What’s the response to newspapers no one will read?
Find a new business model? Improve writing to attract subscribers? Or just demand a bailout.
And anyone slow on the realization that newspapers are solely responsible for their own problems need only to read Patterico’s Los Angeles Dog Trainer Year in Review 2008.
It happens every year: I read every post I’ve written over the past 365 days about the Los Angeles Times . . . and I think to myself: this is just unbelievable. There’s something appalling and eye-opening about seeing an entire year’s worth of the paper’s bias, omissions, and distortions gathered in one post.This year, L.A. Times editors slammed Sarah Palin, John McCain, and McCain’s ally Joe the Plumber  while they protected Barack Obama and his allies, including unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers and radical Palestinian Rashid Khalidi. The paper described a 19-point margin in opposition to gay marriage as a “narrow margin,†and displayed the usual politically correct attitudes on race, abortion, and crime. We watched the paper overreach on the story about Judge Alex Kozinski’s porn collection that wasn’t. And the paper retracted a story by Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Chuck Philips, in one of the most embarrassing incidents in the paper’s history. This year saw a campaign of relentless distortions on DNA evidence; the bankruptcy of Tribune Company; and a collection of errors like none we’ve ever seen before.
Yup, it was a fun year for liberal bias and incompetence at the local rag. So without further ado, here is my sixth annual review of the Los Angeles Times, otherwise known as the Los Angeles Dog Trainer.
Comment by Pablo on 1/1 @ 11:36 am #
It really is remarkable to see a year’s worth of the Times’ shenanigans laid out in one post. Patterico does an outstanding public service. Meanwhile, the call goes out for newspaper bailouts with a familiar detail missing.
I predict that 2009 will be rich with schadenfreude.
Comment by Jeff Y. on 1/1 @ 11:41 am #
Of course this bailout is nuts, but so was the Wall St. Bailout, and for the same reasons.
This shit is not legal. The government does not have this authority.
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 11:59 am #
Look’s like Patterico’s visit count is down over 50%.
Irony indeed.
Wonder if the right wing blogosphere will get a gummint bailout?
$60/month should do it.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 1/1 @ 12:03 pm #
Hey, nipply: I see that Blago story is really falling off the front page.
What’s your “local paper” have to say about it this week?
Snicker.
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 12:11 pm #
root veggie is typically context free in #3
hey, snippy, a little wet and cold up there in the Seattle area, eh? You might think to move to some sunnier climes just in case your nihilism is more SAD than basic amorality.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 1/1 @ 12:17 pm #
He can’t be in Seattle. He said that his “local paper” wasn’t covering the Blagojevich story any more, but I see this story, dated today.
nipply wouldn’t lie, would he?
Comment by Pablo on 1/1 @ 12:18 pm #
Wow, Hot Air’s traffic is down by half too! Since the election. And Dkos is down by 75%.
Can we get nipply a stupidity bailout?
Comment by Sdferr on 1/1 @ 12:31 pm #
I just tried to read an article by Nouriel Roubini posted at RealClearP and found myself continually annoyed and distracted by advertisements containing video or flashing graphics. I reloaded the page at least three times in an attempt to get one, just one, that didn’t have this sort of stuff in it. No such luck, even though the particular ads were changed for a different advertiser each time. Seems to me the new media have some bugs yet to work out.
Comment by guinsPen on 1/1 @ 12:35 pm #
A thorough review of last year’s editions reveals an evenhandedness that surprises even me.
So, kudos to us. Patterico is wrong.
…
As are the rest of you.
Comment by Random Ombudsman on 1/1 @ 12:36 pm #
Blast. Sure wish I’d said that.
Comment by Random Ombudsman on 1/1 @ 12:37 pm #
Spliff, mon!
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 1/1 @ 12:39 pm #
Sdferr, a couple of tips:
1) If you use Firefox, install NoScript. It greatly reduces the amount of flashing bullshit that you have to deal with.
2) Look for a “print” link or icon on the article. Often that will take you to a plain text version.
Comment by DCLex on 1/1 @ 12:41 pm #
Amen to that, Sdferr - I’ve removed RCP from my favorites for just that reason..haven’t really missed it either. If it’s a page I absolutely HAVE to read, I just deploy multiple iterations of Wordpads/Notepad and size them to block the ads. Ugly, but effective.
Patterico is to be commended for doing that ugly job so no one else has to.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 1/1 @ 12:43 pm #
I just went over to RealClearPolitics. NoScript seems to prevent any flashing stuff (at least I don’t see any), and it looks like the Roubini article does have a “print” link.
Comment by Sdferr on 1/1 @ 12:44 pm #
I do use Firefox, so NoScript is an add-on thingy I can get with a search, I take it SBP? Will NoScript deal a deathblow to the few pop-ups that still seem to escape my (evidently inadequate) pop-up blocker as well? If so, achdulieber! A joyous NewYear and thanks SBP.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 1/1 @ 12:47 pm #
Yep, you can find it here:
http://noscript.net/
There’s a slight annoyance in that sometimes page features that you do want won’t work, but it puts a little icon down in the lower righthand corner that lets you turn scripting on and off for specific pages, selectively.
Comment by Pablo on 1/1 @ 12:50 pm #
Right, Sdferr. No Script is here. Ad Block works too, and it’s not as much fuss as No Script.
Comment by Sdferr on 1/1 @ 12:51 pm #
Thanks again, I’ve already installed it and will start learning it uses.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 1/1 @ 12:54 pm #
I like the extra functionality in NoScript, Pablo, but it’s a matter of taste, I guess. :-)
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 12:59 pm #
I was just remembering when the right wing blogoshpere was claiming it was going to replace the dreaded “MSM” Darleen.
Hire its own reporters, etc.
Now it’s dying faster than newspapers.
As I said…irony.
Comment by Pablo on 1/1 @ 1:00 pm #
I use both, though I tend to just toggle NoScript on at pages that are really full of crap Ad Block doesn’t handle. It can get a bit tiresome having to allow or block on every page you visit, but it does offer a bit more control. Ad Block is more “set it and forget it”. Mostly, I just love the kajillion things Firefox allows you to do with it. Like TrollHammer. :-)
Comment by Pablo on 1/1 @ 1:01 pm #
And with that, bye parsnip!
Comment by Mikey NTH on 1/1 @ 1:01 pm #
Ignore the lamprous troll.
“Look! Over here!”
Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 1:03 pm #
The meme that media liberal bias is the primary factor that frustrates conservatism at every turn is one of the lamest excuses of all time.
The decline of print media is due to an obvious factor independent of politics.
It’s called the internet.
Comment by Pablo on 1/1 @ 1:16 pm #
It’s called trust, Not Sure. That’s a primary reason that people are turning to the internet.
It may be independent of politics for the reader, but it isn’t for the writers, and Patterico’s demolition of the LAT demonstrates the problem comprehensively.
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 1:23 pm #
Haha,
Patterico’s blog is one long exercise in bad faith readings of news articles.
I think the right wing extremists blogs failed to understand that their rabid bias has a very limited appeal and makes any claims of liberal bias in the “MSM” laughable.
Thank goodness Patterico has his government paycheck to get by on.
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 1:26 pm #
root veggie can’t hold a job … it’s jealousy of those that can is both evident and pitiful.
Comment by mongo78 on 1/1 @ 1:34 pm #
Speaking of which, can someone post the URL for the Trollhammer add-on?
Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 1:36 pm #
“It may be independent of politics for the reader, but it isn’t for the writers, and Patterico’s demolition of the LAT demonstrates the problem comprehensively.”
I’m sure the LAT is quaking in fear. Where does Patterico really rank in the general scheme of things? Higher than Erick’s RedState, with its 200 or so regulars?
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 1:37 pm #
NotShirley
Deal in non-sequitors much?
If we are dealing with the LATimes alone, its clear bias plus sloppiness and ethical problems have directly affected subscriptions. From the Staples scandal to the Gov. Davis recall, each revelation of hackery and leftwinger cheerleading has had people cancelling subscriptions in droves.
Now, understand this … a newspaper is entitled to a POV; however, it is not entitled to pretend it doesn’t have one.
It’s silly to argue that the LATimes is not a left-liberal paper. That the editors refuse to change in the face of ever declining readership and ad revenue merely demonstrates they have fooled themselves into not seeing the correlation between the product they put out and the refusal of greater groups of consumers to buy it.
Comment by Pablo on 1/1 @ 1:46 pm #
Let’s see. Circulation is dropping like a stone, layoffs have been coming fast and furious and the company is in bankruptcy. Nope, nothing to worry about here.
As for Patterico, and his relevance to the Times, perhaps you should ask them.
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 1:56 pm #
I’m sure the LAT is quaking in fear. Where does Patterico really rank in the general scheme of things?
Well, the LAT takes Patterico seriously enough
But of course, you’d have only seen that if you actually read Patterico’s review.
Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 2:03 pm #
“It’s silly to argue that the LATimes is not a left-liberal paper.”
I argued no such thing. Major city newspapers tend to represent a mind-set fond of diversity and acceptance because that is their general audience.
Accordingly, conservatives tend to favor other careers over journalism.
“That the editors refuse to change in the face of ever declining readership and ad revenue merely demonstrates they have fooled themselves into not seeing the correlation between the product they put out and the refusal of greater groups of consumers to buy it.”
See above.
It also seems to me that the “MSM” has been in love with Republicans more often than current theories can account for.
Comment by thor on 1/1 @ 2:05 pm #
In keeping with the simple pattern of her flowered frock or on her checkered table cloth, Darleen should soon be claiming you live in your parents basement, parsnip. Blame her predictability on the linear symmetry of her put-down pattern. Shame what the lack of appreciation for art and intellectuallism and a dull suburban life breeds.
Comment by geoffb on 1/1 @ 2:14 pm #
IIRC on another thread Ric Locke said that it had been determined a while ago that the person now posting as “parsnip” was from the Washington DC area. So here is his hometown paper on Jan 1st.
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 2:15 pm #
Major city newspapers tend to represent a mind-set fond of diversity and acceptance
BWAHAHAHAH!
My oh my, you must have soooooo much experience with The Press.
:::snicker:::guffaw:::
Comment by comatus on 1/1 @ 2:22 pm #
But are we really being fair to the makers of buggy whips? There are very few, true, but their product is better than ever, and commands an admirable price. Somehow I don’t think this will happen with media.
http://tinyurl.com/7xzhjj
Smacking your significant other with a rolled-up newspaper just doesn’t have the je ne sais quoi of a fine buggy whip.
Comment by geoffb on 1/1 @ 2:23 pm #
From that WaPo story, I love this paragraph.
A new President coming in is “a mess”?
Comment by thor on 1/1 @ 2:23 pm #
What experience do you have, Ms. Mitty? Ever got to wear a press card around your neck and snicker at people who had to pay to get in the big event? Did you know you can’t be towed or ticketed when you display your press creds on the dashboard of your car whenever you park where you’re not supposed to. Ha! Free parking too! Gotta love it.
Fuckin’ Press rocks. And Maureen Dowd is hawt!
Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 2:23 pm #
Too much free time will do that to you.
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 2:27 pm #
basement boy
we already know you live off your parents … whether it is in the basement, attic or grannie flat over their garage is academic, it remains that you hold contempt for honest work because you’ve never engaged in it.
root veggie holds a similar contempt with extra heapings for people who work within those areas of legitimate government province — ie military or judiciary. Contempt, that may be assumed, borne out of covetedness and modicum of self-awareness that veggie could never measure up to such work itself.
Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 2:35 pm #
:::snicker:::guffaw:::
Which is mostly why a current Red/Blue depiction of America is now eerily similar to a Civil War battle map.
Here’s a clue: Red is losing.
BTW, The Washington Times has been subsidized for years by the Moonies.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 2:42 pm #
“Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 1:03 pm #
The meme that media liberal bias is the primary factor that frustrates conservatism at every turn is one of the lamest excuses of all time.”
Look, over there!
Reality!
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 2:43 pm #
“Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 1:23 pm #
Haha,
Patterico’s blog is one long exercise in bad faith readings of news articles.”
Look, over there!
Reality!
Comment by guinsPen on 1/1 @ 2:45 pm #
“His pounding of the keyboard increased: thor-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa-pocketa.“
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 2:47 pm #
“Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 2:03 pm #
“It’s silly to argue that the LATimes is not a left-liberal paper.â€Â
I argued no such thing.”
“Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 1:03 pm #
The meme that media liberal bias is the primary factor that frustrates conservatism at every turn is one of the lamest excuses of all time.â€Â
Look, over there!
Reality!
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 2:48 pm #
“Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 2:03 pm #
“It’s silly to argue that the LATimes is not a left-liberal paper.â€Â
I argued no such thing. Major city newspapers tend to represent a mind-set fond of diversity and acceptance because that is their general audience.
Accordingly, conservatives tend to favor other careers over journalism.”
Look, over there!
Reality!
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 2:50 pm #
Comment by thor on 1/1 @ 2:05 pm #
Look! An idiot drooling in the corner!
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 2:51 pm #
You’re truly NotSure: The phenomenon you’re about to see unfold isn’t wholly political; it’s far more organic than that and like water, it will indeed seek entirely natural levels. The blues who seek to redefine natural order in order to suit their parasitic, collectivist, redistributionist nature must and will be brought into balance by the producers as a matter of course. They must be; it is inevitable and I think you know it is, even as you prattle about how you think stuff works and why.
Balance is the order of things; it’s not a question of if but a question of when O!calism — and its aftermath — fails. It may require replacing parties, it may involve replacing entire systems but it will come and it will expose the house of cards we’re currently built upon, courtesy of overspending and under producing.
Who overspends most? Naturally it’s the blue redistributionists; they even have a currency designed to allow such things. Who under produces? Those reds under redistribution’s thumb.
You may want to bookmark this comment for your later reference.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 2:55 pm #
JH, the drooling retards have their collective (HA!) fingers in thier ears going “I CAAANT HEEEAAAARRRRR UUUUUUUUUU!
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 2:56 pm #
NotShirley
Maybe you need to check with thor since he one of his tactics is to accuse anyone he disagrees with as using “Wiki” as a source and here you are cut-n-pasting a Wiki entry of a term that was simplistic when first coined and even more risible fifty years later.
Do a bit of demographic research of the So Cal area, including income levels and housing patterns, then get back to me, eh?
BTW, there’s another thing you have failed to consider concerning that ostensible “mindset fond of diversity and acceptance” as the reason contemporary “journalists” are overwhelmingly left-liberals … the emergence of j-schools in the 60’s and their impact on the traditional newsroom.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 2:57 pm #
It only figures they’d also have their journals of record, O’Brain. Their codes and bibles, as it were, their nodding trancers, their intellectual whirling dervishes, their planks to the foreheads. Look, over there. Reality.
Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 2:58 pm #
Wow. My sister thinks you’re hot.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 3:00 pm #
Kool-Aid.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 3:02 pm #
I think you’re into proofs-by-dependents.
Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 3:04 pm #
Cry me a river. Were was the impact of the “emergence of j-schools in the 60’s” on Saint Ronnie, Bush I or Bush II?
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 3:10 pm #
Gah. And NotSure adds a perfectly executed double “if it’s real, how come everybody’s not doing it” fallacy with a cherry on top.
I give it a 9.95, NotSure.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 3:13 pm #
It’s real, NotSure.
Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 3:13 pm #
Actually, red states on the whole take in more federal dollars than they contribute as opposed to blue states.
Look it up.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 3:15 pm #
I’ll Google it.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 3:21 pm #
“Actually, red states on the whole take in more federal dollars than they contribute as opposed to blue states.
Look it up.”
Provide a link.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 3:23 pm #
“Cry me a river. Were was the impact of the “emergence of j-schools in the 60’s†on Saint Ronnie, Bush I or Bush II?”
You truly are one of the marching morons, aren’t you?
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 3:27 pm #
What was President Reagen’s SDI refered to as, unsure?
Comment by SmokeVanThorn on 1/1 @ 3:30 pm #
thor, parsnip and Not Sure
You’re 100% correct - the conservative blogosphere is completely insignifcant and has absolutely no influence. So stop wasting your time here.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 3:30 pm #
Since you haven’t yet caught it, actually Congress on the whole takes in more federal dollars than they contribute as opposed to the private sector. You know, the bailout bunch; those kindly folks who also spend ten trillion a year through the DHHS. Heard of it?
Look it up.
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 3:32 pm #
Here’s a link No Brain:
http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/22685.html
Looks like Texas will soon slide over into the “Blue” column.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 3:39 pm #
Here’s a thought for all the drooling morons out there: how about reducing Federal spending?
I know a thought like that is likely to cause your head to explode, but, give it a try.
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 3:41 pm #
If we can start with military spending, you’ve got my support.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 3:43 pm #
So NotSure, we find that academia tends overwhelmingly left. The press, probably thereby, tends overwhelmingly left. Congress tends overwhelmingly left or, if it’s Republican, spends like it enjoys it a good bout of epidemic entitlement spending, left-like. And O!coalism will tend overwhelmingly left, or so it tells us and so its record predicts.
There appears to have been an impact from the “emergence of j-schools in the 60’s†during Saint Ronnie, Bush I or Bush II that remains to haunt us for decades.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 3:43 pm #
Are you saying national defense isn’t an enumerated constitutional requirement, parsnot?
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 3:44 pm #
Are you saying you’re into principle by acclaim, parsnit?
Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 3:45 pm #
What a wonderful idea.
Too bad you spent the last six years apologizing for efforts to do the exact opposite.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 3:45 pm #
Are you saying O!cialism is an enumerated policy contained in originalism, parshot?
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 3:45 pm #
Cite one. One.
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 3:47 pm #
Cry me a river. Were was the impact of the “emergence of j-schools in the 60’s†on Saint Ronnie, Bush I or Bush II?
Oh for heaven’s sake, you really are a college student … you certainly didn’t live through the Reagan years and you really haven’t read anything over the past 8 years.
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 3:48 pm #
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 3:41 pm #
If we can start with military spending, you’ve got my support.
Ah, but don’t question root veggie’s patriotism!!
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 3:51 pm #
Very little of our “defense” spending actually goes to, you know, defending America, JHo.
We should be able to chop at least 75% of our current spending without damaging our government’s “enumerated constitutional requirement” that it defend us.
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 3:51 pm #
NotShirley
So, have you finished some actual research on So Cal and found out why the term “white flight” today is just a racist smear?
Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 3:54 pm #
Medicare Part D.
The gift that keeps on giving.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 3:56 pm #
“Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 3:41 pm #
If we can start with military spending, you’ve got my support.”
National defense is a legitimate function of the Federal government, you retarded marmoset.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 3:57 pm #
Let’s start with the Dpartment of Education.
Spends billions, educates no one.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 4:01 pm #
“Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 3:45 pm #
Here’s a thought for all the drooling morons out there: how about reducing Federal spending?
What a wonderful idea.
Too bad you spent the last six years apologizing for efforts to do the exact opposite.”
You have exactly ZERO knowledge of what I said over the last 6 years, you drooling moron.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 4:01 pm #
Are you saying the War Dept provides welfare, parfart?
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 4:02 pm #
“Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 3:51 pm #
Very little of our “defense†spending actually goes to, you know, defending America, JHo”
You’re a retarded marmoset, alfie.
Please, just shut the fuck up before you embaress yourself even more.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 4:02 pm #
Cite one example of my defending runaway entitlement and social spending, NotSure.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 4:03 pm #
“Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 3:54 pm #
Cite one. One.
Medicare Part D.
The gift that keeps on giving.”
I opposed it, you drooling moron.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 4:04 pm #
Are you saying we shouldn’t be able to chop at least 75% of our current domestic spending without damaging our government’s “enumerated constitutional requirement†that it defend us, balloon fencer?
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 4:05 pm #
Again: Are you saying O!cialism is an enumerated policy contained in originalism, parshot?
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 4:05 pm #
You right wing extremists would rather our tax dollars go to Afghan warlord’s viagra instead of, say, a working class kid trying to get a college degree?
Sounds rather unpatriotic to me.
It is.
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 4:06 pm #
JHo,
You’re being too cute by half.
I have no idea what you’re trying to say.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 4:09 pm #
Are you saying you can’t defend your own points, alphie?
Comment by nikkolai on 1/1 @ 4:09 pm #
Debating these drooling moron trolls will give you brain damage. Avoid it at all cost.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 4:11 pm #
Are you saying the American scholarship is underfunded, alphie, and is so because Afghanis don’t deserve a chance to learn? Or live?
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 4:12 pm #
Are you saying alphie is a drooling moron troll, nikkolai? At any rate, I think you’re right. About the brain damage.
Comment by dre on 1/1 @ 4:16 pm #
“You right wing extremists would rather our tax dollars go to Afghan warlord’s viagra instead of, say, a working class kid trying to get a college degree?”
Let’s see a few hundred to a tribal chief for info on the Taliban’s whereabouts or sending a kid for 4 years to a communist indoctrination center. Tough choice there.
Comment by nikkolai on 1/1 @ 4:17 pm #
The Talking Telephone Pole is legendary in his/her troll-i-ness.
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 4:19 pm #
I’d love to see what’s left of the Republican Congressional delegation push cutting student loans in the upcoming Congress, JHo.
Nobody’s gonna shed a tear if Obama cuts one or two aircraft carriers, though.
Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 4:19 pm #
Of course you did.
I’ll bet you defended Tom Delay as well.
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 4:22 pm #
Nobody’s gonna shed a tear if Obama cuts one or two aircraft carriers, though.
until the next 9/11 … and root veggie and ilk will be right there to hand out sweets and do a little cheering at Amerika being taken down a few notches.
But, don’t question his patriotism!
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 4:22 pm #
Are you saying populism trumps constitutional divisions of power and a strong national defense, what I’m told is a drooling moron troll, and that it has enumerated right to pay people to seek personal goals on the taxpayer dime? At voter whim, drooling moron troll?
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 4:22 pm #
Have you cited anyone around here endorsing socialism yet, NotSure?
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 4:23 pm #
Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 4:19 pm #
Do provide a link or is that research thing from your dorm room just gettin’ ya down?
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 4:26 pm #
Let’s just say we have different views about what constitutes “a strong national defense,” JHo.
Would have helped if the DoD’s cause if it had used some of the $6,000,000,000,000 in taxpayer money it’s received over the past 8 years to, um, catch bin Laden.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 4:28 pm #
Are you saying a national defense is subject only to opinion, alphie?
Comment by Patterico on 1/1 @ 4:28 pm #
alphie/parsnip got me. My traffic is down significantly — from the best month I’ve had in almost six years. Of course, the long-term trend is up, and the LAT long-term trend is down. But why pay attention to context and truth when you can misleadingly compare two figures, leave out the context, and draw a false inference?
Not missing you a bit, alphie/parsnip.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 4:30 pm #
Are you saying that it having a budget, by your reckoning, well over forty times higher than the DoD means the DHHS should have found a solution to dependency and poverty over the last eight years, parshop?
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 4:33 pm #
I hear the NYT is selling properties to stay out of reorganization, Patterico. Notwithstanding parsnot’s vague and useless leftist populism, it appears popularity may yet prove a reliable indicator of sanity.
Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 4:34 pm #
Nah. I just ordered a Belly Stuffer and we’re about to settle in to an FLCL marathon.
You can do whatever it is wingnuts do when they feel neglected.
Comment by Mr. Pink on 1/1 @ 4:38 pm #
Why toss around the “wingnut” word? Seems to me if we go by your definition of wing nut then you and parsnip would have been wingnuts up until 2006.
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 4:41 pm #
Not only public opinion, JHo.
Few defense “experts” agree about much either, though.
Take the decision to only have a few high tech fighter planes instead of a bunch of medium tech ones.
The debate is still going on on that one thirty years later.
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 4:43 pm #
Patterico,
The web sites of “MSM” outlets like the L.A. Times and CNN are gaining vistors much faster than you right wing extremists.
You can’t even beat them on your home turf.
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 4:43 pm #
Comment by Not Sure on 1/1 @ 4:34 pm #
Ah, can’t find a link. What a surprise.
I’m watching the Rose Bowl … 71 degrees and sunny. Husband and kids in attendance so “neglect” just doesn’t happen here.
That family thing, ya know.
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 4:50 pm #
oooOOOooO … root veggie goes all chihuahua on crack @ #111!
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 4:51 pm #
Are you saying the country agrees on everything parsnub? Or that technology remains static? Or that the government doesn’t have a mandate to provide national defense but precious little else?
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 4:52 pm #
Darleen, do you suppose parshit is saying it predicts a deeper slide into leftism than the one I detailed at #69?
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 4:53 pm #
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
What was that, JHo?
Comment by Mr. Pink on 1/1 @ 4:56 pm #
Promote the general welfare means to bail out newspapers? Who knew.
Comment by SSG RaTsO - Proud to be ODD! on 1/1 @ 5:00 pm #
Why bother catching bin Laden? He’s had no impact on the world in the last 5 years or so, so what’s the difference?
Did some number cruncing on the Tax Foundation numbers and found that over $2000 more are spent, per capita, in blue states than in red states.
GPO only shows $3.5T over the last 8 years.
Comment by Mr. Pink on 1/1 @ 5:00 pm #
Also the auto industry and Wall Street.
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 5:08 pm #
Amazingly, the word “provide” is not one of the synonyms for “promote”.
Comment by SSG RaTsO - Proud to be ODD! on 1/1 @ 5:09 pm #
From the 1828 edition of Noah Webster’s American Dictionary of the English Language:
WEL´FARE, n. [well and fare, a good going; G. wohlfahrt; D. welvaard; Sw. valfart; Dan. velfærd.]
1. Exemption from misfortune, sickness, calamity or evil; the enjoyment of health and the common blessings of life; prosperity; happiness; applied to persons.
2. Exemption from any unusual evil or calamity; the enjoyment of peace and prosperity, or the ordinary blessings of society and civil government; applies to states.
“General welfare,” as refered to in the Consitution is more akin to the guarantee of republican government than to redistributive taxation.
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 5:11 pm #
Fair is fair, Darleen.
If buying boner pills for Afghans provides for the general defense of America, bailing out companies can be considered promoting the general welfare.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 5:18 pm #
Are you saying the Constitution provides for mob whim, parshine?
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 5:19 pm #
Are you saying “welfare” and “Welfare” are the same thing, farside, and that the Founders actually envisioned the DHHS as part of their use of the former so as to specifically enumerate dependency on government?
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 5:21 pm #
No, I’m saying what constitutes “defense” is just a whim, JHo.
If you like the defense pork going to your state, better hope you’re represented by Democrats.
Comment by SSG RaTsO - Proud to be ODD! on 1/1 @ 5:22 pm #
Only among those not really paying attention.
Mass producing Sherman tanks during WWII, despite being outclassed one-to-one by the German Panzers made sense, becaseu massed firepower could defeat the superior tank and we had teh manpower to put inside the tanks to do that. Personnel costs were not the largest segment of the budget.
Today personnel costs are the largest part of the budget. Adding people makes the bottom line go up faster than adding equipment platforms, so fewer, superior platforms (which in this case means specifically that they maximize the effectiveness of the people operating them) is the only thing that make sense.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 5:27 pm #
Are you saying, putrid, that entire communities of crime-riddled, oppressed, racially-isolated, and impoverished welfare dependents — entire generations of them, actually, one after the other — establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity?
Or that government’s trillions and trillions of dollars of decades-long efforts, to date, have therein yet established true justice, insured domestic tranquility, provided for the common (domestic) defense, promoted the general welfare, you fucking idiot, and secured the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity, such as to ordain and establish that this Constitution for the United States of America shall bend to leftist whim?!
You utter waste of protoplasm. You poser; you fraud, you crucifier of integrity, you fraud upon thought, you oppressor of right and good, and you pathological pestilence upon decency and civility.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 5:29 pm #
Yours then, asshole?
Comment by SSG RaTsO - Proud to be ODD! on 1/1 @ 5:29 pm #
But it’s not personal. :)
Comment by SSG RaTsO - Proud to be ODD! on 1/1 @ 5:32 pm #
Well, no. Not that money doesn’t get misspent, or inefficiently spent, on defense.
But ‘a whim’? You’ll have to support that in some fasion even to really contemplate it.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 5:32 pm #
Can’t think of a better reason to somehow reform voting rights, SSG RaTsO…
Comment by geoffb on 1/1 @ 5:42 pm #
mongo78 said,
“Speaking of which, can someone post the URL for the Trollhammer add-on?”
Done.
Comment by daleyrocks on 1/1 @ 5:55 pm #
Parsnip is a community based reality of one. He’s already all that he can be, which, as is plain to behold, is not much at all.
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 6:05 pm #
Let’s test it Ratso.
Which of the following countries will the U.S. go to war against in the next 30 years:
1. Russia
2. China
3. Brazil
4. The E.U.
5. Japan
If you didn’t pick any of them (and a reasonable person wouldn’t) then we can cut our defense spending down to 10% of its current level and still have a military capable of defending America against the remaining threats.
Comment by Carin on 1/1 @ 6:23 pm #
I didn’t know snippy was an expert on defense spending! Besides, I wouldn’t count out #1 or #2.
Comment by Sdferr on 1/1 @ 6:27 pm #
Damn, y’all are nothing if not persistent. But y’know what’s really good?
Pan gravy on biscuits with a side of pan gravy on biscuits.
Comment by SSG RaTsO - Proud to be ODD! on 1/1 @ 6:45 pm #
Let’s test it Parsnip?
Which wars have we engaged in that were predictable beforehand? Since you offer a 30 year window–then I’ll need you to show evidence of these predictions at least 15 years prior to the event. I cut it in half, because I’ve feeling generous. I could easily cut it by a much greater margin than that and it won’t change the outcome.
We could easily be invovled in wars with any (or even all) of the 5 on the list you provided in the next 10 years, let alone the next 30.
In addition, the US military conducts far more missions than just warfighting, and when you cut our capacity for the warfight you also cut capacity for those OOTW. Or are you repudiating Bill Clinton now?
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 6:49 pm #
How do I get TrollHammer installed? Seems the instructions on the top of the source code page are over my head…
Comment by Carin on 1/1 @ 6:51 pm #
JHoward, if I can do you it, so can you. Unfortunately, I rarely run firefox … being on a mac, I prefer safari.
So, I guess I’ll be here, reading the inane … ready to inform you guys if they ever say anthing 1)on Topic or 2)Cogent.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 6:55 pm #
For a guy with two websites of his own, apparently I can’t, Carin. I’m a Lions fan too, tho…
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 6:55 pm #
the US military conducts far more missions than just warfighting
The constitution allows for a defense of America Ratso, not a global welfare agency run by war profiteers.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 1/1 @ 7:21 pm #
JHoward, it’s a two stage process:
1) Go here: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/748 and install Greasemonkey (it may require restarting the browser afterward — I can’t remember offhand).
2) Go here: http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/34653 and click on the “Install” button.
Comment by geoffb on 1/1 @ 7:38 pm #
JHoward,
You have to be using Firefox. Then get the add-on called Greasemonkey and add it onto your Firefox browser. Then download and run/install the Trollhammer script.
Comment by geoffb on 1/1 @ 7:40 pm #
Everybody types faster than I. :-)
Comment by SSG RaTsO - Proud to be ODD! on 1/1 @ 7:40 pm #
So you are repudiating Clinton. Interesting.
Too late though. We’ve accepted that we’ll be used for OOTW, right, wrong, or indifferent. Still, once you’ve removed the capacity to move an Armored Division anywhere on the globe, you’ve also removed the capacity to move tons of relief supplies. You don’t want the military to do that? We don’t necessarilly want to be the ones to do it either, but who else can?
And given your past demonstrated and continuing incapacity for it, you are about the last person to be explaining the meaning of the Consitution to me. If you really want to persue that, you can show me the clause that makes it inappropriate for us to deliver aid or perform humanitarian operations.
But, first, demonstrate that 30 year crystal ball for us, please.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 7:56 pm #
Bwa. Completely missed the Install button. Thx Spies.
Comment by JHoward on 1/1 @ 7:57 pm #
Sweet. In The Bin You Go, Troll™.
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 8:06 pm #
The constitution allows for a defense of America Ratso, not a global welfare agency run by war profiteers.
parshit … do you then think police agencies should not have community outreach programs? gang deterence programs? special units that deal with domestic violence, organized crime or elder abuse? Indeed, why should there even be a 911 call line, police should be limited to only responding to crime.
May I suggest that since you believe the citizens of the US do not deserve a military (and certainly, Americans abroad don’t deserve any protection), thus leaving the US as vulnerable to international predation as the citizens of a city that refuses to have an effective police department — that you leave and find a country more to your liking.
You are an un-American American.
Comment by Big D on 1/1 @ 8:09 pm #
JHoward,
Parsnip is a teenager. As a father of a teenager I can tell you they are impervious to reason. You are wasting your time.
SPB, thanks for TH!
Comment by Darleen on 1/1 @ 8:11 pm #
you’ve also removed the capacity to move tons of relief supplies
No more this, this, or this
but please don’t question root veggies’ Love of Humanity.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 1/1 @ 8:25 pm #
OT, but probably of interest to Darleen:
Remember a week or so ago, when the nipply-types were blaming the gang rape of a lesbian on the Proposition 8 folks?
Arrests have been made.
Yep, looks like a Mormon to me.
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 8:26 pm #
Deserve a military, Darleen?
If only we could rent a more cost-effective one, like China’s.
Comment by Ag80 on 1/1 @ 8:39 pm #
parsnip’s/alphie’s latest raison d’être seems to be calling contributors to this site as “extreme right-wingers” and “wingnuts.” I think he must be confusing PW with other sites.
However, if believing in smaller government, lower taxes, individual rights and a strong defense makes me extreme, OK, I’ll take it.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 1/1 @ 8:41 pm #
Pol Pot would be “extreme right wing” in comparison to nipply.
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 8:44 pm #
Funnily enough, Pol Pot had the same targets you right wing loons have, SBP: Teachers, Journalists and Judges.
Coincidence?
I don’t think so.
Comment by guinsPen on 1/1 @ 8:54 pm #
If only we could rent a more cost-effective one, like China’s.
Go julienne youself, rednip.
Comment by guinsPen on 1/1 @ 8:55 pm #
Yourself, as well.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 9:05 pm #
“Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 6:55 pm #
the US military conducts far more missions than just warfighting
The constitution allows for a defense of America Ratso, not a global welfare agency run by war profiteers.”
Sweet jeebus on a pogo stick, it’s spouting socialist propagnda from World War I.
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/1 @ 9:08 pm #
“Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 8:44 pm #
Funnily enough, Pol Pot had the same targets you right wing loons have, SBP: Teachers, Journalists and Judges.”
You are insane.
Comment by Big D on 1/1 @ 9:19 pm #
Of course he’s insane. He’s a teenager, QED.
Comment by Rusty on 1/1 @ 9:29 pm #
141
Hence the letters of marque and reprisal and the war against the Barbary Pirates.
Comment by B Moe on 1/1 @ 10:33 pm #
I’ll bet you defended Tom Delay as well.
From what? Has somebody finally come up with a charge, then?
Comment by B Moe on 1/1 @ 10:35 pm #
And did tuberhead really just assert that Brazil and Japan are two of the top five military threats to this country?
Comment by Big D on 1/1 @ 11:09 pm #
B Moe
An original thought and a cold drink would actually kill parsnip.
Comment by Ag80 on 1/1 @ 11:15 pm #
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 8:44 pm #
Funnily enough, Pol Pot had the same targets you right wing loons have, SBP: Teachers, Journalists and Judges.
Coincidence?
I don’t think so.
So did others. Can you name them?
Comment by B Moe on 1/1 @ 11:22 pm #
Actually Big D, tuberhead has had some incredibly original thoughts in the past. The mile high berm, the balloon fence, and my personal favorite, the Chinese shipping container invasion.
Comment by Gary Rosen on 1/1 @ 11:41 pm #
Is parsnip really Alphie? You know, Stormfront Alphie who spews out loony, rabid antisemitic conspiracy theories?
Comment by Big D on 1/1 @ 11:57 pm #
B Moe,
OK. How about an original SANE thought?
Comment by Ag80 on 1/2 @ 12:08 am #
I won’t say this is my last comment to the trolls, but has anyone else noticed that they tend to abandon a thread when someone makes a valid point?
Comment by maggie katzen on 1/2 @ 12:10 am #
um, no, Ag8o. wish it were so. my theory is they get all angried out eventually, pass out for a while and then wake up to a whole new world and start all over again.
Comment by Ag80 on 1/2 @ 12:25 am #
Maggie:
I never clicked on your link before. I apologize for that. Thanks for your service. Have a great career.
Comment by maggie katzen on 1/2 @ 12:28 am #
oh, it’s not me, it’s my husband (currently commenting as ssg RaTsO). my blog is nothing but kittehs and junk.
Comment by thor on 1/2 @ 12:36 am #
My parents don’t even live in the same state I do, you fat pinhead. Makes it hard for me to live in their basement, eh, moreso since they don’t even have a basement.
Seems to me I should just keep repeating tales of your being a craggy old prostitute who lives in a homeless shelter since turnabout is fair play.
Shelter girl, does five dollah make you hollah? Arf, arf.
Comment by thor on 1/2 @ 1:07 am #
Yours is an astute observation and similar to what I noted of Darleen and the extremist r-wingered ilk having much in common with Hamas. Hamas has their Mickey Mouse sock puppet who tells children’s tales about the evil Jews while Dar-dar has PW to tell her tales of Obama being a Marxist and how I, or anyone else she disagrees with, live in their parents’ attic. Essentially it’s the same old game the r-wingers and the Muslim fanatics and fascists play. Maybe we ought to create a r-winger Christian fanatic proxy militia like Iran’s Hezbollah and then send ‘em out to cancel out the Allah-monkeys. Their blood lust for each other would eventually eliminate their overall numbers and make the world a safer place. Sounds good to me.
Comment by Patterico on 1/2 @ 2:12 am #
“The web sites of “MSM†outlets like the L.A. Times and CNN are gaining vistors much faster than you right wing extremists.”
alphie,
Do you have any documentation of this, other than your ass?
I note that I have documented that HotAir.com got almost 1/3 the traffic of latimes.com in October. That’s a web site put out by two guys.
The documentation is in the link Darleen provided to my post. The post you didn’t read.
Comment by parsnip on 1/2 @ 2:23 am #
Hot Air’s numbers are indeed impressive, Patterico.
The regularly get 100 times the number of visitors PW or your site bring in each day.
But there aren’t many right wing blogs that get that number of visitors and even their numbers are down dramatically.
If you want to see how “MSM” sites are doing, check out Alexa.com
http://www.alexa.com/site/ds/top_sites
Comment by thor on 1/2 @ 2:59 am #
I just got around to reading the top of this thread. I’m like that. Hey, Patterico, I don’t read you or your site because I think your site sucks and that you’re a basic moron. That Darleen is even more of a moron really shouldn’t send much a tingle up your leg.
The LA Times you no likey. Read something else, moron. Nobody gives a shit. Oh wait, your metanarrative is that somehow that little website with your name on it qualifies you to pass final judgment on an entire newspaper? Please, moron. If you want a job at the LA Times then simply apply for one and when/if you get rejected keep your grudging bitterness repressed, ya nutter.
Similar to sniveling chick poetry, every wingered hack thinks their personal pain of rejection must be acted out for others amusement.
Comment by Carin on 1/2 @ 5:20 am #
Funnily enough, Pol Pot had the same targets you right wing loons have, SBP: Teachers, Journalists and Judges.
Coincidence?
Pol Pot used forced death marches and reeducation camps. I don’t think our criticism will have the same effect.
Comment by Carin on 1/2 @ 5:23 am #
You right wing extremists would rather our tax dollars go to Afghan warlord’s viagra instead of, say, a working class kid trying to get a college degree?
Viagra for warlords falls under civil defense.
Taxes for college education? Our founding fathers must be spinning in their graves.
Comment by B Moe on 1/2 @ 5:31 am #
The money doesn’t go to the working class kid trying to get a college degree. The money goes to fat ass professors and administrators.
How come colleges and universities are totally exempt from charges of price gouging? How come nobody ever suggests cutting tuition rates as a way to make college affordable?
Comment by N. O'Brain on 1/2 @ 7:27 am #
“Comment by thor on 1/2 @ 1:07 am #
#
Comment by parsnip on 1/1 @ 8:44 pm #
Funnily enough, Pol Pot had the same targets you right wing loons have, SBP: Teachers, Journalists and Judges.
Coincidence?
I don’t think so.
Yours is an astute observation ”
Yet more proof, if any was needed that thor is insane.
Comment by Mossberg500 on 1/2 @ 7:32 am #
Mitty Achievement Update: Nielsen Rating Infomercial Certificate
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 1/2 @ 7:45 am #
Do you have any documentation of this, other than your ass?
Remember, this is the same troll who keeps claiming that the Blago story is “falling out of the news”.
In the world that most of us live in, not so much.
Comment by nikkolai on 1/2 @ 9:01 am #
Notice how our two pesky left-wing atheist extremist trolls continue to label everyone here “right wing extremists”. Classical Liberal = Traditional American = Right Wing Extremist.
Green skies, indeed.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 1/2 @ 9:01 am #
I think thor’s said so many asinine things that he can no longer surprise or shock me. Possibly the only way he could shock me is if he managed to carry off being a decent person; I don’t think he can act that well.
Comment by JHoward on 1/2 @ 9:19 am #
TrollHammer™ gives minty fresh breath and sparkling white teeth. I only wish I’d tried it sooner!
Comment by Civilis on 1/2 @ 11:01 am #
While there is some pork-barrel spending associated with the defense budget, that’s a fault in our congress, not in the defense budget. Both parties share some of the blame for defense pork, like pork in general. Without reforming congress, I don’t see the percentage of pork in the defense budget dropping if the defense budget is reduced. Therefore, any cuts in the defense budget are likely to mean one of two things should the US go to war… more dead American soldiers (sailors/airmen/marines) or more civilian collateral damage. I wonder which are trolls are in favor of?
I’d also like to see a breakdown of federal government spending and tax receipts by congressional district, rather than by state. I think that would be a more instructive measure of where our federal dollars go, but somehow I doubt our trolls will actually try this. Pity.
Comment by Sdferr on 1/2 @ 11:20 am #
I’ve grabbed this fragment with the intent to decontextualize it in order to ask: when we see or hear such a statement, do we think or are we meant to think that it entails an inherent admission that our Constitution is necessarily flawed as written? That there is something about the Constitution, at least as regards the Congress, that demands “reform”?
Comment by SDN on 1/2 @ 11:53 am #
Many of the Left would like us to think the Constitution is flawed; Of course, we haven’t followed it since Teddy Roosevelt. And there is a process for fixing flaws. provided you can get enough of your fellow citizens to agree. However, the Left, like most spoiled children, wants the candy right now, and knows that most of the people in this country reject their agenda unless the Left is allowed to lie about it.
That’s why they made it a point to target teachers, journalists, and judges for deceptive replacement by their side. Pol Pot just wasn’t as sophisticated.
Comment by Patterico on 1/2 @ 12:19 pm #
I am reminded why I banned alphie/parsnip (yes, they are the same, though he lied about it). When you expose the weak part of his argument, or where he has misstated a fundamental premise, he ignores you and continues to misstate. Arguing with him is a waste of time.
And thor? The idea that I would ever apply for a job at the L.A. Times is rich. Thanks for the laugh.
Comment by Civilis on 1/2 @ 12:25 pm #
I’ve grabbed this fragment with the intent to decontextualize it in order to ask: when we see or hear such a statement, do we think or are we meant to think that it entails an inherent admission that our Constitution is necessarily flawed as written? That there is something about the Constitution, at least as regards the Congress, that demands “reform�
Personally, I think that the Constitution is fine with regards to congress, save for the usual small-l libertarian griping about congress (and the federal government as a whole) being involved with matters that are better left to state or local governments, or the people. The defense budget, specifically, is something I can’t see being handled by anyone other than congress. I can’t personally conceive of a constitutional structural change that would cause congress to clean up.
Its more a matter of the public responsibility to elect good representatives coupled with a responsibility to the media to cover congressional malfeasance. If we had a public that cared about what Dodd / Stevens / Rangel / etc. were doing, we wouldn’t have nearly this magnitude of problem.
Comment by thor on 1/2 @ 12:47 pm #
Thanks for banning parsnip, Pat. He/she (I’ve never asked) is a valued voice here on PW and a constant reminder of why one should continue to ignore your r-wing weenie-laden web site.
You’d step on your own balls if ball stomping was required for a paying gig at the LA Times. I know it. You know it, unless you’re not right in the head. No decent writer gives two farts for Sean Hannity’s bogus screedings of the MSM. I never had a conversation with others in the press area of their political leanings. It’s not that I thought they’d lack an opinion it’s just that in the locker room of a sports team you’re only there to do your job, which is to grab quotes, free power bars, Gatorades, doughnuts and anything that’s not nailed to the ground. Ha. Most work as beat writers for the large papers, igno, and obviously only a few are paid to cover politics.
Thanks again for parsnip and your fun displays of waterheaded naivete.
Comment by parsnip on 1/2 @ 12:57 pm #
Haha,
Patterico proves the old saying that law school is the last refuge of people too dumb to master Calculus.
It is silly that you would apply for a job in the private sector.
I’ve worked in the private sector, they expect results.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 1/2 @ 1:05 pm #
I thought you were in law school, parsnip.
Comment by thoor on 1/2 @ 1:28 pm #
Actually I don’t think Patterico is a waterhead, he simply think clearly with Rush Limbuagh echoing in his head.
How is it American or flag-pin-patriotic, I ask, to cheer for people in ad sales, layout and design, or underpaid delivery people to be laid off? Will staff people losing their jobs teach a senior editor that he/she should’a chosen more Thomas Sowell and less Maureen Dowd from his Creative Syndicate options, or whoever they’re with. R-wingered choleric renditions of this MSM myth seems to be a favored meme from low-IQ Hannity-worship gassers, but it’s as dumb as their dumbest.
Comment by SSG RaTsO - Proud to be ODD! on 1/2 @ 1:54 pm #
I’d be willing to reform Congress.
Abolish elections fo representatives. Instead, names are drawn at random from the qualified, registered, voter rolls and those people serve in Congress. Having served one term, one would be ineligible for a second, ever.
Comment by Patterico on 1/2 @ 2:20 pm #
“How is it American or flag-pin-patriotic, I ask, to cheer for people in ad sales, layout and design, or underpaid delivery people to be laid off?”
I don’t know. Who has done that?
You argue by making things up — like your fantasy that I’d give up a stable job to work for a newspaper whose parent company just filed for bankruptcy.
By the way, the fact that you think *anyone* in their right mind would even consider such a thing speaks loud and clear about your capacity to reason.
Comment by parsnip on 1/2 @ 2:26 pm #
The government, your employer, is in worse financial shape, Patterico.
Comment by Mikey NTH on 1/2 @ 2:41 pm #
Guys - leave the alphie alone, he has to plan the construction of the balloon missile fence.
Comment by thor on 1/2 @ 2:46 pm #
How’s about you strut a little of your reasoning ability and review the failings of Fox News this past year, Patterico.
One of the most embarrassing displays of mediocre narrative bending was Sean Hannity’s special concerning the Texas rape ranch. It was thrown together with the original info provided by the State’s DA’s PR person - or whoever - but they ran it as a re-play in the wee-morning hours about a week past the CPS abduction of those severely victimized women and children. In other words, with spooky music added to illuminate the horrors that never happened Sean Hannity narrated the wildy inflated charges against the cult, always describing them as a unrepentent cult of limitless rape and molestation. Strange how that narrative went poof!
Start there then work your way through the White tapes and the fair and balanced election coverage. That’d be fun for ya, eh.
Comment by Civilis on 1/2 @ 2:49 pm #
Abolish elections fo representatives. Instead, names are drawn at random from the qualified, registered, voter rolls and those people serve in Congress. Having served one term, one would be ineligible for a second, ever.
I’m not sure a voter chosen at random would be any better. More ignorance, less corruption. It’s hard to state whether the drawbacks outweigh the benefits. Such a system could always end up appoiniting one of our trolls to congress…
Comment by thor on 1/2 @ 2:52 pm #
White = Whitey
Comment by SSG RaTsO - Proud to be ODD! on 1/2 @ 3:08 pm #
More ignorance? I’m not convinced that’s possible.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 1/2 @ 3:11 pm #
Such a system could always end up appoiniting one of our trolls to congress…
And that would be different from Dennis Kucinich or Cynthia McKinney how, exactly?
Comment by McGehee on 1/2 @ 3:21 pm #
Two years and out, and never eligible to come back? That’s definitely an improvement over the current system.
Comment by Spies, Brigands, and Pirates on 1/2 @ 3:22 pm #
For sure. Although McKinney didn’t last that long, Kucinich seems to have settled in for the long haul.
Comment by Dave D on 1/2 @ 4:22 pm #
I really miss the way PW dealt with PIATOR back in the day. That was some hilarious stuff, remember?
Comment by Civilis on 1/2 @ 10:03 pm #
Is the percentage of the general population that believes the US government was responsible for 9/11 greater or less than the percentage of US congresscretins that believe the US was responsible for 9/11? With a handful of glaring exceptions (such as McKinney and Kucinich), I suspect that there are less outliers on the extremes in congress than in the population at large, although it may ultimately balance out.
I’d certainly expect such a congress to be more populist and more swayed by mass popular opinion, not less. You’d still have to sell real educational reform, real tax reform and real social security reform, something we can’t do as is. I’d also suspect that you’d quickly see a dedicated corps of professional political “handlers” created to “advise” congressmen as to how the whole system works and “suggest” the best way to vote.
Comment by SSG RaTsO - Proud to be ODD! on 1/2 @ 11:18 pm #
Civilis, you should change your handle to “wet blanket.” :P
Comment by McGehee on 1/3 @ 12:23 am #
There’s a solution to the objection Civilis raises: once someone’s been in Congress and left, they’re not allowed on the capitol grounds again except in a tour group, and the only way they can have any contact with a serving member is when that person is back in the home district during recess.
Once anyone who’s eligible to pester a member at the Capitol makes himself known, he goes on the list to be in the next Congress, and after his two years he has to go home and stay there.
Comment by Civilis aka Wet Blanket on 1/3 @ 7:18 am #
Alas, my curse is to be contrary. I see how systems and procedures can be abused, and must always unceasingly play devils advocate and point out potential problems. I’m sorry to be such a downer.
Trackback by Animal sex library. on 6/28 @ 3:08 am #
Animal sex video….
Animal sex clips….