Category Archives: Politics & Government

Two kinds of Republicanism

Posted on by

In a Rolling Stone article titlled “Ohio Burning,” Matt Taibbi offers one explanation of what happened November 7th.

There were really two kinds of Republicanism in the Bush years. There was the Bush/Rove/DeLay revolution, a brilliant perpetual plan for winning elections, raising money and concentrating power. Even if they were never verbalized, everyone implicitly understood the revolution’s prime directives: support the president blindly, demonize the opposition and never break ranks. It wasn’t hard to be this kind of Republican. If you could read at a fourth-grade level, pray to Jesus and exhibit genuine terror before photos of men holding hands, you could ride the revolution all the way to Washington with a ten-point cushion. There was room for even the very dumbest in this revolution.

The other Republicanism was the old-school conservatism that supposedly provided the revolution’s ideological underpinnings. But somewhere along the line, the Bush revolutionaries broke free of those principles and sailed off into the unknown.

I really like the way Mr. Taibbi writes. Maybe it’s just seeing his words in Rolling Stone, but they reminded me of Hunter Thompson. I would give an appendage-to-be-named-later to write so well.

Scott Adams on The Future of Voting

Posted on by

“I’d also want to see the list of experts lined up on both sides of every argument, along with their political affiliations. If 90% of economists favored one fiscal policy over another, that would sway me. If 90% of recently retired generals supported one method of fighting a war, that would sway me too. I’d also like to see opinion poll results that are limited to independent voters above a certain IQ range who have passed a knowledge test on the specific issue. It doesn’t help me to know that 80% of the ignorant, brainwashed masses support something. I want to know what the well-informed, bright, independents think. That way if I don’t have the time or interest to study an issue, I can still decide to vote with the bright, informed people.” (Posted 2006)

“A Come-to-Daddy Moment”

Posted on by

I sure hope Maureen Dowd never has any reason to evaluate my job performance. From her Thursday column in the NYT:

“Poppy Bush and James Baker gave Sonny the presidency to play with and he broke it. So now they’re taking it back. They are dragging W. away from those reckless older guys who have been such a bad influence and getting him some new minders who are a lot more practical.”

Scott Adams happy to be greedy capitalist

Posted on by

“I’m happy that lots of people vote. The system would break down otherwise, and short of me being the dictator, I can’t think of a better system than imaginary democracy masking the naked ambitions of greedy capitalists. It sounds bad when you say it, but frankly I don’t have a better idea. I’m just happy I have a chance to be one of those greedy capitalists myself. Now go vote me some tax breaks.”

— Scott Adams

Thirty years of election coverage

Posted on by

The first election covered by The Missourinet (a network owned by the company I work for) was in 1976. News Director Bob Priddy orchestrated that first election night and every one since. Prior to The Missourinet, radio stations throughout the state focused on local races and relied on the wire services for news and numbers from throughout the state.

The Missourinet brought the sounds of election night from the state capitol and campaign headquarters throughout Missouri to the hometown audiences of our affiliates.

The technology has changed… and is changing… but insight and understanding Missourinet reporters bring to their election night coverage remains the focus of their reporting. Bob reflects on the past 30 years in this 10 minute video.

Decision time

Posted on by

Radio Iowa News Director O. Kay Henderson has some excellent advice for those who haven’t seen a debate, haven’t met one of the candidates, and haven’t a clue about how you’re going to vote:

“Go to an “opinion leader” in your life, in your neighborhood, in your community. This could be a person you see tomorrow in church. It could be the person you’re sitting beside at the high school play-off football game on Monday night. It could be a co-worker, or a life-long friend or the owner of the hardware store. Pick somebody whose opinion you respect (and who you suspect has been following the race) and ask them how they’re going to vote and why.

I confess I am one of the clueless to whom Kay refers. I might presume to modify her advice just a tad. Instead of “opinion leader,” I might seek out the smartest, best-informed, good person I can find, and ask him or her.

Take a moment to read Kay’s post. It’s a nice story.

Will November 8 be a GOP “sick day?”

Posted on by

Looks like there are only a few likely outcomes to Tuesday’s mid-term elections. A) The Republicans hang on keep a slim majority in one or both of the houses. B) The Democrats take a narrow lead in one or both. Or, C) The Democrats win big in both. Scary (if you’re a Republican) big.

I won’t hazard a guess. What intrigues me is how the hard-core conservatives will respond to any or all of the possible outcomes. What’s your line on Wednesday morning when you come into the office?

I assume there is some super-secret email list that will provide… what should we call them… talking points? Perhaps a website like this one, or this one, or they could borrow this list of excuses for John Kerry losing.

After the last couple of elections we heard, “The people have spoken!” If a whole bunch of those same people tell us something different this time, how do we respond?

I was going to offer some possible morning-after responses but I think I’ll wait and take notes during the days following the election. I’ll post some or all here.

Scott Adams: Electronic Voting Machines

Posted on by

“…there’s a 100% chance that the voting machines will get hacked and all future elections will be rigged. But that doesn’t mean we’ll get a worse government. It probably means that the choice of the next American president will be taken out of the hands of deep-pocket, autofellating, corporate shitbags and put it into the hands of some teenager in Finland. How is that not an improvement?”

“Statistically speaking, any hacker who is skilled enough to rig the elections will also be smart enough to select politicians that believe in… oh, let’s say for example, science. Compare that to the current method where big money interests buy political ads that confuse snake-dancing simpletons until they vote for the guy who scares them the least.”

Are Bush and bin Laden on the same side?

Posted on by

Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins explains “why God is a delusion, religion is a virus, and America has slipped back into the Dark Ages.” The following excerpt is from an article at Salon.com:

We’re seeing a rather unholy alliance between the burgeoning theocracy in the U.S. and its allies, the theocrats in the Islamic world. They are fighting the same battle: Christian on one side, Muslim on the other. The very large numbers of people in the United States and in Europe who don’t subscribe to that worldview are caught in the middle.

Actually, holy alliance would be a better phrase. Bush and bin Laden are really on the same side: the side of faith and violence against the side of reason and discussion. Both have implacable faith that they are right and the other is evil. Each believes that when he dies he is going to heaven. Each believes that if he could kill the other, his path to paradise in the next world would be even swifter. The delusional “next world” is welcome to both of them. This world would be a much better place without either of them.