Friday
(1)The liberal-leaning USA Today describes The Guardian today as a "left-leaning British newspaper", showing a rather more sophisticated understanding of British political culture than the self-styled most intelligent newspaper in the UK can demonstrate of the world.
We now know that Clark County, the target for a Guardian operation to get out the vote for the Democrats, was the only county in Ohio to switch from a Democrat majority to a Republican one. The idea that Holland Park socialists living in £5 million homes could communicate with the concerns of a district of Ohio where $100,000 is considered a lot of money to spend on housing is bizarre.
In fact it is the exact reverse of the old Tory caricature: grandees looking down their noses at the 'Great Unwashed' and telling them what to do, for their own good of course. The true sign of just how ridiculous the Guardianistas are, they have no idea how arrogant and stupid they sound in the real world.
Every conservative and libertarian criticism of President Bush is at least partly justified. He has not vetoed any spending proposal from Congress. He has presided over a terrible budgetary situation (to the point where I almost oppose the tax cuts on the grounds that the budget deficit has to be contained first). He did introduce steel tariffs (which did not win him Pennsylvania or Michigan). The policy in Iraq worries me (since the spectacular successes of liberating Bagdad and later capturing Saddam Hussein) by looking all too similar to the political fudges of Vietnam in the late 1960s. I like the idea of the US spending money on Iraqi state education and a national health service no more than I would like it in Camden. I still think North Korea was and remains a bigger threat to the West than Iraq. The Patriot Act is at the very best a temporary necessary evil. And I am not so sure about "at the very best" or it being "temporary" and "necessary".
But the tribal test of elections is simple. All the bad guys, the Guardian readers, the little-Hitler bureaucrats, anti-smokers, the Socialists, idiot British Conservatives like Alan Duncan, the Palestinian 9/11 cheerleaders, the terrorists, the UN crooks, virtually the entire Left worldwide. They are the ones reaching for Kleenex, anti-depressant pills and shaking their fists at God.
All the people I know that are cheering are the good guys. I have even made this Guardian article my home page on IE, so that every morning for the next few weeks, I am reminded that We win and They lose sometimes.
TO: Antoine Clarke
RE: Don't Ya Just Love It...
"We now know that Clark County, the target for a Guardian operation to get out the vote for the Democrats, was the only county in Ohio to switch from a Democrat majority to a Republican one." -- Antoine Clarke
...when a plan comes together, and backfires on the opposition?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[God works in mysterous ways.....]
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 5, 2004 07:37 PM
I'd have preferred a Kerry presidency / republican congress deadlock, but an advantage of Bush winning: he's got the job, he won't lose it, so Libertarian "allies of convenience" can quit with the cheerleading and go back to actually being Libertarian. Bush needs slapping down at least as much as he needs praising.
Posted by Julian Morrison at November 5, 2004 09:35 PM
TO: Julian Morrison
RE: Under Other Circumstances....
"I'd have preferred a Kerry presidency / republican congress deadlock..." -- Julian Morrison
...I could agree. Deadlock means extensive discussion, to me. However, we seem to be involved in a bit of a war at the moment. And in such a time as this, extensive discussion could well be, and most oft is, detrimental to the prosecution of such activities.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[A lack of leadership is no substitute for inaction.]
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 5, 2004 10:02 PM
Bush has his mandate, he will do what he said he'll do on the campaign trail and at his press conference this week. As usual, the moanbats think North Korea was a bigger threat to the US than Iraq. They never stop to consider that the biggest threat to the US was not Iraq, but the Islamofascist terrorists. Without the Jihadi's getting their hands on NK's nukes, North Korea is a second rate threat to be handled by the neighborhood of Japan, China, and the rest.
That is why Iraq is so important. We now have a base right in the middle of that hornet's nest and we are going to change their minds or kill them. There will be no political pressure on Bush to get out. That's good for the US and the world. Another reason for Iraq is that it's a lot easier to influence Iran from Baghdad than it is from Baltimore.
Thank you, you 59,000,000 rednecks, dummies, and luddites.
Posted by EddieP at November 5, 2004 10:33 PM
Doesn't this serve to remind us what a delicious, meaty, satisfying word to roll around one's mouth is Schadenfreude? One can savour it like a fine Oloroso or a Single Malt. I've long stated that one of my chief reasons for wishing for a Bush win was to see the whining and moaning from the Lefties. I now have my wish. And is it sweet? Oh, yes. It is very sweet. My sole regret is that I am not back in the UK for a while to mine the glorious lodes and seams of Leftist angst. I seldom get to be as obnoxious as I can be (which is to say: very) in a righteous cause.
As this Brockes woman points out, the arc of their emotions was directly counter to mine. When those loaded exit polls came in, I must admit my heart sank. I didn't put too much faith in them, as everything I had read up to that point convinced me a Bush win was inevitable. Nonetheless it was unwelcome news. Of course as time went by, things started to look better and better. By the time Ohio was in the bag and I knocked it on the head for the night, I felt great. But the poor, sad, deluded Lefties went quite the other way. I truly cherish the thought of their going to bed thinking Kerry had won and waking to the awful realisation that Smirky McHalliburton ChimpHitler had stolen the election...again!
Yes, I know it's unseemly to gloat. But there's this huge, quivering bubble of mirth inside that keeps making a bid for the surface every time I picture the disconsolate faces that must have filled the Guardian's newsroom.
And, hast thou slain the JabberDonk?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
P.S. The $100 I won off a lefty friend of mine over who'd win does nothing to dampen my spirits.
Posted by David Gillies at November 5, 2004 10:51 PM
TO: EddieP
RE: Hey!
"Thank you, you 59,000,000 rednecks, dummies, and luddites." -- EddieP
Don't forget the Mensans.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 6, 2004 12:43 AM
P.S. Not to mention the airborne-rangers and other assorted grunt.
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 6, 2004 12:46 AM
Over the past few days, there has been a steady stream here (though you might call it a shower) of inconsolable Leftists and statists, parading their misery at John Kerry's downfall and accusing various posters and commentators of being infatuated with George Bush.
I do hope they've managed to tear the soggy Kleenex from their eyes for long enough to read Antoine Clarke's post - not to mention the excellent commentary from Davie Gillies, above.
It isn't George Bush's re-election that gives us pleasure: it's the wailing of the self-righteous Left and the smack in the face it has received because its hitherto apparently unstoppable march has banged hard against the plain common sense of the US electorate.
To put it bluntly, we're not celebrating Bush's victory - we're celebrating your defeat.
They're not quite the same thing.
Posted by GCooper at November 6, 2004 12:58 AM
I am so happy I have found you guys, I have been twisting in the wind out here. Personally I would have never said the "patriot" act was necessary. but that is just me
Posted by Greg Schade at November 6, 2004 01:16 AM
I heard that Tony Blair wanted Kerry to win. Have any of you heard this? Do you know if it's true? Just curious.
Posted by Denise W at November 6, 2004 08:39 AM
Oh come on! That article isn't for real. You ghosted the link to point to the well known online Guardian Article Travesty Generator!
Posted by Gordon at November 6, 2004 09:45 AM
Heh, googling, I just did find a travesty generator and run a guardian article through it. Read and be amused...
In the coming days, millions of Democrats move through the layers of grief
from denial and anger to acceptance, is proving to be a painful, self-lacerating
process. For some, the implications of Mr Bush's victory confronts Democrats
in expanding their existing base, they maximised Mr Bush's re-election
season since the Vietnam generation dairy farmer in south-central Wisconsin,
had consoled themselves by taking the long view of history. On Wednesday
night, she went home and re-read a book on the struggle to come to terms
with defeat. From the liberal bastions on America's two coasts, to the
cities of the heartland, Mr Bush's victory confronts Democratic National
Committee, consoled himself with a single fact: that Mr Bush was never
really elected by the supreme court. Black Wednesday night, she went home
and re-read a book on the struggle for women's suffrage. By Thursday she
emerged with a call for national unity. "This is a symbol of my disunity,"
said Mitch Hampton, a jazz pianist from Boston
Posted by Julian Morrison at November 6, 2004 05:48 PM
TO: Julian Morrison
RE: Got a Link?
That was tantalizing. Where is the rest of it?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Please. Sir. Could I 'av some more?]
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 6, 2004 05:54 PM
That's all of it. Original whiny article here: http://tinyurl.com/5zbwo
BTW in blog comments you don't have to do all that letter-ish stuff with "to" and "re" and whatnot.
Posted by Julian Morrison at November 6, 2004 06:01 PM
TO: Julian Morrison
RE: Format
"BTW in blog comments you don't have to do all that letter-ish stuff with "to" and "re" and whatnot." -- Julian Morrison
Been doing it this way for years. Cuts down on miscommunications, significantly. People know exactly WHO I am addressing and WHAT I am referring to. Especially helpful in situations of heavily trafficked blogs such as LGF.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Celebrating 'diversity', are we?]
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 6, 2004 06:55 PM
Denise W - Yes, Blair wanted Kerry to win. Kerry is more of a strutting lefty poseur soulmate. Cherie-Antoinette also wanted Kerry to win.
Posted by Verity at November 6, 2004 07:04 PM
Been doing it this way for years. Cuts down on miscommunications, significantly.
Chuck, my guess would be because significantly fewer people read your posts as a result. Honestly, I find the formatting sufficiently annoying that I just skip over them most of the time. I only tuned in to this one to see how you'd react to Julian's gentle prod.
Posted by S. Weasel at November 6, 2004 08:14 PM
TO: S. Weasel
RE: And This Means What....
"I find the formatting sufficiently annoying that I just skip over them most of the time." -- S. Weasel
....to me?
I don't count coup based on the number of people who read my comments. And if formating gets in the way of someone reading my comments, well....whose problem is that? Certainly not mine. I'm not making any money off readership, here.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 6, 2004 08:26 PM
Chuck: the usual way of identifying the person you're replying to is to add their name up front, as I just did. The backlog of comments above places it in context. And the name you type in the box above this text field I now fill in, shows who you are without needing to add a duplicate in the text field itself. The "re:" and a subject is redundant given the usual short length of the mesage itself. Subject is useful in email mostly to see a synopsis of many messages when listed together, but this comment board doesn't support such a mode. As for the "regards", Whom are you regarding? That's a written letter thing and it's mere pointless tradition even there.
Among smart people, mis-communications are too rare to need such prevention. And among not-smart people, communication falls on deaf ears regardless.
Posted by Julian Morrison at November 6, 2004 08:34 PM
I didn't want to weigh in earlier, but I have to say that I do tend to skip over Chuck's posts as well, for the same formatting reason...
EG
Posted by Euan Gray at November 6, 2004 08:40 PM
TO: Julian Morrison
RE: Up-Front Addressing Formats
"...the usual way of identifying the person you're replying to is to add their name up front, as I just did." -- Julian Morrison
Tell me, Julian, what's the first thing in my post?
"Among smart people, mis-communications are too rare to need such prevention." -- Julian Morrison
Among smart military people, miscommunication is a horror to be avoided. After all, they know von Clauswitz's dictum by heart and by experience.
Look. If you don't like the formating, fine. Don't read me. It's not my problem. I'm not here for some popularity contest.
If smart people can't focus on the message instead of the formatting, it would suggest an interesting problem with comprehension.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. I've been a non-conformist all my life. I see no reason to change my approach because people want me to conform to THEIR ideals.
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 6, 2004 08:44 PM
TO: All
RE: The Weeping Democrats
Thanks to Julius and others, I've motivated myself to write on these poor people.
This item relates to the current state of the Democratic Party. There will be another item soon regarding another stage of the grieving process they are currently going through.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 6, 2004 08:49 PM
"The true sign of just how ridiculous the Guardianistas are, they have no idea how arrogant and stupid they sound in the real world."
Heh, they have no frickin' idea how stupid they appear to any Brit who hasn't got their head buried up Cherie-Antoinette's gurning puppet's back passage
cheers,
Matt (a Brit)
Posted by Rubbermatt at November 6, 2004 09:19 PM
Tell me, Julian, what's the first thing in my post?
The "as I just did" was more important part of my suggestion than the "up front."
Anyhow, that's an interesting question you ask. Because, you see, I didn't notice it as an example of such. Because all that header and footer stuff you add is basically data-less, when I read your posts I skip over it.
All conversation is an agreement to submerge some personal preferences in the common protocol, so as to share information. A post here in Japanese, for example, might lack readers regardless of its perspicacity.
Posted by Julian Morrison at November 6, 2004 09:19 PM
TO: Julian Morrison
RE: Really?
"...all that header and footer stuff you add is basically data-less, when I read your posts I skip over it." -- Julian Morrison
Including the occassional pithy tag-line? I AM 'crushed'. ;-P
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Do not cast your pearls before swine? What?]
P.S. Are you REALLY a "libertarian"? I thought those people let everybody do pretty much as they wished. How very odd, that here, in their midst, I should come across such criticism of my 'formating'. One might think I was in the midst of of a bunch of tyranical adjutants, wanting their i's and t's crossed and dotted, just so....
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 6, 2004 09:39 PM
No, no, Chuck, you're confusing "libertarians" with "really easygoing people who don't give a shit what you do," and I assure you most people I have read here are not that. Now, if we encourage our respective legislative bodies to outlaw Chuck's Formatting (the Chuck's Formatting Law, let's call it), or send goons to your home to confiscate your keyboard, then we will be betraying ourselves as libertarians.
But it's entirely within the philosophical limits to tell you your mother dresses you funny and you make a whistling sound when you pronounce "S."
Posted by S. Weasel at November 6, 2004 09:53 PM
TO: S. Weasel
RE: Really?
".... you're confusing "libertarians" with "really easygoing people who don't give a shit what you do," and I assure you most people I have read here are not that." -- S. Weasel
I thought libertarians were such. So, I guess they aren't and I can expect rebuke or worse at their hands for not being exactly like them.
Thanks for the warning.
"Now, if we encourage our respective legislative bodies to outlaw Chuck's Formatting (the Chuck's Formatting Law, let's call it), or send goons to your home to confiscate your keyboard, then we will be betraying ourselves as libertarians." -- S. Weasel
What people do with the small things is what they will do with the big things. Libertarians, such as yourself, reproach me for being different in my posting comments. What's to keep them from doing so in the legislature? God should FORBID they gain control of such, at this rate.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
P.S. That should read, "You are silly and your mother dresses you funny."
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 6, 2004 10:37 PM
P.P.S. Happy B'day, to me....your time, of course. And now, off to dinner at the best restaurant in town, as they are closed come tomorrow, local time.
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 7, 2004 12:28 AM
What people do with the small things is what they will do with the big things.Hmm. Yes in a way you are seeing us in the small as in the large. Imagine and compare how a similar situation would be handled on some hypothetical leftwing blog. A clamour of "something must be done", a mass petition to an admin, a public poll of "solutions", and finally the introduction of a new set of micromanaging rules for comment formatting, backed by bans.
Posted by Julian Morrison at November 7, 2004 08:01 AM
GCooper:
"It isn't George Bush's re-election that gives us pleasure"
Speak for yourself. I'm ecstatic.
"To put it bluntly, we're not celebrating Bush's victory - we're celebrating your defeat."
I'm doing both. It doubles the pleasure.
Posted by Shawn at November 7, 2004 11:19 AM
TO: Julian Morrison
RE: Don't Need to "Imagine"
"Yes in a way you are seeing us in the small as in the large. Imagine and compare how a similar situation would be handled on some hypothetical leftwing blog." -- Julian Morrison
I've been killed by the best worst of them [Kos, Willis, Armed Liberal, etc., etc., etc....] on the merest of pretenses, being a non-conformist regarding formating being one of them. Telling the truth of a matter, and backing it up with facts is the usual problem.
And your point here is....what?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 7, 2004 03:45 PM
Nobody should be allowed to make two posts in succession. Mr Chuck Pelto has done it four times on this thread alone.
He's becoming a bore.
Posted by TheMightyMole at November 7, 2004 05:58 PM
TO: TheMightyMole
RE: Help Me Out Here...
"Nobody should be allowed to make two posts in succession." -- TheMightyMole
...stop being such a lurker and post more yourself.
RE: BOOOORing!
"He's becoming a bore." -- TheMightyMole
Not enough about you?
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Bore: One who talks when you wish him to listen.]
P.S. Maybe if you interjected more, I'd listen more.
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 7, 2004 06:46 PM
I have been celebrating this VICTORY for 5 nights in a now. And every morning my hangover is gone the instant I realize that BUSH WON, and THE LEFT lost!!
The enjoyment of knowing that despicable leftists all around the world so utterly depressed is so f##king WONDERFUL!
YES!!!
Posted by Peter King at November 7, 2004 07:11 PM
I have been celebrating this VICTORY for 5 nights in a row now. And every morning my hangover is gone the instant I realize that BUSH WON, and THE LEFT lost!!
The enjoyment of knowing that despicable leftists all around the world so utterly depressed is so f##king WONDERFUL!
YES!!!
Posted by Peter King at November 7, 2004 07:11 PM
Summary of what Chuck wrote above: "I go to other people's blogs and annoy them until they kick me off". Or did I misread?
Posted by Julian Morrison at November 7, 2004 07:40 PM
TO: Julian Morrison
RE: Misread
"Or did I misread?" -- Julian Morrison
You're some kinda libertarian, Julian. If you ARE one. And if you are, it looks like libertarians are just 'liberals' by some other name.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[Merde by any other name still smells.]
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 7, 2004 07:50 PM
P.S. Anytime you want to get back ON TOPIC, will be fine with me.
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 7, 2004 09:27 PM
TO: All
RE: Speaking of Weeping
Ground ops have begun in Fallujah. Our first step in the 'dance', was to trod on the Baathist die-hards' toes.
So far...so good....
But the day is yet young and no plan survives contact with the enemy.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[God's speed to the GIrines of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force. Good hunting and good luck. Wish I was there.....]
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 8, 2004 12:57 AM
P.S. Some of the bozos around here probably wish as much, themselves.
Posted by Chuck Pelto at November 8, 2004 12:58 AM
Mr Pelto has now made four posts in succession. Even more of a bore.
Posted by The Mighty Mole at November 8, 2004 06:16 PM
Hello,
Bumped into this blog by way of Discarded Lies. Nice colour-scheme: unambiguously heterosexual. However, I can tell from the painfully Glenn-Reynolds-chic header graphic that you are a Libertarian.
Listen mate, Libertarianism is a silly belief system. Understand this.
In a nutshell it doesn't work because it fails to recognise that individual rights are preceded by collective rights, because it is the state, not the lone gun-toting Popperian that provides the security that guarantees life and liberty.
Hence intrusions must be made into the individual's liberty even when the exercise of that liberty does not directly impinge on someone else's. The right to collective self-defense and (partial) exclusivity based on cultural, civilisational or even racial criteria must be acknowledged in order to provide for the group continuity and shared identity that provides for a stable society, (preferably a reasonably homogeneous ethno-state, since empirically this works the best) that allows concepts like "individual liberty" to have any kind of meaning.
Now do us all a favour and become a boring old Bourkean conservative, like every other man of letters.
You need to make a 180 (or at least 90) degree turnaround in your attitude, starting from right now. Put yourself into a Tony Robbins frame of mind and take charge of the situation. Your new life starts tomorrow.
Posted by Nat the Cat at November 9, 2005 11:09 AM
In a nutshell it doesn't work because it fails to recognise that individual rights are preceded by collective rights, because it is the state, not the lone gun-toting Popperian that provides the security that guarantees life and liberty.
Arse about face. An individual, even a gang of individuals, ability to take my stuff, and harm me pales by comparison to the states ability and willingness to do so.
Your views of reality are like Newtonian physics: intuitive, ostensibly logical and in fact a quite false model of the way reality works. The truth is far more complex and counter-intuitive.
Most rational libertarians do not think 'lone gun-toting' is the main way we defend ourselves but rather it is the emergent property of people doing that (amongst other things) which allows civil societies to flourish which is the true way to get security. In fact rational libertarians value social structures in ways conservatives delude themselves they want but in truth do not (getting that conservatives to recognise the sad fast they do not in fact believe in society any more that the socialists is hard but hey, the truth usually is).
Posted by Perry de Havilland at November 10, 2005 01:56 AM
