Politics: Onward from New Hampshire

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by bilmore
Both of those guys should have been smart enough to know that what they did just can't be done. Whether we think Scalia would be influenced is almost immaterial - the issue is, did he cause a perception of unfairness? It was poor judgment for both of them. Now, Cheney is going to lose a vote, and Scalia's credibility is damaged, and he's going to have to recuse again.

Just incredibly careless.

I feel duty-bound to disagree with this. Curses! Now I have to defend the stupid side of the argument!

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
paid for by the litigant's former company,

To make clear, as I did by PM to Ty, that part of my response was a joke. Unless you have other information that supports Halliburton's financial contribution, in which case it was a prescient joke.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Although I do not think I am going to get to see John Edwards make a fool of George Bush in a presidential debate or two, I continue to hope that I will see him make Dick Cheney look like a fool in a vice-presidential debate.

I don't think even Edwards could make Cheney look like a fool. Criticize his philosophies if you want, but characterizing him as a fool tells us more about you then him.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by bilmore
I don't think even Edwards could make Cheney look like a fool. Criticize his philosophies if you want, but characterizing him as a fool tells us more about you then him.

I'll bet you didn't realize that Kingsfield was a comic character.

Rummey and Cheney are each, in a very sad and tragic way, charicatures for many of us. Fool may be the wrong word. But it is nicer than the right words.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
I feel duty-bound to disagree with this. Curses! Now I have to defend the stupid side of the argument!

Damn. I was sure you were going to weigh in with a right to privacy argument in their favor, (Scalia's right to chose until duck viability), and I tried to head it off.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
To make clear, as I did by PM to Ty, that part of my response was a joke. Unless you have other information that supports Halliburton's financial contribution, in which case it was a prescient joke.

My bad. I misremembered from Dahlia Lithwick's story in Slate, but looking at it it simply says "an energy company" sponsored the trip, and I assumed it was a company with ties to Cheney.

Stronger ties than simply having the Administration by the nuts, I mean.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Rummey and Cheney are each, in a very sad and tragic way, charicatures for many of us. Fool may be the wrong word. But it is nicer than the right words.

We can start with "intellectual superiors", and then you can work in the words with fewer syllables afterwards.

Honestly, I have never understood the antipathy people seem to have for both of these guys. They're both brilliant and accomplished people, with views that aren't far off center-right.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Paul O'Neill's book admits Bush had decided to go to Iraq BEFORE 9/11.

It doesn't go that far. There were a lot of people in the Administration thinking along those lines, etc., though.

Originally posted by bilmore
Cheney's no fool, fool.

You're absolutely right. Aspiring for parallel construction led me astray. Cheney is no fool. Edwards, however, was well known as a plaintiff's lawyer in North Carolina, and I think he would perform very, very well in that setting. It would be hard even for smart people to stay with him, I think.

Originally posted by bilmore
Honestly, I have never understood the antipathy people seem to have for both of these guys. They're both brilliant and accomplished people, with views that aren't far off center-right.

I felt that way about Cheney until relatively recently. I thought he was conservative, but a Wyoming-sort of sensible albeit right-wing conservativism that I might not agree with but could respect. I thought he was fairly pragmatic, too. But he is the villain of the Suskind book -- he appears to have succumbed to hubris. He's ideological now, instead of pragmatic. He seems to think he has all the answers, and he appears to be running things in the White House so that only his views are heard by Bush.

[Atticus Grinch]

Originally posted by bilmore
Honestly, I have never understood the antipathy people seem to have for both of these guys. They're both brilliant and accomplished people, with views that aren't far off center-right.

Explain to me, on the same basis, the far-more-virulent antipathy for Clinton. Hint: saying he wasn't "center-left" won't cut it.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by bilmore
Honestly, I have never understood the antipathy people seem to have for both of these guys. They're both brilliant and accomplished people, with views that aren't far off center-right.

I think it is just natural for people to be jealous of people who are brighter and more accomplished than they are. I experience the same sort of thing on this board.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
My bad. I misremembered from Dahlia Lithwick's story in Slate, but looking at it it simply says "an energy company" sponsored the trip, and I assumed it was a company with ties to Cheney.

Stronger ties than simply having the Administration by the nuts, I mean.

it's another oil services firm, according to the LA Times story in Ty's link. Question whether Cheney should be accepting hosting there either, but that's a gov't ethics question, which we don't answer these days, not a recusal question, which we, well, don't answer these days.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Although I do not think I am going to get to see John Edwards make a fool of George Bush in a presidential debate or two, I continue to hope that I will see him make Dick Cheney look like a fool in a vice-presidential debate.

I didn't get this, till I remembered that you thought Gore won the debates in 2000.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
Explain to me, on the same basis, the far-more-virulent antipathy for Clinton. Hint: saying he wasn't "center-left" won't cut it.

Will saying "BJ in oval office" or "vaginally placed cigar" cut it?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
I experience the same sort of thing on this board.

You're jealous of your breast implants?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by bilmore
We can start with "intellectual superiors", and then you can work in the words with fewer syllables afterwards.

Honestly, I have never understood the antipathy people seem to have for both of these guys. They're both brilliant and accomplished people, with views that aren't far off center-right.

Happy to explain the antipathy, but then you get to explain the visceral anti-Hilary sentiment held by many Republicans.

For me, these two represent elitist macho white male culture at its worst. Yes, they are intelligent, but they exude a set of self-righteous, xenophobic and chauvinist cultural values that disturb me.