We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Newsflash! McCain calls himself liberal Republican… John McCain has called himself a ‘liberal Republican‘.
In other news today, Maria Sharapova called herself a ‘tennis player’, Nicolas Sarkozy called himself ‘President of France’, Natalie Portman said she was interested in Scarlett Johansson’s breasts and Terry Pratchett called himself ‘an author’.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Aren’t we all?
Jon: call me weird, but…
The RINO just took a slap at conservatives in his party. He must be feeling cocky about his election prospects.
I flip back and forth every day between “it would be best for us in the States to have another Jimmy Carter so the republicans can regroup” to “holy jebus this guy Obama is more dangerous than Carter was in his wildest dreams.”
I suspect there are many others out there who do the same. I have a really hard time getting excited about a guy like McCain who’s only redeeming quality at this point is that he won’t retreat from Iraq immediately and he seems to have his act together on trade. Other than that he’s no different than Obama or Hillary.
Damned one way or the other I suppose.
Poor John! Only thing he is doing is making people realize what a great campaign Bob Dole ran against Bill Clinton. Of course, Bob Dole got a gig as a viagra spokesman after that. Doubt that McCain will do so well.
Look at the primaries. McCain has “won” all the recent ones, but sometimes with less that 50% of the vote — in a REPUBLICAN primary! There is no enthusiasm for him outside the Beltway media clique — that is obvious from the lack of voters going to the primaries, and the lack of money being contributed to his campaign.
Now there is the great Tanker disaster. The US Air Force had awarded a contract for new aerial refueling tankers to Boeing a few years ago — then McCain intervened to have the contract re-bid on the basis that some improprieties had been committed. The Air Force has just re-awarded the contract, this time to the FRENCH at twice the price, with a loss of over 20,000 US manufacturing jobs. Our Johnnie may have some explaining to do.
McCain is toast.
I believe this is news to the journalists that cover his campaign. They thought he was that rarity, a conservative democrat.
Tman: “I flip back and forth every day between “it would be best for us in the States to have another Jimmy Carter so the republicans can regroup” to “holy jebus this guy Obama is more dangerous than Carter was in his wildest dreams.””
I agree. Every time I decide to throw McCain under the bus, Obama says something so staggeringly dangerous that I reconsider.
Too bad it probably won’t make a difference. I think we’re doomed to the Obamessiah no matter how we anti-statists vote.
20000 jobs? Surely you jest? I don’t know enough about this contract, but I’ve read many opinions that Boeing had a sense of entitlement throughout the whole process (being all-American and all), and the Euros simply had the better product at the end of the day.
IMO, after all the mega mergers there are too few defense contractors left in the US to keep things competetive. Anyway, it’s not like China was awarded the contract.
Can we steer this discussion back to Ms. Portman an Ms. Johansson’s breasts?
Forget McCain, vote John McClane ’08(Link)
Matt-“Too bad it probably won’t make a difference. I think we’re doomed to the Obamessiah no matter how we anti-statists vote.”
You’re probably right, but I’m hoping the younger generations who are filling auditoriums for Obama will do what the younger generations usually do on voting day: not vote.
If not you can look forward to the “Amhedinnerjacket/Obama shaking hands in the living room” photo op.
This is why I come to Samizdata, so I can cheer up!
Time for some steak and wine, food and booze usually make me feel better.
I come here for in depth discussions of Scarlett Johansen’s breasts, with pictures if possible.
Of course, at my age, even Natalie Portman’s breasts would do in a pinch…
This thread is worthless without pics.
BTW, Alice, the replacement tanker is slated to be built in Alabama, not Europe.
But with 40%(?) foreign sourced parts. In any other endeavor, that would be a good thing. But do we really want to tie our defense capabilities into EUrope?
And on the real thread topic, call me the odd one out in this community, but I think Natalie Portman is a lot hotter than Scarlett Johansson. And the majority of some other people agree with me. Some wise comments in the six in that thread so far. And one mistaken one which is, predictably, the least intelligent of the thread. |-)
Sorry, Sunfish, there is a big difference between “built” and “final assembly”. The plan is to import most of the airplane from the EU and slap a coat of paint on it in Mobile. Well, I know that “slap a coat of paint” is not quite accurate, but you catch the drift.
If EADS actually was planning to build the plane in Alabama, I for one would have no problem with their winning the contract.
The underlying issue is that successive generations of US politicians & their willing bureaucrats have driven industry out of the US. Not so many decades ago, the US had three separate manufacturers building large jets — Lockheed, Douglas, & Boeing. Now there is only Boeing — and many of its large components are imported.
The problem is not the use of imported materials & components per se — benefits of globalization, etc. The problem is the willing destruction of US manufacturing capabilities. Will John John do anything about that?
Mid, this is not about the women in question, but rather their breasts. I cannot believe I have to explain this to you!
Granted, if your measure by volume, if your idea of ‘hot’ is Teutonic bovine mammaries (or if you manufacture kevlar reinforced support bras), then Johansson wins. But personally, I’m fine with this or, looked at another way, this.
I sometimes wonder just exactly what men who obsess about big boobs are looking for, a mommy or a mate. I mean, those things are for feeding babies. As a rule, humans don’t have litters and as far as, er, … recreation is concerned, I am not aware of any correlation between sensitivity and displacement. 🙂
Of course Natalie is gorgeous, and Johansson is not fit to serve her tea, as Mr. Alisa would put it. She is not even all that hot on her own (I refer to her face this time). However:
Is that a trick question?:-)
Zing!
or should I say
“Touché.”
Yes, there are a few of those about.
I am led to believe it is something to do with an indication of reproductive fitness. Hormones and that.
You’re getting a little Freudian there…
A mate for you is a ‘mommy’ for your offspring.
I do not know whether Alice has supported George Walker Bush or not, but it astonishes me that many people who have supported the President who has increased government spending more than any other President since either Nixon or L.B.J. (depending on how one calculates things), will not John McCain – who (for all his verbal mess up) has a more conservative record on government spending than most Republicans in Congress (not that is very difficult).
As for Boeing versus Airbus:
I despise the state supported Airbus – but is in not odd that it won a bidding contest with a bid that was twice the level of the previous Boeing bid?
Perhaps this was indeed United States Air Force bias (no fault of John McCain’s if it was) – but that seems a bit unlikely. Could it not be the case that the first Boeing bid was a phony – a price they could not have delivered?
If this is not so then, yes indeed, the deal should be blocked in Congress.
However, Airbus has for years being using as a excuse for its government subsdies the “hidden subsidies” of U.S. government contracts to Boeing – and this deal (if it goes into effect) blows that argument out of the water, thus meaning that the W.T.O. will rule against Airbus in the next dispute (destroying Airbus in the long term).
“But you have not dealt with the question – how will John McCain help U.S. manufacturing industry?”
By cutting corporation tax for a start.
John McCain is far from perfect as a cadidate (although he is better than the spend thrift joke George Walker Bush), but to say he is no different than Senator Clinton or Senator Obama is absurd.
Some research on the voting records and promises (and connections – over their entire adult lives right back to their university work) of Senator Clinton and Senator Obama is needed.
Paul, the Airbus tanker is really a much better aircraft, I think it is that simple.
The alternative being…what?
Lockheed and McDonnel-Douglas are gone. There are no more KC-135s or KC-10s to be bought.
Boeing lowballed the last bid, knowing that the USAF would have a certain amount of pressure to go along with any price increases or overruns, because Big B is the only US option. Frankly, they’ve acted as though an eleven-digit government contract was a God-given entitlement. There were also complaints about whether the Boeing design was even all that great for a tanker.