CalexenderJ's Comments (231)

“Not buying it. Tiger was dumped before 4 weeks ago he was most boring man on the planet. Do you really think had it been Phil Mickelson the sales would be higher? I don't.”

“Why? It'd just be a lot of making up facts, ignoring questions, winking, and you betchas on Palin's part, and then afterwards the media would say Palin won because she really connected to with the average American even though their insta-polls say the exact opposite.”

“1. Republicans say government run programs aren't popular only ALL THE TIME.

2. What do you think insurance is other than a concept of giving people's money away to other people.

3. Republicans act like the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany are the only two countries in history that had universal healthcare when in fact every other modern western nation has managed to figure it out without having their societies collapse.”

“Really? With everything that we know about Sarah Palin wouldn't it have been more shocking for her on a conservative radio program to say that the issue of Obama being a citizen has been decisively resolved and that the people who still question his place of birth are being willfully ignorant. That would be shocking. What she actually said was classic Sarah Palin.

Look at what she said. She starts by saying that she wouldn't make it an issue. Which tells you right away that she KNOWS there's absolutely no basis to the rumors. If there were she wouldn't hesitate to make it an issue. Then she says that voters have the right to raise any questions that they want. A statement that at it's face can't be argued and provides Palin cover, but in context suggests that perhaps there's some doubt as to where Obama was born. And then, Palin brings up her kids, and somehow suggests that there's an equivalence between the 50% of republicans who don't think Obama is a U.S. citizen and the two or three bloggers who don't think Palin is Trig's biological mother.

You add all that up and it's hard to get an answer that's more typical Sarah Palin.”

“Not buying it. Republicans will attack Obama on national security anyways. Before Obama's speech Karl Rove said he would stand up and applaud if Obama sent 30,000 more troops, after the speech Karl Rove's analysis was that Obama had poor style. There's NOTHING Obama can do to avoid republican attacks on national security.

Obama beat John McCain in this last election. Enough of the country trusted Obama to answer the phone at 3am rather than a guy who had been famously a war hero, not because he promised to move the war to Afghanistan, but because he seemed like he would use judgment in deciding if and when wars needed to be fought. Nine years in most of the country, and increasing those swing voters, doesn't really see the need for this war. Ending it wouldn't cause them to feel that Obama is incapable of keeping them safe. Unless there was another terrorist attack. If Obama were to end the war, and then there was another 9/11 he'd have no hope of being elected, but then again if there's another 9/11 despite the 30,000 extra troops, he'll have an extremely tough time being reelected anyways so that likely isn't his reasoning.If the economy doing well, Obama will get reelected regardless of the extra troops. The extra troops may help with his internal politics inside Washington, it's possible he needs to placate the Pentagon, but it's not the issue that the Reagan Democrats with make their vote on.”

“I think it's clear by now that Sarah Palin will say pretty much anything to score a couple of political points. That's old news.

Your broader point on conspiracists is well taken. I think the rise in the belief in conspiracy theories is partially a consequence of the failure of the traditional media. Because the media has been asleep at the wheel for large stories, such as Bush's insistence that Iraq had WMD's, their credibility is almost fully eroded. People believe that the president could have been born in Kenya without the any major news outlet reporting it. Even further a large sum of people dismiss news reports from major news outlets that have reported that the president was indeed born in this country. When we've gotten to the point where news reports from major newspapers and the big networks are given far FAR less weight than email forwards and internet sites, the natural result will be an increase in unsourced, unproven theories.

This is why conservatives always go out of their way to trash the media. Sarah Palin is the queen of this behavior. She doesn't want people listening to any factual news sources, she's absolutely okay with people to buying into the birther movements and believing Acorn stole over 10 million votes in a national election.”

“"The charge-for-content crowd seems to change strategies as often as Lindsay Lohan switches meds."

Ouch! That seems like an unnecessary gratuitous shot at LiLo.”

“I seriously can't think of a politician with less regard for the truth than Sarah Palin. She's lies about EVERYTHING. What color is the sky in Palin's world? I don't know, but she'd tell you sky was neon pink if she thought that it would win her some political points and the media would smile and nod.”

“Cantwell 2012!!!!!!

(or 2016)”

“I couldn't agree with your more.

Unfortunately, there's a whole cottage industry dedicated to insuring we don't have rational conversations on a whole host of issues, from rationing and healthcare reform to global warming to fixing the economy. Whether these people are motivated financially or politically the Glenn Becks and Sarah Palins of the world will continue to throw out red herring after red herring to prevent the possible of an adult conversation on these serious issue. And unfortunately "death panels" make a more salacious story for our news media than a serious discussion on what levels of rationing are acceptable.”

“Virtually everyone has SOME admirable qualities. A violent criminal may be good at setting goals or paying attention to detail. So yes, there are some likeable things about Sarah Palin, just as I'm sure there are some likeable qualities to Michele Bachmann and Glenn Beck. But typically, I look at the whole package, and when examining what Palin has presented to the public the dominant traits I see are that of a petty, ignorant, misleading quitter. To me that far outweighs the fact that she's protective of her kids and that she has doggedness to stick to her "facts" long after they've been exposed as false.”

“ACORN forced Palin and Rush and assorted other nuts to endorse Hoffman in NY23, forcing Scozzafava out of the race, paving the way for Owens a democrat to win a district that has gone republican for 140 years.”

“If the interview was with Katie Couric after the 10th time Palin said "common sense solutions" in answer to a question, Couric would have asked "such as...?". Then Palin would have gotten annoyed, thought the interview was biased, and then she would write another book with whole chapters devoted to how bad a person Couric is.”

“That was Palin? I would have sworn it was Tina Fey!”

“"To read Sarah Palin's shockingly shallow Going Rogue"

Shallow? Yes. Shockingly? Not to anyone that's watched Palin since she made her national debut. The only thing would be shocking is if the book was NOT shallow and filled with inaccuracies.”

“Based on what you've presented here you make a compelling case for additional oversight. Having seen you on tv and listened to you discuss other topics, I'm skeptical that you're providing the entire picture. But if Republicans are tired of being the party of no and crazy obstructionism, if you proposed some legislation that would provide real oversight to FHA and the financial industry, you might win some political points and help the country at the same time.”

“You laud Bush for his staunch support of Israel and his tough stance against Iran. But what did we see during the Bush years?. We saw multiple attacks against Israel from Palestine and Lebanon, which escalated into what could most accurately be described as wars. Not to mention virtually all of the progress that Iran has made on nuclear weapons was under Bush (the cowboy)'s watch. If that's your idea of success, that's setting an awfully low bar. Obama is taking a different approach, and you are correct in noting that involves reaching out to Arabs in the region. However I think it's faulty to suggest that this is not being done with the well being of Israel foremost in mind. Now it's possible to that this tact will not be any more successful than Bush's approach and if that proves to be the case I'm sure you'll be on hand with the "I told you so's" but until then I find it hard to blame Obama for switching from a strategy that clearly wasn't producing the desired results.”

“I couldn't agree more Andy! Sean Hannity is the most intellectually dishonest person I've heard in the media (with the caveat that I've never really listened to Rush or most other conservative talkers, Hannity just happens to be on during my commute).

A little over a year ago, during the 8TH year of Bush's presidency, when the economy was melting down, Hannity defended Bush on the economy saying "well the president doesn't have that much to do with the economy anyways", he then went on to blame the economic crises on Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter (as if there wasn't 20 years of republican "leadership" interspersed). And then after absolving the 2nd term president Bush for not really having the ability to affect the economy, he went on to blame Obama who was merely a candidate at the time, and he said the economy was doing badly because Obama was up in the polls and the economy was reacting negatively to his potential victory.

There is no fact that Hannity won't twist (or ignore) to make a conservative look good and a democrat look bad.”

“I sure hope your comprehension of financial statements surpasses your reading comprehension. The problem that Andy correctly assesses is NOT Sean Hannity's views. It's how completely and utterly misleading Sean Hannity is. For example, when the markets hit 6,500 Sean railed about how the markets were terrified about Obama's socialist policies, when the markets rebounded to 10,000 not a peep. When the economy continued to contract in the second quarter, Sean yelled about the "Obama recession", when the GDP grew, not a peep. Sean is more than welcome to his opinion that Obama's not using the right prescription to fix economy, but he should at least have the decency to be intellectually honest when making his argument.”

“I don't think Robert stated anywhere that he hadn't heard any intellectually serious criticisms of the president. What he's suggesting is the vast majority of the most vocal and repeated criticisms of the president from the right are completely absurd, and it hurts to GOP to have it's loudest voices spewing absolute nonsense.”

“Obama without question has done a lot of good things. Anyone who says that he's no different than McCain would have been is insane. The issue isn't with what Obama's done, but what he hasn't done given challenges of our time. For instance, there was a lot of good in the stimulus bill, a lot of money has been designated for important projects, and yet there's the sense that the stimulus bill could have been even better if it wasn't watered down with needless compromise, it seemed like the president was too willing to make concession. So while he got a good bill, it seemed like he was settling for just good enough. The president is giving the same impression on the healthcare bill. The president will very likely sign the most far reaching insurance reform in history AND YET there's still the sense of an opportunity being missed. Instead of fighting for a public option, which the president acknowledges "is a good idea" he seems willing to sacrifice it to be conciliatory, so again we'll get something that's just good enough. The same thing seems to be happening with financial regulation, and with cap trade. My advice to the president would be to pick an issue, any serious issue, and draw a line in the sand, and get it done and surpass all expectations. That's what Obama did in the campaign, and that's what he'll need to do as president to keep his supporters happy.”

“Elimination communication is the craziest thing I'VE ever heard.

I'm not knocking it, but... WOW”

“This isn't a matter of whether or Sessions should be a senator, as long as people vote for him, of course he should be allowed to serve. The issue is whether or not he should be on the judiciary committee. If you don't have the requisite knowledge, then of course not. Would you want senators with no clue of what's going on outside of their own state on the Foreign Relations committee, or with no business sense on the Finance committee? Of course not. Now obviously there's likely to be a learning curve on each of these committees because senators typically don't get elected with expertise in these areas BUT you shouldn't get to be the ranking member of an important committee without a basic understanding of lawyer's role versus what a judge does.”

“I agree with this for the most part, my only worry is the following: "We’ll still have a significant number of Americans without insurance, a system that lacks sufficient quality, and costs even higher than before. We won’t be able to afford it for long, and we’ll need to do this again." Whatever we decide to do now needs to better position the country for REAL reform. If passing health care "reform" now, makes it more unlikely to get real reform done later , than it's short sighted to pass a bill for the sake of passing it despite what incremental good it achieves. The reason behind all the support for the public option is the belief that with it in place, it will provide the model (and engender the public support) for real reform. If you believe that that's not the case, than I wholeheartedly agree that it doesn't make sense to draw a line in the sand over it.”

“I bet the day after the inauguration Obama was "liked" more than Hilary. But after 9 months of constant attacks from the right wing media, plus disappointing his liberal base on some issue, plus being the person of ultimate responsibility of all of the government policies you disagree with, be it the Afghanistan war, or wall street regulation, or the bailouts, it's obvious that he would be less likable than the dutiful secretary of state who shuns the limelight.

Are you seriously telling me that had Hillary been elected, and had to suffer daily attacks from Fox news and talk radio (which she definitely would), and had to compromise or forcefully cajole on extremely important issues, that she would still be more likable than the young senator who gave such inspirational speeches during the primaries but after the election by and large disappeared from media coverage and scrutiny? Come on now.”