With “demonizing” here defined as “not thinking him a good man.”

    Or calling him a “con man and a thief.”

  182. Yeah, because I didn’t bother “telling the truth” about Obama on my blog for the last several months because I was so scared of being called a racist.

    Yeah. Then he was “pond scum.” Today he’s the good kind of pond scum, I guess.

    Fine. Let’s not pretend you were showing any willingness to give me the benefit of the doubt with that quote.

    I wasn’t. I’m not. Because you’re far too smart.

    I don’t believe for a second, as I said upthread, that you believe a man who has allied himself with racists, anti-semites, domestic terrorists — and comes from a background of Mau Mauing the flak catchers to line his own pocket — is a “good man.”

    Hence this post.

  183. You’ll see Patterico. I tell you so.

  184. Are you saying it is “demonizing” Obama to call him a con man and a thief? He practically describes himself as a con man in his autobiographies (though he wouldn’t use that exact phrasing); and his thievery, well, I guess if there’s no indictment, there’s no theft.

  185. That’s it for me.

    This is tiresome. I think you’d rather spend your time defending what was an ill-conceived description — and demonizing the readers here as cretinous partisan demonizers who are poison to “the party” — than considering what it is such an ill-conceived description suggests and allows.

  186. “Yeah. Then he was “pond scum.” Today he’s the good kind of pond scum, I gues”

    Hey, you’ve joined with a lefty troll of mine in unearthing an old comment (not from a post) in which I reacted in the heat of battle to a situation where Obama did indeed dishonestly minimize Sarah Palin’s qualifications.

    It made me mad then and it makes me mad now to think about it.

    Maybe I’m an authentic conservative after all!

    Except, whoops. Sarah Palin claimed that the first investigation of her Tasergate scandal cleared her of any wrongdoing. Nope. That was either a lie, or woefully misinformed. She must be a bad woman.

    And McCain distorted Obama’s position more than once as well. On taxes and plenty other issues. He must be a bad man.

  187. Patterico, you’re the one who called him pond scum for spinning. Spinning is the least of my worries about O. It’s not why I call him bad.

  188. “I wasn’t. I’m not. Because you’re far too smart.’

    Great. Then why did you pretend you were?

    [I didn't. In fact, I accused you directly of engaging in a show of ostentatious and self-congratulatory self-righeousness - ed]

    Why, when I advocated the principle of charity in interpreting opponents’ comments, did you open your eyes oh-so-innocently-wide and say: “your suggestion is that this is something YOU are doing and something that I am not”?

    [Because I am charitable about such things, at least at the outset. But when my reading suggest to me that such charity in unwarranted -- that the premise is absurd -- I am under no obligation to keep pretending that someone is sincere when I believe him to be insincere. Your suggestion is that to reach a conclusion other than the one claimed by person offering the premise is somehow "uncharitable." I rather see it as not surrendering to the idea that all opinions and arguments are equal, nor am I required to conclude such - ed]

    Well, now it’s not just my suggestion. It’s your admission. You could interpret my comments as sincere or as preening.

    [Verily! And I concluded that they were preening. Is it "uncharitable" to disagree with the assertion of another, when the facts don't seem to bear that assertion out? Or is that, like, how we are supposed to argue? Me, I go with the latter - ed]

    You chose to interpret them in the worst possible light, because it gave you a little frisson of self-righteousness to imagine me as the bowing, scraping toadie and you as the fearless and courageous truth-teller.

    [I chose to interpret them in the light in which I believe they were offered; I believe they were calculated remarks meant to show Republicans in a good light (people are watching!), and that, if you actually do believe them -- which I don't believe (I didn't CHOSE to think that way, incidentally; instead, I came to a conclusion based on your having called a man who is clearly not good "good," coupled with my belief that you aren't a total idiot) -- that is remarkable in and of itself -- ed]

    Great. Enjoy that. Just don’t fucking pretend that the principle of charity is something that YOU are observing.

    [Again, this is remarkably puerile. This "principle of charity" of which you speak seems a way to leave you impervious to criticism. To disbelieve your premise, having looked at the evidence (and read both your post and your prior assessments of the goodly pondscum), is now "uncharitable," and so the mark of -- what? A bad man? Sorry. Charity is one thing. Blindness is another. Hate the sin, love the sinner, you see - ed]

    You’re right about one thing: this is tiresome.

  189. How about just stop at , you shouldn’t call him good because he isn’t. You should see he isn’t. You ought to know better. And you’re informed and intelligent to be thought to know better. So it’s not so surprising that someone would have a cynical take on a show a magnanimity regarding Obama’s “goodness”.

    Separate the man from his ideas and methods and associations if you must. He is still not a worthy man, on the basis of his arrogant temper, fakery, cheating. How can you call him so?

  190. Congratulations, Patterico! You have the fascist thug known as thor liking you.

    What an honor!

    Do respond to him. He gets ronery when he thinks no one’s paying attention to him.

    Oh, btw: The folks who are trying to claim Obama’s the Anti-Christ (what, another one?!) are demonizing him. What you’re calling demonization is more like, oh, definition of character.

    A desire for manners and good behavior is commendable, but not when the recipient spits in your face and throws crap at you.

  191. We probably should be more like that insurance commercial where the girl see the lady close the gate, and she thinks to herself, “Wow, she just closed the gate without anyone asking.” Then the girl picks up a guy’s newspaper that he dropped and the guy thinks, “Wow, I dropped my newspaper and this girl picked it up for me. That’s nice.” So the guy is next to another guy who almost steps out in front of an oncoming bus and the lady who watches thinks, “Wow, he just stopped that guy from being killed. He didn’t have to do that.” ……….and insultingly on and on and on and on.

    As for me, I’m keeping selfishness as a virtue.

  192. I’m all about Thug Life!

    Gimme your money, and your 3-wood, oh, oh, is that a Ping putter, that too, sucka!

  193. Evan Bayh is a Democrat I like.

  194. He has surrounded himself with disreputable people his whole career. How am I supposed to conclude he is a good man? Is his tactic of distanceing himself from his friends and family the behaviior of a good man? His behavior is not the behavior of an honorable man, a man of charachter.He is fundamentally flawed.

  195. How am I supposed to conclude he is a good man?

    In just the same way you conclude that the guy in the van who will re-roof your house is a good man Rusty. You pay him $5000 up front, and then you wait for him to come back tomorrow to re-roof your house. If he comes back and does a good job, he’s a good man. If he never shows up, then he was not your roofer to begin with.

    It’s easy.

  196. I think alot of respect goes out the window when decrying voter fraud is portrayed as racist by the other side of the political isle. Do you see any prominent left wing website posting anything on ACORN voter fraud? They won yes, but they are purposely excusing voter fraud. They do not care their “guys” cheat. They fucking condone it, they excuse it, they never condemn it. Kinda hard to imagine being a nice loser to people that have been anything other than a rational in their loses for the last 8 years, and in this last election have blatantly greenlighted cheating.

  197. Oh wait Rusty,

    Bad example.

    Better: Your neighbor (Michigan) whose roof leaks, sags, and looks like shit, has your bank account number. He pays his roofer 5000k to fix your roof. Now you’re forced to think that roofer is a good man, because how could Michigan be wrong?

    And of course, the roofer has to show up too. Minor detail.

  198. My fundamental suggestion is for people to be charitable towards the positions other people espouse. Don’t assume they are espousing those positions for bad reasons if it’s reasonable to believe they could be doing so for good reasons. I don’t always live up to this ideal, but I still think it’s a good ideal.

    I don’t assume good or bad, really. I look at the position and evaluate that. People advocate positions all the time out for selfish reasons. Cancer patients usually advocate for more Cancer research, not the cure for heart disease.

  199. Again, I say: take the happy warrior stance. Oppose the policies. Point out the bad stuff the guy has done. But recognize the good in him as well. It will gain you credibility with people you need.

    But, but … I already have the wire frame done for my Barack paper mache oversized head. Point being – the right could never even approach the level of vitriol the left spewed for the last 6 years. They’ve set that bar pretty damn high.

    I think you cannot confuse the tactic of playing tough being nice. I don’t need to say that Obama is a nice man. To be honest, I have NO Idea what type of man he is. Lemme think of nice/good things I can say about him:

    He appears to be an adoring father.
    He doesn’t seem to have a temper.
    He’s wicked with the teleprompter.

    I have no idea about his motivations regarding policy. None. He could believe them, or he could have used Ayers and others to make a name for himself. Time will tell.

  200. I think the big difference though Carin is that if our side became insanely raged it would be shown on TV. They seem have done a pretty good job of sugarcoating the insanity for the last 8 years from what I have seen.

  201. He appears to be an adoring father.
    He doesn’t seem to have a temper.
    He’s wicked with the teleprompter.

    He’s a good looking fella. He’s a great politician. And with that, I’m about out of nice things to say.

    I can’t identify his principles. His judgment, in my estimation, is horrific. I, unlike the likes of Buckley and Parker, cannot rely on the hope that he will be something entirely out of the character he has always shown. The proof will be in the pudding.

  202. I think the big difference though Carin is that if our side became insanely raged it would be shown on TV. They seem have done a pretty good job of sugarcoating the insanity for the last 8 years from what I have seen.

    That is putting it mildly.

  203. *I just don’t happen to think lending legitimacy to the thuggish tactics of a con man and a thief is a very good idea — particularly when “people are watching to see how we react.”*

    God, thats just the point of the thread isn’t it. Obama’s tactics in the election define him as “not a good man”. His past associations (ie close ties to terrorist, racist preachers, gangsters, chicago machine) imply he is anything but a good man. You are what you do, you are defined by the company you keep. Just because the majority of the country discounted character (just like they did with Bill Clinton) does not mean Obama HAS character. How you can argue this “good man” thing is beyond me. There’s a chicago machine politician/thug elected president. Good man my conservative white butt.

    I

  204. think the big difference though Carin is that if our side became insanely raged it would be shown on TV. They seem have done a pretty good job of sugarcoating the insanity for the last 8 years from what I have seen.

    That is a given. I have no doubt we WILL see unhinged images on the MSM, even if they have to go to the most out-of-the way, backwoods hunting cabin to find it.

  205. Patterico, if you come back to read this,

    If you think people in the PW community “demonize” all Democrats just because they are democrats, then you either don’t hang here much or you’re listening to the people who are jealous of JeffG.

    While the PW commenters can be exuberant, verbose and irreverant, we don’t knee-jerk react to PEOPLE as “demons” just for holding contrary views. JeffG has engaged on a very substansive level any number of liberals to leftists as long as they were willing to engage in good faith. Though it is interesting to note that several such people, when finding themselves out-argued and out-classed, devolve into trolls spitting ad hominums.

    Patterico, you of ALL people should know the McCain campaign made several critical errors of message … especially dropping the Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae issue, and the way they managed Sarah Palin. It has nothing to do with McCain being “nasty” but with his basic refusal to have a clear message and to keep pounding it home. How many frustrating times during debates would McCain finally hit a point that was a winner, to only mention it once, in a conversational tone, then leave it never to return? While Obama worked the “change” “hope” thing over and over and over. And Obama would tell blatant falsehoods during debates and McCain would barely protest.

    Now Obama’s debate and campaign STYLE are not the issue of his “goodness”. He’s slick, calm, an engaging showman. But he is a man of questionable character.

    I truly hope he is a halfway decent President and he may actually take the office seriously enough to get us through some bad times, but he is still not a good man. Good men don’t seek out people like Ayers as friends and mentors.

  206. Pingback: Well this is a really crucial debate | The Cranky Conservative

  207. None of that sounds a lot happy warrior to me, Mr. Patterico. For real you sound kind of grumpy.

  208. Darleen, I think it’s a little over the top to call Obama a con man and a thief. But then, I think it’s a little over the top to say I’m being dishonest and unprincipled, as Jeff did, or dishonest and immoral and ignoble and dishonorable and reprehensible, as one of his commenters did.

    As I say, I’m not interested in playing the Andrew Sullivan martyr card. I’ll admit to being peeved at not getting the benefit of any doubt as to my motives from people who should know me, but look, we all take brickbats from our own when we say something out of line and we know the game. It’s no big deal. I’m more concerned about people seeming not to understand why we lost, and responding to the loss by saying that McCain could have won had he simply been less “noble.” That seems to me to show a fundamental misunderstanding of what happened two days ago.

  209. Just don’t fucking pretend that the principle of charity is something that YOU are observing.

    (mr. patterico sowing the seeds of love)

  210. If the question is to be (as Patrick seemed to desire to make it), “Are there good, sincere, well meaning National Democrat politicians and behind the sceners and will commenters at Protein Wisdom acknowledge them?” and my failure by omission to mention any is to be taken as an indictment of PW commenters in general and myself in particular, let me clear that question up right now with a blanket statement.

    Sure, of course, there are many National Democrats — defined broadly — tens of thousands, I have no doubt. John Spratt and his fellow South Carolinian in leadership James Clyburn, Ike Skelton and Henry Cuellar, Sen Jim Webb, Sen Evan Bayh, Sen Max Baucus, Sen Jon Testor, former Gov/Sen-elect Mark Warner, Gov Ed Rendell and Gov Kathleen Sebelius just to name a few.

    For my own part, I thnk the question dividing us doesn’t come down to whether Patterico is or isn’t sincere, but whether his estimation of Barack Obama is true, or mine is. Is Barack Obama a good man or is he not? For clarity’s sake “not being a good man” does not mean a man is an evil man.

    I may be proven wrong. So may Patterico. We will see.

  211. “But then, I think it’s a little over the top to say I’m being dishonest and unprincipled, as Jeff did, or dishonest and immoral and ignoble and dishonorable and reprehensible, as one of his commenters did.”

    Agreed. Still makes me want to throw up in my mouth though when I hear he is a “good” man. Makes me think I should hang out outside a white power church to find someone to watch my kids. I am not calling you unprincipled per say, I just think you are ignoring a perponderance of evidence. I could care less about who won the election 2 days ago for the facts to remain as they are. Just because over 60 million people disagree with me doesn’t make them right.

  212. It seems to me that there are people who think the Republican Party’s job is to win elections, and there are other people who think the Republican Party’s job is to advance a conservative (or classically liberal) ideology and agenda.

    It further seems to me that Patterico has more sympathy with the former camp, whereas Jeff G. would identify with the latter.

    If this is accurate, then I can understand the impasse.

  213. We’re so very doomed. Doomed in the classical rending of garments sort of way I think if you have any enthusiasm for that sort of thing. This dirty socialist and his media thugs are not the kinder gentler ones. It’s gonna take some people longer than others to look at that in the face I think. Your America a dirty socialist backwater. It came to pass in the year 2008.

  214. Nicely put, DarthRove.

    I think you have indeed identified the nub of the matter.

  215. …Just because over 60 million people disagree…

    Just for the record Mr. Pink, some non-trivial number of that 60M may agree with you and still voted for the guy, and some of them voted that way not in spite of the fact that they agree with you but because of the fact that they agree with you.

  216. Not like the cashmere I mean more like a t-shirt you mostly just wear around the house.

  217. happyfeet – I agree with all but the doomed part. America is far greater than his pernicious dirty little socialism. We will survive, but will take some lumps in the process.

  218. #205 I have no idea about his motivations regarding policy. None. He could believe them, or he could have used Ayers and others to make a name for himself

    Carin, he does believe those things, if only because there is nothing else in his head. It’s all he knows. It’s his philosophical home. He’s got nowhere else to go that will ever feel “right” to him. I’d argue any move to center is a pose for expedience, and wonder why with Obama having a trail of dealings so broad and wide and obvious, Kurtzmust play Cassandra.

    Time will tell. But looking backward in time is a pretty good predictor of how the clock will tick forward.

  219. We’ll see. The dirty socialists are in it to win it I think and we can’t even agree to say hey you dirty socialists we’ve got your number. This doesn’t feel like an interregnum to me. This is sabotage.

  220. Hey happy maybe this will cheer you up. A couple quote from Ben Franklin

    “Where liberty dwells, there is my country.”

    “This will be the best security for maintaining our liberties. A nation of well-informed men who have been taught to know and prize the rights which God has given them cannot be enslaved. It is in the religion of ignorance that tyranny begins.”

    “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”

    “The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.”

    ” …a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles…is absolutely necessary to preserve the blessings of liberty and keep a government free. “

  221. I’m not despondent. We had a good run.

  222. Well after rereading those I agree with your assesment. Now I am more depressed. This one, “The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.”, has definately been overwhelmingly rejected.

  223. I’ll start:

    Hey, you dirty socialists, I’ve got your number

  224. Yay! Maybe JD is right after all.

  225. I would take mild issue with Mr. Franklin over the phrase, “The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness.” To my understanding, human beings “have” the basic rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (property in an earlier edit of the DoI?); we aren’t “given” rights by the Constitution, it merely enumerates the proper role of government in light of the rights we as free beings already have, and the situations in which those rights may be suspended by the government if we as free people abuse those rights.

    But what do I know? I’m just a bitterly clinging soul being all selfish for wanting to keep what I earn.

  226. But I certainly agree with Mr. Franklin’s sentiment. I think I’ll print it out in huge font and pin it to my cubicle wall.

  227. “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”

    Thus the election of a product of one of the most corrupt political machines in the nation.

  228. Yeah those quotes put a chill up my spine because they were all true. To think over 200 years ago strode people in this country whose naval lint had more integrity and intelligence than our current crop of politicians. Now look at us. I think it all broke down when they outlawed dueling.

  229. We have often traded a “little” freedom for security for the sake of eliminating some perceived risk — we thought — without realizing the creeping limitations to our broader liberties this entailed.

  230. Shelby Steele in the LATimes today: “Obama’s Post-racial Promise”

    Obama’s special charisma — since his famous 2004 convention speech — always came much more from the racial idealism he embodied than from his political ideas. In fact, this was his only true political originality. On the level of public policy, he was quite unremarkable. His economics were the redistributive axioms of old-fashioned Keynesianism; his social thought was recycled Great Society. But all this policy boilerplate was freshened up — given an air of “change” — by the dreamy post-racial and post-ideological kitsch he dressed it in.

  231. You’re a stupid f——, Patterico.

    Putting aside all of the attacks on Barack Obama for being associated with Ayers and redistributive Marxism, his creating weird symbols of power before even getting in office, his campaign’s financing FRAUD disabling basic protections to raise millions of foreign and over the limit donations, and his “overlooking” of his campaign’s voter registration and, of course, voting fraud.

    Putting aside all that.

    You just posted the other day about his supporting partial birth abortion and how abhorrent this is (you left out infanticide, but whatever).

    And now you say he’s basically a nice guy for a politician?

    You’re an ass——–.

    I maintained some respect for you, enough to positively speak of you at times and link to some of your articles, a year after you banned me. With, admittedly, some criticism.

    But now I’ve lost all respect for your integrity. That you could write that eloquent post about Barack Obama and partial birth abortion one day, and say he’s basically a “nice guy” the next.

    * Same sentiments posted under a different nickname at Ace’s. There’s a brief story behind the nickname, and not important.

  232. Patterico is not a stupid fuck or any of all that. He’s actually a very nice person Darleen says and she’s met him. Y’all have to remember Mr. Patterico is in a city what was already way ahead of the dirty socialist ascendancy so he’s probably seeing a lot of jitteringly excited dirty socialist people everywhere and can sense their manic dirty socialist energies all around him and who wants to get on the wrong side of that?

  233. I responded by way of interpolation.

  234. You’re entitled to your opinion, Jeff, and I’m entitled to mine.

    Great post, by the way. Your criticism of me is not unjustified, as I tend to put things in black and white terms, sometimes using. And usually that would be over the top.

    But not when a guy posts about how awful it is that America is about to elect a President who supports partial-birth abortion (and infanticide in certain circumstances, as others have pointed out)…

    then tells me Barack Obama is “nice”.

    Nice?

    Screw that.

  235. *vitriol. Sometimes using vitriol…

  236. Mortal Kombat!!!!!111!!!!1

  237. “Y’all have to remember Mr. Patterico is in a city what was already way ahead of the dirty socialist ascendancy so he’s probably seeing a lot of jitteringly excited dirty socialist people everywhere and can sense their manic dirty socialist energies all around him and who wants to get on the wrong side of that?”

    I actually was tempted to throw in a bit of “cowardice” in my criticism and dismissal of Patterico, using exactly your reasoning, but I refrained because there was no proof of it.

    However. There is every bit of proof he tells me a supporter of the awful partial-birth abortion practice is “nice”.

    That’s why I decided to call Patterico stupid instead of cowardly… or at least reluctant to be intellectually honest considering he lives in Los Angeles.

    Because writing a post one day about how awful it would be to elect a partial-birth abortion supporting man ≠ nice.

    Speaking of Barack Obama, this is the nice communist terrorist-associating (he sought them out, obviously, and used them to advance his career) fellow:

    And I’ll keep this as brief as I can. You won’t like it much.

    Don’t worry, that means you’re normal.

    The votes and legislation are a matter of public record. You can look for it at the Illinois Senate and U.S. Congressional websites if you doubt it. I can’t imagine why you would.

    The Born Alive Infant Protection Act was signed into law by President Bush. The U.S. House of Representatives has 435 members. Only 15 opposed it (hard left zealots in my humble opinion). It passed the U.S. Senate unanimously by voice vote.

    It protects babies who survive abortion by requiring medical treatment. Barack Obama opposes this. Mind you, Barack Obama is the person who said with cameras rolling that if his daughters made a mistake and got pregnant, “I don’t want them to be punished with a baby.”

    Moving forward.

    During the same year, 2002, the Induced Infant Liability Act was before the Illinois Senate. It is substantially similar to the federal bill. Same provisions. Must protect babies who survive abortion. These aren’t babies in the womb. They’re not even in the vagina as per partial birth abortion (where they are killed, often full term).

    They’re in a hospital or abortion clinic somewhere breathing air.

    Crying, I assume.

    Barack Obama voted “present” against this bill once and then voted “no”. One of the versions he voted against was identical to the federal bill, which passed later in the year,:that has provisions so widely supported almost all the U.S. House and Senate voted for it.

    Barack Obama didn’t want the abortionist to have to face the burden of bringing in another medical professional to oversee his or her botched work and provide assistance to the (damnit! I was going to write, “unborn child”. Scratch that. Born child!) baby. He thought this is unfair in some way to the mother’s original decision to abort the baby as if that’s the relevant thing at this point when the child is crying, breathing air, and trying to live.

    Please read this one article:
    http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18647

    And watch this one video* (not graphic):
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKj109ZST3g

    Some may not understand Sarah Palin’s appeal when compared to Barack Obama. But she has it nonetheless. Some of us value innocent life. We oppose abortion in the way that slavery was opposed in the 1840s and for almost the exact same reason: It’s a violation of rights of the person. Indeed, it involves the definition of a person. And why is a baby breathing air in an abortion clinic or hospital not a person?

    Nice guy, that Barack Obama.

  238. While I agree with your assesment of O! Christoph, I do think you are very wrong to call someone a coward and a liar for disagreeing with you. It should take alot more evidence than 1 or 2 blog posts for you to be able to determine that. IMHO.

  239. In this comment, I should have said, “You’re entitled to your opinion, happyfeet…” Jeff G.’s nickname was immediately below yours and I got who wrote what mixed up.

    Good observation nonetheless, happyfeet.

  240. Dirty socialist reporter whores bend over for our dirty socialist mayor and take it however he wants it with dirty socialist enthusiasm before breakfast. Literally. It’s just a different kind of place than real America.

  241. I saw on that LATimes webpage they gotta thing at the top says “My LA Times”. Geez, they’re hopeful aren’t they?

  242. “I do think you are very wrong to call someone a coward and a liar for disagreeing with you.”

    I refrained from calling Patterico a coward because I don’t think there’s any proof of that, Mr. Pink, and I said so. I was subsequently commenting on happyfeet’s speculation and I must admit it had occurred to me. It’s a reasonable guess. It could also be wrong.

    And I’m not calling Patterico a liar either. I’m calling him a stupid f—— and an ass——–. And I’m saying I’ve lost all respect for his integrity.

    That’s not the same as calling him a liar.

    integrity
    1. Steadfast adherence to a strict moral or ethical code.
    2. The state of being unimpaired; soundness.
    3. The quality or condition of being whole or undivided; completeness.

    One day telling me it’s scary that America will elect a President that has such extreme views he supports partial birth abortion of all things under heaven and Earth (and I’m not even a Christian), and the next telling me he’s really a nice guy dramatically fails the test of “1″.

  243. * Excessive bolding accidental. Just meant to bold “1″.

  244. Mr. Pink, it appears that Jeff G. comes closer to the idea Patterico is a liar than I do:

    “Because I am charitable about such things, at least at the outset. But when my reading suggest to me that such charity in unwarranted — that the premise is absurd — I am under no obligation to keep pretending that someone is sincere when I believe him to be insincere.”

    I, however, think Patterico is as I’ve said.

  245. I think he was speaking more to the aspect of “good”, as in “good” meaning he thinks he is doing what is right for this country. I freakin wholeheartedly disagree with that assesment, but I do not think he was saying O!’s policies are in any way good as you seem to be suggesting. Whatever I got to get another cup of coffee.

    BTW I am disgusted with the calls for unity with or from the people that have been calling our President a murderer for 8 years and who have totally ignored voter fraud issues thru-out this election. I couldn’t swallow that much bullsh!t if I was that Korean kid that eats all the hotdogs.

  246. I believe I misinterpreted Jeff G.’s comment. I think he’s calling Barack Obama insincere, not Patterico.

    Certainly I believe Barack Obama’s far worse than Patterico.

    Once upon a time I too believed Barack Obama was a nice guy. I didn’t know any better so this is what I told people.

    Then I learned about him up to and including (and even past) the partial-birth abortion that Patterico railed against. This lead me to conclude, “not a nice guy”.

    Somehow Patterico concludes the opposite.

  247. Pingback: Outlaw Speak

  248. Pingback: BeldarBlog

  249. This is what Patterico wrote just before the election:

    Look again at the picture of the 18-week-old fetus. Are you comfortable with stabbing that creature in the head with a pair of scissors and sucking out its brains? When statistics show that most such abortions are not done for physical health reasons?

    Bottom line: Obama has pledged to sign legislation that will bring us that unnecessary horror again.

  250. I will concern myself with whether or not someone is a good man, if I am being asked to let him borrow my truck or look after my wife while I’m out of town. Beyond that, I may have my opinion but it’s of no consequence to him — let alone to any third party.

    I think getting offended about what other people think is just plain retarded.

  251. McGehee, Patterico has more of an impact in the world influencing people with his writings on his blog and occasional pieces in the L.A. Times than the welfare of your truck or even the purity of your wife.

    Rather than post your opinion, why don’t you check your tire pressure or something?

  252. Good men don’t call their wife a cunt in front of reporters. Let’s not get into character assasination when McCain has plenty of issues of his own.

  253. oh, so if all your friends jumped off a cliff you’d join them, Sarah? “everyone else is doing it so it’s OK!”

  254. Jeez. Just let McCain go he’s over with bored bored bored no more McCain this or McCain that. McCain makes no difference to anything anymore and never will. He is a loser what delivered this country unto dirty socialisms. He should resign and pick a house and stay there.

  255. Yeah, I take that into account when I let them borrow my wife or watch my truck, too, McGehee.

  256. In front of reporters?!!! OMG!!!

  257. Wonder what Vera Baker’s doing for the Chicago Building Department down there in Bermuda, or wherever.

  258. “Good men don’t call their wife a cunt in front of reporters.”

    Sarah, don’t be a cunt.

    Swearing at someone you love in a moment of anger, and then later patching things up, probably eating a mountain of crow (publicly and privately) isn’t comparable to:

    “Look again at the picture of the 18-week-old fetus. Are you comfortable with stabbing that creature in the head with a pair of scissors and sucking out its brains? When statistics show that most such abortions are not done for physical health reasons?

    “Bottom line: Obama has pledged to sign legislation that will bring us that unnecessary horror again.”

  259. I think without the personal attack language this could have made for a nice discussion

  260. Pingback: damnum absque injuria » Circular Firing Squads

  261. It appears my opinion offended Christoph.

  262. Cristoph is a passive-aggressive Canadian asshole who’s been acting like a douche on Ace of Spades for months.

    I’m wondering if he finally got banned over there?

  263. So he comes here and acts retarded?

    I can hardly wait to see how that works out for him.

  264. “Spies, Brigands, and Pirates”,

    Where the hell did you get the “passive” part from?

  265. McGehee, I was commenting on your non sequitur.

    Patterico posts something on the internet that contradicts in strong terms what he’s been trying to tell us, to with the goodness of a man who is a crook, someone who will again bring about the partial-birth abortion that Patterico calls a horror, who associated with terrorists, etc… with an irrelevant comparison about your truck or wife (at least you put them in the right order — ha ha — kidding).

    Therefore my crack about checking your tire pressure instead of posting on the internet.

    Your comment didn’t offend me. I thought it was dumb.

  266. BTW
    Charitable? Charitable to a philosophy ,and those that expound it, that is anathema to my way of life? They’re barbarians. they’ll get what barbarians deserve.

  267. McGehee, I was commenting on your non sequitur.

    Your response included an attempt substantively to defend your position that Patterico’s opinion is offensive. That’s not a normal response to a non sequitur.

  268. Pingback: Friday Quote — Dean’s World

  269. Pingback: Steynian 281 « Free Canuckistan!

  270. I happen to be one of the minority that think you’re right.

    I think he’s naive and petulant, but not “bad”

    But that being said, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The problem is all those intentions work in the classroom or in a vacuum, the real world has no such forgiveness.

  271. Pingback: Is Barack Obama a good man? « The Counter Revolution

  272. Pingback: Right Wing Nut House » ON BEING NOBLE AND OTHER NONSENSICAL IDEAS IN THE AGE OF OBAMA

  273. Thanks for the great discussion. JeffG won on logic points. Patterico is interesting but now I understand why OJ got off.

  274. “Patterico is interesting but now I understand why OJ got off.”

    In the interest of civility, Moneyrunner: fuck off.

  275. Moneyrunner, I’m as willing to criticize Patterico as the next fellow, but that was a stupid comment of yours. Non sequitur.

  276. Pingback: “A Good Man is Hard to Find,” 2

  277. Pingback: Patterico’s Pontifications » Here’s a Fun Comment Thread

  278. Pingback: Patterico’s Pontifications » On Obama and Good Men

  279. Pablo suggested I post this again:

    Jeff Goldstein’s threat of violence:

    I READILY ADMIT TO THREATENING TO BEAT CERTAIN PEOPLE’S ASSES. And you know what? I’d still do it to most of them if we ever met up. So?

    Jeff Goldstein’s threat of violence:

    Scott Jacobs is one of those guys I mentioned that if I ever met him in person, I’d leave him in a heap, mewling like a baby pussy.

    Jeff Goldstein’s threat of violence:

    Hey, listen: Doc Weasel is a cover band. The guy who runs their site, Kenny, is a 140lb unpaid roadie and all around lackey living at home with mom, posting amateur porn and tugging at his own little doc weasel. If I ever run into him, I’ll break him like a toothpick.

    Jeff Goldstein’s threat of violence:

    Note that I said if I ever ran across some of these people, I’d have no problem — and feel no guilt — about snapping their ACL.

    Jeff Goldstein’s threat of violence:

    As I said earlier, why the fuck should I be embarrassed about telling people who’ve said some vile things to me that I’d be happy to meet up with them in person, where I’d give them the opportunity to say those same vile things directly to my face. Just before I broke their fucking ankles?

    Jeff Goldstein’s threat of violence:

    I’ve probably gotten into it with about a half dozen people over the years, some of whom if I ran into them in the street I would beat their ass without hesitation.

    From: Jeff Goldstein: Arguing “On Point” — With Threats of Violence.

    Thanks to Pablo for the suggestion. It’s a good one. Sorta makes it clear who wrote this post.

  280. Yep, awesome work, Patrick. It does make it clear who wrote your post. You’re welcome.

  281. Pingback: Does it Matter if He’s Eeeeeevil? | Andrew J. Patrick

Leave a Reply