Read this. Then point out each of the 277 errors I was able to note in the first five paragraphs alone.
And yes, this will count toward your final grade.
Search
Archive Calendar
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |
Archives
Categories
- A Government That Can Force You to Buy Health Insurance Can Make You Do Anything (3)
- a protein wisdom philosophy primer (3)
- academics (25)
- armadillo (8)
- Friday Fiction 100 Word Challenge (51)
- from the protein wisdom conceptual series (136)
- identity politics (33)
- If Republicans Win the Senate in 2014 (1)
- in which celebraties comment on current events (67)
- language / intentionalism (88)
- legal (6)
- My brief conversations with inanimate objects (130)
- NSA / FISA (46)
- One Term to Serve, the 2012 Revival (6)
- Overheard in a Fallujah bunker (27)
- Poems from 196x, Revised by the Ghost of Richard Brauti (27)
- protein wisdom's DNC coverage (30)
- protein wisdom's RNC coverage (29)
- protein wisdom: the movie Lists (20)
- Provocateurism (16)
- real-time empirical observations (51)
- red pills found behind the sofa cushions (42)
- Scenes from my driveway (61)
- Talking back to 80s music (41)
- The Martha Stewart Chronicles (58)
- The protein wisdom interviews (10)
- The protein wisdom original poems (142)
- Uncategorized (20,046)
- Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance, abridged (34)
Recent Comments
- In The Mailbox: 02.28.23 (Afternoon Edition) : The Other McCain on Hey, longtime pw readers…
- In The Mailbox: 12.23.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll truly IS a sad, embittered psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- In The Mailbox: 07.18.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
Let me provide an example: who here believes that cutting earmarks is primarily meant as a way to attack the deficit, rather than as a symbolic gesture aimed at letting politicians know that we watched them sell their votes for ObamaCare — against the will of the people — for a little bit of take home pork?
Jeff, I ran a word count and came up with 544 words.
I only bring it up because I’m a premise kind of guy….
The comments after the article are even more instructive.
Too many people want to play Team R and Team D without admitting it isn’t a Team R or Team D issue anymore. This is a Team America issue and the partisan crap needs to stop until the game is again played by the rules known as the Constitution.
/rant
Is the situation with the spendings dire and urgent or not? With his steadfast devotion to the spendy spendy earmarks, Mr. McConnell and his Team R senate friends are saying no the situation with the spendings is not particularly dire and urgent… we have it all under control.
I would be very surprised if even McConnell’s wife believes his bullshit.
Marcia is whore. She thinks she knows everything.
Everything including “and,” “the,” and the prepositions?
Figures.
They’re getting bolder with their accusations, brasher with their admissions.
“Yeah, I’m a socialist: so what? The rest of ya are a blight on the planet and should be eliminated.”
Unfortunately, Blake, it is unAmerican to put America first for Team D.
With his steadfast devotion to the spendy spendy earmarks
Are you assuming that earmarks increase spending?
They don’t; they just direct it out of a slush pile to a specific location. Yes, that location is often one’s one jurisdiction.
You’re thinking pork.
The problem is that while they are frequent fodder for political rhetoric, they account for less than 1 percent of the federal budget.
It’s not about how much, sweetie, it’s about how that quantity is used to expand centralized control.
Repeal the 17th!
The problem is that while they are frequent fodder for political rhetoric, they account for less than 1 percent of the federal budget.
If I promise you $1 million in pork for your district in exchange for your support of my $100 million program, and in return you promise me $2 million in pork for my support for your $200 million program, what is the total amount of government spending due to pork?
Here’s a hint, Adam: it’s more than $3 million.
Are you assuming that earmarks increase spending?
They don’t; they just direct it out of a slush pile to a specific location.
Nonsense. There’s no way you can make me believe that the slush pile isn’t artificially inflated to a point where there’s enough slush for however many votes they need to buy.
If there’s $40 million needed to achieve some policy end, and the votes to pass it will cost $20 million, then the price of the legislation will be $60 million. Plus overruns.
On McConnell and earmarks:
As a matter of practical politics, since the GOP doesn’t control the Senate, any earmark ban would be self-imposed, GOPers refraining from participation while Dems earmark away. What McConnell may be worried about is GOPers up in ’12 being vulnerable to attack on the “constituent services” front. I’d also guess that he’s worried about the hypocrisy charge, like all good Republicans are.
what’s a plum line, a line from a purple fruit..?
Republicans would like to cut programs like Social Security and Medicare in order to fund more tax cuts for millionaires
That one’s my favorite.
Adam Sewer.
What’s a plum line?
That’s Greg Sargent’s way of telling you he’s a straight up and down, on center-point, measure twice cut once, hands on, no bullshit kinda guy.
Which is, you know, bullshit.
But b-lackingly un-leadened all the while.
“Earmarks are only 1% of the federal budget – they don’t matter”
– every other commenter on RedState, Hot Air and Free Republic prior to 2006.
Shouldn’t that be plumb line, then? As in, line with lump of lead attached? Or is there some hidden D.C. irony I’m missing?
Sorry, sdferr, as usual you are like a gazelle to my slug.
The plum line is the best line in the scene. The actors all try to get the writers to give their character the plum line.
In the example before us, it’s all the Progg mouthpieces trying to get Daddy Soros to give them the cleverest talking points.
C’mon! You guys don’t seriously think Greg Sargent would know a damn thing about carpentry now, do you!? What else could he mean other than the usual liberal journalist “I lean neither left nor right, scrupulously objective promoter of left-elite statist conventional thinking that I am”?
heh, long may I stott!
Pronk?
Stott-pronk! Better.
And I see Squid just outed himself as one of those artsy-fartsy theatre types. At leat tell us that it was because those theater chicks are kinky as well as easy.
Long may you stot, sdferr, whilst I hirsle.
The theater director dudes are the kinky-easy ones I think Ernst. The ladies are actually mostly conventional in the sack. Farting wouldn’t help with either set though, I think.
On the earmark thing, Rush was making a pretty-good point in his usual round-about way today:
It’s all earmark spending. All of it.
Or it would be if the Congress hadn’t delegated so much of its discretionary power away. Maybe they wouldn’t fret so over 1% of the budget if they took back control of the other 99%.
fraking comment monster got me again.
This is just more of Sargent’s kind of diversionary tactics, and an chance to drag out the hypocrisy attack. As Dicentra mentioned, earmarks are not always pork transmitting devices, and can be used to direct how appropriated funds are spent as opposed to giving bureaucrats free license.
God willing, it will be moot anyway if the House lives up to the GOPers pledge and votes for budget items stand alone. Then each politician would have to go on record for each bill, including earmarks, that they voted for.
We need big spending cuts.
And he’s a liar about Ryan’s plan increasing the debt. Were his flat-tax idea alone was adopted, and much of the IRS as we know it now dismantled, it would be to the economy what lighting the afterburner is to a jet aircraft.
Sargent is a liar.
This is just more of Sargent’s kind of diversionary tactics, and an chance to drag out the hypocrisy attack. As Dicentra mentioned, earmarks are not always pork transmitting devices, and can be used to direct how appropriated funds are spent as opposed to giving bureaucrats free license.
God willing, it will be moot anyway if the House lives up to the GOPers pledge and votes for budget items stand alone. Then each politician would have to go on record for each bill, including earmarks, that they voted for. We need big spending cuts.
And he’s a liar about Ryan’s plan increasing the debt. Were his flat-tax idea alone was adopted, and much of the IRS as we know it now dismantled, it would be to the economy what lighting the afterburner is to a jet aircraft.
Sargent is a liar.
This is just more of Sargent’s kind of diversionary tactics, and an chance to drag out the hypocrisy attack. As Dicentra mentioned, earmarks are not always pork transmitting devices, and can be used to direct how appropriated funds are spent as opposed to giving bureaucrats free license.
God willing, it will be moot anyway if the House lives up to the pledge and votes for budget items stand alone. Then each politician would have to go on record for each bill, including earmarks, that they voted for. We need big spending cuts.
And he’s a liar about Ryan’s plan increasing the debt. Were his flat-tax idea alone was adopted, and much of the IRS as we know it now dismantled, it would be to the economy what lighting the afterburner is to a jet aircraft.
Sargent is a liar.
Well, there’s another comment eaten that no one wanted to hear anyway
I meant mine, and not Ernst. I presume people generally want to hear his.
Now it’s there. So I guess #27 & 28 can be deleted.
OK, maybe 29-33 should be deleted. Rats…
I think you should get a Brooks Robinson for the bunch Bob.
sdferr,
Do you mean a golden glove, a human vacuum cleaner, or a lifelong Oriole :)
Or maybe charged triple for monopolizing the thread…
I think he means a 5, Bob.
ding ding ding ding ding SW
I presume people generally want to hear his.
Dash ish not sho, Herr Reed. Az no vun can shtant my dick jherman akshent.
I hear you. I myself am into sporting a beret, smoking gauloises and imploring complete strangers to hit the paypal button.
Interdire!
I did watch the great man play ball back in the day. Must have been the late Cretaceous.
I am still searching for even an honest clause in that drivel.
#1: It is a Plumb Line, not a Plum Line.
That’s enough for me.
Ah, Brook’s number had faded into the cobwebs of my little gray cells. You fellows are sharp!
Ernst, all I wanna know is if you wear a monocle and hold a cigarette between your thumb and forefinger, palm up naturally, while you speak that way?
Ve haff vayz…
How are the Dem earmarks going to pass the House?
conference committee Rob. But you might be on to something.
OT: Has anyone been over to blog run by the guy said to bear an uncanny resemblence to the overgrown aboriginal teddy bears invented by that Lucas fellow? (I’m being oblique because I’m not interested in starting a blog feud) Anyway, he has a long, much updated post in which he pretty much destroys whatever credibility he had with me regarding his sense of judgement. It’s been interesting to read. In a Rabbit and Eeyore sort of way.
The bill still has to come back for a vote.
The Senate could “deem” the conference result to pass, but the House doesn’t have to.
Division of power isn’t just between the branches of government, ya know. Sometimes it’s inside a branch, too.
Earmarks are the cheap brightly colored plastic toy nestled inside the flashy graphics covered box of the “Happy Meal”. Both of which add only a few cents to the end cost. But take them away and the kids stop whining for that meal to be bought and that is where the savings lie.
Ernst — That Fellow (known to some as sharing a name with one of the odder cards in a regulation deck) has been playing out a stereotypical case of Conservative Cringe for a while.
And, yes, the post you’re referring to is particularly egregious. “OMG! I didn’t realize a left-wing advocacy group might not tell me the whole story! HOW DARE THEY!!!”
Ernst,
What’s the subject of said column at the place we’ll just allude to?
Ernst, he did update and update as he got more information. He was honest about that. I think that is pretty valuable.
A “misscarriage” Bob. Either of justice or reportage, take your pick. Rabbit chose both.
He’s had to do that about a dozen times over the last two weeks. Every time it’s because he bought into the MSM narrative and had it forcefully pointed out that the MSM was feeding him shit.
I do believe he did the same thing in his very next post, as well, about a case where the press tried to slander an unsuccessful candidate and he was entirely willing to go along.
What Rob said (since the comment monster’s on me like a drunk Mel Gibson on a Ukranian hooker)
I do believe he did the same thing in his very next post, as well, about a case where the press tried to slander an unsuccessful candidate and he was entirely willing to go along.
Rob, I had something to say about that (comment 247), not that it’ll make a dent.
Bob Reed,
Isn’t that assumed?
And I see Squid just outed himself as one of those artsy-fartsy theatre types.
I’ll have you know that I met my wife on a friend’s college theater production. I was a lighting and sound guy, and she was an electrician and carpenter. Not so much drama on our side of things.
The ‘plum line’ thing I just pulled out of my ass, though. Seemed clever at the time.
Credit where credit is due: the idiot in question is Adam Serwer. I guess Sargent ran out of lies for the week and had to hire a ringer.
I just wanted to underscore that fact Spiny :)
Funny. I found my quip in a similiar place for similiar reasons.
So which theory is the most likely to be right? That’s hard to answer. I mean, we know the guy is both stupid and arrogant.
Squid,
Got too dizzy from the spin, eh?
I think maybe he’s spent too much time huffing his own fumes.
ST, Glenn Reynolds and Jeff (IIRC) were pushing a little something called Porkbusters as far back as 04 and 05.
Oh oh.. Have I been banned again?
Okay, just kidding, I’ve never been banned even though I’ve probably deserved it on occasion, but my extremely well thought out and cogent comment did just disappear. I’ll try to recreate it.
I’m glad to see that several comments up-thread pretty much agree with my take: While it’s true that earmarks and pork are a very small part of federal spending, they are the grease that helps humongously expensive bills slip through Congress. Would ObamaCare have passed without the Louisiana Purchase, the Cornhusker Hustle, and all that? No, probably not. Earmarks and pork buy votes and provide cover for congresscritters who can deflect criticism by pointing to the goodies their bought vote brought home. Thus, putting a stop to earmarks and pork isn’t a symbolic gesture at all, it’s vital to ending business as usual in Washington. Stop greasing the skids and the slope won’t be nearly as slippery, eh?
Just kidding, but why does my comment keep disappearing? Y’all don’t know what you’re missing but it was Great!!
Okay, five tries and I give….
Because I don’t know when to quit: I’m glad to see that several comments up-thread pretty much agree with my take: While it’s true that earmarks and pork are a very small part of federal spending, they are the grease that helps humongously expensive bills slip through Congress. Would ObamaCare have passed without the Louisiana Purchase, the Cornhusker Hustle, and all that? No, probably not. Earmarks and pork buy votes and provide cover for congresscritters who can deflect criticism by pointing to the goodies their bought vote brought home. Thus, putting a stop to earmarks and pork isn’t a symbolic gesture at all, it’s vital to ending business as usual in Washington. Stop greasing the skids and the slope won’t be nearly as slippery, eh?
Oh well, what Squid said at #9, with emphasis and flourishes!
I get all that about the effect of earmarks being about more than just 1% of the budget, but still, 1% of 1.4 trillion works out to somewhere north of 100 billion, don’t it?
I remember when 100 billion was a lot. You know, back when republicans were in charge…
If I lose a comment, I start copying it before hitting say it.
OK, I only went as far as the header and I noticed that the picture is Markos “Screw them” Moulitsas, but the byline is Greg Sargent. Ewwww.
If I lose it I hit the back button and there it is again. Change something and try again.
That isn’t a problem. That makes things 1% better, which is 1% better than no better at all.
plus that 1% is 100% borrowed
v trashy way of doing business
Check this out y’all
http://powip.com/2010/11/wapo-op-ed-urges-obama-to-stage-orderly-withdrawal-from-dc/
Dan found some really good news…
Oh, snap. You nailed us good there, buddy. How anyone could disagree with someone who does their homework like you do, I just don’t know. Moron.
My comments keep disappearing as well.
My trust in our “new” government is evaporating by the minute.
Right. Pablo hated Bush Jr. so much he voted for him twice.
true. kill epa, cpb, agriculture, energy, education, osha,….
No, I voted for Gore once to my rather tepid regret.
Pablo, we all know you’re a wingnut who voted for Bush before he even ran for president. You, and the rest of us, are indeed that evil.
I’m more evil than either one of you.
Bob Reed, even if I could put that column in the realm of “good news,” I can’t. I kinda remember McCain being very please that Obama brought the gospel to 2008 in the form of accepting public money for his campaign. Which he not only didn’t, but then proceeded to turn off the security features allowing for illegal voting.
The proper response to Cadell in that article is “you are fucking naive.”
illegal donations not voting… my bad.
Hmmmph. If only you would disappear in a swirl of clean water. Or even dirty water would work; is there a high-enough river bridge nearby ?
test comment
OK, so it’s not the ericodom thinger. That turned out to be a (Jeff!) hotlinked image used as a button to link to ‘Samsphere’ in Denver, an event that happened sometime back in 2008. I blocked that image and link completely, and still lost a comment.
Back to square ‘A’.
OT (This is a test) Separated at birth?
Some things cannot be unseen. My brain shall never be scrubbed free of that image, and the words behind it.
You are simply too finicky, cranky-d. It comes of being isolated from the ebb and flow of everyday life.
I see worse than that in my mirror every morning. As for Wal*Mart —
Regards,
Ric
“illegal donations not voting… my bad.”
– You’re forgetting ACORN. I’ve often wondered what the results might have been without the votes of all those dead people, multiple votes voters, and illegals.
Ric, if that were all that was available, my celibacy would be by choice rather than by luck.
Any ST-TOS fans, a golden oldy of mine from four years ago. Call it shameless self-promotion, living in the past, a cry for attention, or boredom on my part while avoiding work, but I found my copy of the entry and searched for it on PW.
Thank you, comment gods!
I’m not forgetting Acorn – that is a separate issue. I was mentioning O’s promise of taking the public money and thereby accepting limits for his campaign and then deciding to forgo it after promising to do just that to McCain. Caddell is as big a fool as McCain if he thinks a promise not to run is for reals.
– They said there wouldn’t be any math. They lied.
– It’s becoming a tradition, like Lucy with the football.
– The Postal service is projecting 260 billion in losses by 2012, despite dumping 100,000 jobs and raising postage three times in as many years.
– I seem to remember 1985 when Gates was going on about the “paperless office”.
“…rather than as a symbolic gesture”
Zzzzactly Jeff!
If they can’t cut the little stuff how will they bring themselves to cutting the bigger stuff. On the other hand why are earmarks even worth defending if they only represent 1% of the budget?
“If I lose it I hit the back button and there it is again. Change something and try again.”
They don’t call geoffb the PW historian for nothing (well at least I do;)
why are earmarks even worth defending if they only represent 1% of the budget?
The argument seems to be that it’s because it’s the part of the budget that they haven’t ceded control over to somebody else. To which the correct answer is that eliminating earmarks would be a good way to signal that you intend to take back control over the other 99%.
Right. Pablo hated Bush Jr. so much he voted for him twice.
No, I voted for Gore once to my rather tepid regret.
You WHAT??!!!
[heartache]
Earmark reform is about corruption, not about deficit reduction. Anyone who hasn’t gotten that message by now has been deliberately not paying attention.
Oh, but corruption is A-OK if it involves less than 1% of the federal budget, Sargent says. I mean, we’re only talking about maybe $40 billion or so; what’s the problem?
I was very much not a George Bush fan back in 2000. Voted against him, I did. I’m glad that didn’t work out.
– Recalling the old Reagan joke: “A few billion here, a few billion there, and pretty soon you’re talking about real money.
– Bumbblefuck update: “A few trillion here a few trillion there……”
Ol’ Dutch was actually quoting (paraphrasing?) this guy.