Brent Nyitray
Fairlington Blade
Let the mutherfuker burn!
jnc4p
Kevin S. Willis
Michigoose
lmsinca
markinaustin
Arcanaut
novahockey
quarterback
ScottC
yellojktAh, the surprises that await the aspiring pol!
Exhibit A: Texas Governor Rick Perry.
He jumped into the race in August as a force to be reckoned with. His early polling gave him a 29-17 lead over Mitt Romney.
Now we hear from Iowa, a state that was ‘supposed’ to be his, that he’s tied for fifth (!) with Newt Gingrich and trails leaders Herman Cain and Romney by about 15 points.
Despite what the punditry claims, the Iowa caucuses aren’t that important. Since 1976 only one non-incumbent GOP candidate who won the Iowa caucuses has gone on to win the presidency.
But it seems to me that for Perry to poll way behind a candidate who is barely campaigning in that state says a lot about his campaign and the people who are running it. I’m not talking ideology, but campaign mechanics.
If I were a campaign manager, I’d take a long look at every skeleton or perceived skeleton in my client’s closet and create a strategy for the candidate to minimize, dismiss, or even benefit from it. I don’t get the sense that Team Perry has done anything close to that.
First, there’s the book he wrote that was published late last year. As Steven Levingston wrote,
“He didn’t think much of legislation on food safety, the minimum wage, child labor bans, environmental protection and Medicare.”
When challenged by those in the electorate who were uncomfortable with his positions in the book, Team Perry scrambled to contain the damage control.
Second, was the statement about Ben Bernanke. I understand why he might object to Bernanke’s quantitative easing, but instead of preparing him with a 40-second soundbite to counter it, Team Perry left the man without a fallback. And again, they had to mop up when Perry called the Fed chairman’s actions “almost treasonous.”
The list goes on. The ranch name. Allowing him to reignite the birther issue in a way that riled other Republicans instead of giving him more presidential sounding talking points for his interviews. His lack of preparedness for the debates and his response to same.
Isn’t up-front preparation, in part at least, what an aspiring pol pays a campaign team for? Is Perry’s team not capable of providing guidance and counsel, or is it not allowed to? Either way, Perry’s candidacy looks to me like it needs proactive focus from a capable campaign team who is allowed to do its job.
Filed under: 2012 | Tagged: Rick Perry |
All Things in Moderation 
I think there are 2 conservative criticisms of Perry. First and foremost, he has not clearly articulated conservative positions in debates, unlike Gingrich who is climbing in the polls. Second, he is not taking the fight to Obama and directly and relentlessly criticizing him. The other things, like: "“He didn’t think much of legislation on food safety, the minimum wage, child labor bans, environmental protection and Medicare.”" only help him with the right as well as, IMO, many independents. I'm still fascinated with the "more legislation = effective government" argument, unless that legislation actually repeals previous legislation and
LikeLike
Regulations. The birther questions always come from the left wing media and amount to a modern day loyalty oath. It will have no effect on the electorate but it does embarrass establishment Republicans.
LikeLike
Mr. McWingnut, I agree on your criticisms of Perry. I look to a candidate's campaign team to assist him/her in articulating party/personal visions and plans in a way that resonates with voters and the media. If Team Perry had, for example, crafted 6-10 zingers for the debates, Perry might not have been stellar, but he would have used the format to his advantage.
LikeLike
"The birther questions always come from the left wing media and amount to a modern day loyalty oath."While this is actually true, this was a monster that could have been put down a long time again by Conservatives and never was. "He didn’t think much of legislation on food safety, the minimum wage, child labor bans, environmental protection and Medicare"Really, conservatives want child factory workers? I get that less government regulation is a good thing and that many or even most Americans feels that way, but once cadidates are forced to be specific about cuts, they have to be awfully careful about what they say they will cut.
LikeLike
Really good post by the way, MsJs.
LikeLike
Agree with ashot, MsJS.Oh, and ashot, the boots went up last night.
LikeLike
"While this is actually true, this was a monster that could have been put down a long time again by Conservatives and never was."I disagree that this is a "monster." I think, for the right and many independents, it's meaningless. It is important to the Democrats, the Media (BIRM,{rimshot}I'm here all week!)and the Republican establishment. No one is going to change their vote based on a candidate's position on or repudiation of birtherism.Perry has money but I think he's done. I'm guessing the rest of the campaign for him will be practice for 2016.I'll say it again, no incumbent, non-primaried Democrat has lost the Presidency since Grover Cleveland in 1889. The grass roots focus is on the Senate and House. The Presidency is a lost cause.
LikeLike
ashot:Really, conservatives want child factory workers?Child labor laws outlaw a lot more than just working in a factory. Indeed, in this day and age that's the very least that it does.I should turn this one around and ask….really, you don't want to allow a 12 year old to get paid for refereeing a 1st grade town rec soccer league game? Because that is the kind of "work" that is acutally being outlawed by child labor laws where I live, not factory work.I find the notion that, if child labor laws disappeared tomorrow we would somehow find ourselves transported back to 1870 to be pretty absurd. Parents sent their kids to work in factories because they needed the money earned to survive, not because they liked the idea of their kids working in a factory. Such a need a need no longer really exists in our country. That is what prevents parents from sending their kids out to work all day, not child labor laws.
LikeLike
Scott, loosen child labor laws and more kids will be working the fields from TX to CA than are there now and there are too many now. No, I do not have a handy link.Glad you have power!
LikeLike
Scott:Personally, yeah, I would outlaw a 12 year old doing that. I got my first paying job (other than babysitting) when I was 14 and that was too young and I was definitely taken advantage of because of my youth. Kids that age don't know enough to question adults "asking" them to work overtime or do a little extra to "help out".
LikeLike
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7M4gz97Y9W8Should be Perry in NH.
LikeLike
Why should 12 year olds be paid for volunteer work. My kids all went to work between 15 & 16 during summers and weekends and I personally thought that was plenty early. Community service is something that looks terrific on college or job applications.I think if parents expect their kids to start earning money at 12 it's probably because they do need the money. McWing, I'm not sure how you claim that the birther issue is a favorite of the left when it's the right that's questioning Obama's citizenship. It shouldn't have become an issue IMO, and you can't expect Dems to just ignore the claims. I know Obama tried to avoid the issue until Presidential candidates forced his hand.
LikeLike
Michi,Isn't that a parents job though, to determine whether their child is capable of, for example, refereeing a 1st grade soccer game? Or babysitting? These things go on right now anyway, regardless of the law. If we have laws on the books that are unenforced, or unenforcable, aren't we furthering contempt for the law overall?
LikeLike
BTW, Greg should be happy tonight, his post on Axlerod's comments is over 1000 comments. It's been awhile since he's seen one of those.
LikeLike
McWing, yes it is the parents' job, but kids don't always tell their parents everything. . . nor do they necessarily know that what their boss is asking them to do is against the law. In a perfect world parents would know everything and have perfect communications with their kids, but in reality none of us were that open with our parents and can't expect our kids to be any different. I know I wasn't, and my parents had no idea I was working as many hours as I was because they were working their asses off themselves.
LikeLike
"McWing, I'm not sure how you claim that the birther issue is a favorite of the left when it's the right that's questioning Obama's citizenship. It shouldn't have become an issue IMO, and you can't expect Dems to just ignore the claims. I know Obama tried to avoid the issue until Presidential candidates forced his hand."The only time I see Republicans asked about birtherism is from left. CNN, NYT, MSNBC, et al seem obsessed with whether or not a Republican embraces or repudiates birtherism. On the right, conservative talk shows, blogs and FOX, it just doesnt come up.Regardless, I think it's a complete electoral non issue. As I wrote, no one will change their vote depending on a candidates position on birtherism.
LikeLike
Troll- Agreed, it's not a monster. That was a poor choice of words on my part. Scott- I don't think we would return to the 1870s. I chose the phrase child factory workers because that's obviously how the issue would be framed politically. I do think we're creating a bit of a mythical issue here. I don't think there are a lot of 12 year olds pining away to work or that we are wasting human capital by failing to let them do so.
LikeLike
Re: PL. Isn't Greg endorsing Axe going full Dem Wirtschaftlich dolchstoßlegende.Yup. That'll definitely work.{I think there's a Black Swan coming but it's not from the right.}
LikeLike
FWIW, federal child labor laws are not so restrictive that a 12 year old cannot baby sit or referee soccer games, on weekends, anyway.State laws vary. The Federal laws are aimed at not interfering with school.
LikeLike
Wirtschaftlich dolchstoßlegendeTao, I tried to look up a translation for this and struck out………could you let me know what you're saying exactly.McWing, a lot of "in office or running for office" Republicans went "birther" so I don't think the question, when it comes up from media, is really that out of bounds. I never expected Republicans to call out their fellow travelers on the issue, why would they, but I don't think it's correct to say voters will just disregard it. It was a part of the Republican agenda for a couple of years and went pretty mainstream.
LikeLike
Wirtschaftlich: economicDolchstoßlegende: "stab in the back"The 2nd term is from a political playbook with a very, very evil provenance.But hey, it's just Axe and the Chi-boys, what's the harm?{but freakin' Schumer should know better}
LikeLike
As I wrote, I don't think whether or not a Republican repudiates birtherism strongly enough, or embraces it like a drowning man holds onto a life raft, will change anybodies vote. As far as Republicans embracing it, some did. Many have repudiated it, though I don't think the media is likely to accept that repudiation as they and the Democrats keep think that keeping the issue alive serves two purposes. First, their assumption is that it will alienate potential swing voters. And two, they think it will split Republicam voters. There is no other reason to bring the issue up.
LikeLike
The 2nd term is from a political playbook with a very, very evil provenance.Aren't they just Democrats, and not very liberal ones at that? Seriously, they're ready to cut Medicare and Social Security, they've deported or imprisoned more illegals than Bush ever dreamed of, domestic drilling has increased, they've kicked ass in the terror network, etc. etc, and the guy's admitted to being a Blue Dog Dem. Second term with an R House and Senate, looks like more of the same right of center deals to me.
LikeLike
Mark:Glad you have power!Thanks. Lost it briefly this afternoon for about 4 hours…suspect they were fixing a line elsewhere and had to turn it off to do so. Happy to be back in time for the evening though. it was shaping up to be a cold night by the fire.Scott, loosen child labor laws and more kids will be working the fields from TX to CA than are there now and there are too many now.What kind of kids? Illegal aliens?
LikeLike
Mich:Kids that age don't know enough to question adults "asking" them to work overtime or do a little extra to "help out".Their parents generally do.
LikeLike
It confirms an opinion many on the left have of conservatives as both racist and stupid. I think that's another reason.
LikeLike
lms,Axe is accusing the GOP, presumably with the approval of President Obama, of intending to bring down the entire economy of the United States.The 1000plus comments basically agree. Although 700 or so are Bernie calling folks he disagress with encephalitic, and Liam calling people birthers and teabaggers.
LikeLike
Birtherism, I mean.
LikeLike
lms:Why should 12 year olds be paid for volunteer work.Why should a 12 year old only be allowed to do volunteer work? Seems a bit odd to me that a 12 year old can volunteer to ref a soccer game and all's fine, but if the town decides they want to pay them money to do so, the kid is suddenly being taken advantage of. Not just odd, but exactly backwards. My kids all went to work between 15 & 16 during summers and weekends and I personally thought that was plenty early. Do you want what others personally think being imposed on you? Especially if you happen to disagree?I think if parents expect their kids to start earning money at 12 it's probably because they do need the money.It has nothing to do with what parents "expect". It has to do with what kids are allowed to do. Again, if a kid is old enough to "volunteer" to do something, he is old enough to get paid to do it, if someone wants to pay him.
LikeLike
tao:The 1000plus comments basically agree. Although 700 or so are Bernie calling folks he disagress with encephalitic…Heh.
LikeLike
lms:And BTW….I think if parents expect their kids to start earning money at 12 it's probably because they do need the money.Even assuming that is true, who are we to tell them they can't have what they need?
LikeLike
Accusing the opposition of intentionally torpedoing the economy is not new. Limbaugh has done it for years. I think it's kind of silly, myself. Republicans and Democrats are intentionally trying to torpedo the economy by advancing the policies they normally believe in and argue for? Really?
LikeLike
Kevin:I agree. Democrats obviously don"t try to torpedo the economy. It just comes naturally. 😉
LikeLike
Kevin, agreed.And, of course, the right jumped all over Reed, Durbin, Kerry, and others when they stated Iraq was lost.But the Heritage Foundation's subscribers and the TeaParty were not prone to donning Guy Falkes masks and taking it to the streets of Oakland, et.al., mixing it up with cops.
LikeLike
Just stopped by Plumline. OMG. Bernie went off on Mark, but Mark obviously scored a bullseye. And Reagan was a simpleton. Despite his own diaries, and plenty of other data to the contrary.An amazingly repetitive set of grade school exchanges.
LikeLike
The 1000plus comments basically agree. Although 700 or so are Bernie calling folks he disagress with encephalitic, and Liam calling people birthers and teabaggers.One of the reasons I came here and wanted to start a different type of environment was to get away from people like Bernie and Liam. But you're wrong about who's commenting on the Axlerod piece. Only 200+ top comments, the rest are "all comments", which is most certainly people besides Bernie and Liam. When I commented on the quantity (not quality) of comments it was because I hoped maybe they would quit worrying about what we're doing, and focus on their own damn site. To me, since we're heading into an election year, both sides will be going extreme, I was hoping we could focus on solutions or at least not try to impugn the motives of the other side here. I think some of what Axlerod said is accurate and some is just garbage. I also think it'll be interesting to see Obama and team try to claim a populist, we're for the underdog middle class, mantle at this point. IMO neither side really has any good ideas to speed the recovery process other than calling each other "job killers".
LikeLike
Tao: tea party had much more of a backyard BBQ vibe. OWS is more pre- rave. Oakland popo out of line, however. Pulled that with the tea party, there would have been a shoot out.
LikeLike
Democrats obviously don"t try to torpedo the economy. It just comes naturally. 😉Lol, who's watch was the torpedoing on again?Sorry to disagree with you and 12 year olds working, I think it's a goofy idea. It's one thing to go out and put in a few hours of community work and another to be obligated to help support your family at 12. I think the child labor laws are pretty useful for the most part, and it still doesn't mean that kids can't do a little lawn cutting or baby sitting to earn a few buck for a movie or new pair of jeans.
LikeLike
I'm very curious to see how an electoral strategy of "The Republicans have rendered me impotent and also they can even control the economy" fares. Generally it is unwise to make your opponents seem "all powerful." In 1980, The Democrats tried to imply that Reagan could somehow control the Iranians, and it made Carter look worse, a feat I'd of thought impossible up to that point. And wouldn't it then behoove those unemployed and underemployed, to vote Republican, since they have the power to control the economy?
LikeLike
Lmsinca: those are just more of your sides job-killing comments. Job-killing!
LikeLike
See y'all manana…………..
LikeLike
there would have been a shoot out.And that right there is why concealed carry (and civilians carrying in general) scares the bejesus out of me. Guns don't kill people. People kill people.
LikeLike
I just don't think America's team is going to come back in the 4th quarter. That's just me though, I tend towards pessimism.
LikeLike
Michi,I gaurantee that at virtually every gathering of more than 10 Teabaggers, at least two people were armed. No shoot outs. No fear. Heck, at one TeaBagger protest in LA, a union guy (I think it was a union guy, I'll find the link) bit the finger off one of my fellow TeaBaggers and he wasn't shot. The biter, not the bitee.
LikeLike
Here's two links. I included an extra one because Politico is a really dubious source.http://escapetyranny.com/2011/09/05/some-videos-to-remind-you-what-labor-day-is-all-about/http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0909/MoveOn_California_fracas_fingerbiting_regrettable.html
LikeLike
Sadly, McWing, I believe you're right about the Cowboys.Re: guns. Too many close calls here in UT over the past 10 years. Sooner or later a civilian is going to pull the trigger at the wrong time. I don't doubt your take on TP gatherings, we've just been lucky so far.
LikeLike
I respect your professional military opinion, Goose, and I don't and not likely to ever own a gun. And most of the concealed carry people I've known have not been folks I'd personally pick to be packing. That being said, I have no problem with civilians packing, if registered, licensed and trained.
LikeLike
(BTW, have now found out how to stream the NFL for free. Didn't even need to take Mark's suggestion and go to a bar to watch any games this weekend!)
LikeLike
Kevin: too few people ever think about the implication of pulling out a gun, let alone actually pulling the trigger. They think it's like on TV, and it's not.
LikeLike
I have never heard the story of RWR and the sixteen year old virgin. Bernie must have awfully thin skin. He wrote that john/banned took offense to something he wrote about RWR. Was it the 16 y.o. virgin story?FWIW, I am surprised that there were any 16 y.o. virgins in [screen] Hollywood of the late 40s. Or was this a story about a babysitter? Or worse, a relative?What is Bernie posting about?Scott – does it make a difference to you if the child workers are undocs, or green cards, or citizens? What if the parent is an undoc but the 12 y.o. is a citizen? What if the state's compulsory school law is for all of them, regardless? The Amish are serial violators of this federal law, btw. I know that from the cases I must read. What if it is Amish kids in PA and OH?
LikeLike
Mark: where (approx.) was your exchange, time-wise? I did a quick pass and didn't see it, and didn't want to spend the time to sort through 1.2K+ comments to find it. Just curious.Two minute warning. Interesting tidbit about the Eagle's bye week that I heard: they actually spent time watching film of themselves to analyze their tendencies rather than watching film of the Cowboys. Appears to have worked for them!
LikeLike
Michi,Here in Texas, there are a lot of CC's around. It's not the Wild West. In fact, according to the FBI, all violence, including murder and shooting, has dropped dramatically over the years. In this age of coincidence equals causation I can safely say that the drop is a direct effect of concealed carry.
LikeLike
bernielatham7:36 PM CDTRepublicans ought not to be given any mercy on sexual matters after Clinton and Weiner but I really don't care much about this kind of crap and it wouldn't change my vote unless the complaint turned out to be rather serious (demeaning, insensitive) or where the party had previously promoted some related policies (Vitter, prostitutes while playing the family values card) or where the party was being set up as a saint to further ideological mythologies (Reagan at 43 humping a 16 year old virgin).mark_in_austin7:53 PM CDTTell the story about the sixteen year old virgin again.bernielatham7:55 PM CDTWant to come right out and express your full opinion here, mark?RecommendReportbernielatham8:12 PM CDTThis is at least the second time you've taken a swing at me, mark. That's fine. But choosing to just leave it snide isn't.RecommendReportLiam-still8:14 PM CDTBernie, No need to take that tone. You did mention about Reagan and the sixteen year old virgins.RecommendReportbernielatham8:16 PM CDTYes, I did. This is instance 3.
LikeLike
I dunno, McWing; I've seen lots of studies going both ways (too tired on a Sunday night after a good hike this afternoon to bother with links), so I don't find a correlation either way to be compelling. I don't think anyone knows why crime statistics fluctuate the way they do (kind of like economics–everyone's got an opinion and everyone's opinion has a study to back it up).Loads of CC here in UT, also (and I'd be willing to bet that a fair number of your TX permit holders are actually permitted from UT–folks love our lax permitting laws) and we've had lots of close calls like I said. At least one politician lost his job by pulling out his weapon at an inappropriate time and place.Frankly, I prefer Montana's open carry policy. At least that way I know who the dangerous people are. 🙂
LikeLike
Thanks, Mark!
LikeLike
I preferred the old rules in TX, too. You could carry a rifle or shotgun anywhere. You could not carry concealed except to and from work or when traveling. Now, with concealed carry permits, you do not know who is carrying, or where.And yes, I knew an old dude in 1970 who carried his 20 gauge wherever he went.Never harmed a soul, but never got mugged, either.
LikeLike
Michi,I beleive that In Arizona, you can carry/wear any weapon as long as its not concealed and you can also get a CC permit. Again, the modern Arizona is not like the Wild West, except on the border, but that really isn't the fault of CC.
LikeLike
Mark,I guess I just don't see the danger.
LikeLike
Heading off to bed, y'all have a good night!
LikeLike
g'night!
LikeLike
Mark:Sorry for the delay in responding. My cable went out, and hence also my internet access, just after I made my last posting last night. I missed the end of the Eagles/Cowboys game too, although that was apparently worth missing.Anyway, I just assume that if they are undocs, or even citizen kids of undocs, another law (besides immigration laws) telling them they can't work is probably not much of a deterrent. Also, if there is already a law telling them they have to go to school, what's the need for a no-work law that is merely designed to accomplish the same thing?The Amish are actually, I think, a good example of the problem with such laws. They have a particular way of life which gets essentially outlawed, even though that was hardly the point of the law in the first place. re Bernie and his complaint about you making a "snide remark" and leaving it at that…all I can say is wow. If unintended irony were currency, Bernie's posts would be a Treasury printing press. I've said it many time before, but he has a truly stunning lack of self-awareness.
LikeLike
This was an interesting read for me.http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/opinion/sunday/douthat-what-tax-dollars-cant-buy.html?_r=1&wpisrc=nl_wonkI agree with some of it. But it was interesting as a faint echo of Jack Kemp conservatism, the kind that thought government was a problem because it did not work well, but should be made to do so, within a limited context; not because it was THE problem, and should be drowned in the bathtub.
LikeLike
Troll,"Again, the modern Arizona is not like the Wild West, except on the border, but that really isn't the fault of CC"What's the number of accidental deaths and homicides due to legally owned firearms? I don't remember, but don't more people die from slipping in the bathtub, or something like that? BTW, one of the guys I know with a CC that it kind of worries me/creeps me out is a former police officer and former Navy. I'd feel more comfortable with Mark in Austin packing heat than that guy. 😉
LikeLike
BTW, I have no objection re: open carry versus concealed carry. I think open carry might be a little better. Mark: "not because it was THE problem, and should be drowned in the bathtub."I think a lot of those folks would have second thoughts after they actually got it into the bathtub. Perhaps not Norquist, but most politicians, yes. The extremity of the position is due to a sense they are battling out-of-control socialism, and must meet the battle with gusto and a take-no-prisoners attitude. When they propose stuff, like Ryan's Medicare vouchers, they're often talking about stuff that isn't going to reduce government involvement by one iota.
LikeLike
"I have never heard the story of RWR and the sixteen year old virgin. Bernie must have awfully thin skin. He wrote that john/banned took offense to something he wrote about RWR. Was it the 16 y.o. virgin story?"Here is what I saw some days ago, when BL first started pushing the Piper Laurie story. john/banned took exception to the pointless smearing of character, or at least the giving of attention to it, and suggested that it was part of BL's pattern of attacking and trying to drag down RR's reputation. BL took umbrage and denied he had ever attacked Reagan's character — including that very comment. He instead framed it in terms of the importance of the story in undermining the "sanctification" or canonization of Reagan as a moral example … by unprincipled right-wing propagandists, blah blah blah. As in, "See, I'm not attacking Reagan, I'm attacking his idolaters."At least, that's the spin he put on it. I asked what were some examples of this canonization of RR as a moral example that need to be refuted for the good of the republic. (No answers of course.) I also pointed out that RR is dead, and the allegation goes back half a century. BL was not pleased with anyone.But he got very angry with bannedagain for suggesting that BL was smearing RR, which he claimed he has never done, and challenged bannedagain to cite any example of his doing so. When banned said, well, what about this comment itself, BL was indignant (and obviously embarrassed). He denied that it was an attack on RR, and became exasperated that banned didn't accept the distinction.I.e., point out something obvious about a BL comment, such as that it violates his own supposed standards, and incur his lofty wrath. All must unquestionly accept his premises and characterizations — even the silliest ones — or be consigned to the ranks of the "not serious" and "time wasters." All part of why he is amusing but of no serious intellectual interest.And, no, I feel no compunctions about posting this comment. He's a big boy.
LikeLike
Btw, I have been reading right-wing "propaganda" for over 30 years and have no impression of Reagan's being idolized or held up as a personal moral example. There are certain aspects of his character that have been held up to admiration (justifiably), but I can't think of any example of this "moral sanctification" that is supposedly beguiling the country.
LikeLike
Re gun control, John Lott says that crime in Chicago fell after its gun ban was struck down, contrary to warnings that it would soar.
LikeLike
Just threw up a new post on Axelrod's comments. Some people brought it up above so I thought I would give it its own thread.On gun control, I tend to fall on the republican side of things. Legal gun owners, CCWs or otherwise, tend to responsibly use their guns which is to say they generally don't use them. Kevin-"What's the number of accidental deaths and homicides due to legally owned firearms? I don't remember, but don't more people die from slipping in the bathtub, or something like that?"Well, every home and apartment has a bathtub. Not every home or apartment has a gun. So that isn't the least bit surprising. I bet there are a lot more accidental gun deaths in homes where there is a gun than in homes where no gun can be found.
LikeLike
I think McC had a closer sense of what RWR's strengths were and how to emulate them then do any of these Rs. QB, reading all that propaganda must have been hard on your eyesight. But I agree with you – RWR has never been held up as a personal moral example, to my recollection, by conservatives. But what HAS happened is that his name is invoked for any purpose at hand by campaigning Rs. Often it is to support positions that RWR abandoned as POTUS [permanent tax cutting comes to mind]. Again, I do not think conservatives, in my memory, lauded his personal rectitude, and I do think liberals caricature conservatives. Of course, conservatives caricature liberals and all of you caricature moderates!
LikeLike
Aspects of Reagan's character that have been admired by conservatives generally have to do with things like his sense of duty to his public office, his personal graciousness and warmth, his optimism and persistence, his disposition toward making friends rather than enemies, and the like. Conservatives were never terribly happy with his (long past) personal history. This whole meme about the importance of the Piper Laurie story is just a way to say that sex scandals about Republicans are important, but those about Dems aren't. For me, they are relevant when they are relevant, and I have just as much of a problem with guilty Rs as with guilty Ds, which is to say, it depends on the facts.
LikeLike
Reagan and Piper Laurie. If true (and I don't have any particular reason to doubt Piper Laurie, and Reagan would not be unique in that regards, given his profession, then or now). He still oughta be on Mt. Rushmore. 😉
LikeLike
"I bet there are a lot more accidental gun deaths in homes where there is a gun than in homes where no gun can be found."Certainly more gun-related spousal homicide. As I noted before, I don't own a gun. It's my position that it's unwise to give your spouse the temptation.
LikeLike
"Re gun control, John Lott says that crime in Chicago fell after its gun ban was struck down, contrary to warnings that it would soar."Isn't it the case that changes in gun control laws rarely have an significant immediate impact (that is, at least within the first few years) on gun crime? Of course, most gun crime is committed with weapons that were not purchased legally, anyway. And the crime itself is clearly illegal, so one can assume criminals don't pay much attention to gun control laws. 😉
LikeLike
Kevin-I know you are a freakonomics fan and if you heard their podcast on the fall of crime you might hypothesize that the drop in crime in Chicago is related to the poor economy as much as anything else.
LikeLike
"accidental gun deaths in homes"not to be too pedantic, but is it accident if negligence is responsible for the shooting? It's a big difference in my opinion. you have to break every one of the gun safety rules for someone to get hurt/killed by "accident." You can break 3 of the 4 safety rules and still not have an accident. it's when you break them all you get into trouble.
LikeLike
I suppose it depends on the accident, NoVA. Folks who get shot cleaning their weapons or by examining or playing with a loaded, unlocked weapon are the types of folks who set themselves on fire by attempting to pour gasoline into the carburetor of a running car, or . . . well, take your pick of Darwin award winners. I know I've hurt myself with power tools (and non-power tools) on more than a few occasions, and at no time was the problem that I owned a hammer, a radial saw, or a wood clamp. Every single time it was me being a dumbass.
LikeLike
"I know you are a freakonomics fan and if you heard their podcast on the fall of crime you might hypothesize that the drop in crime in Chicago is related to the poor economy as much as anything else."Indeed. I know nationally we have higher incarceration rates: is that true in Chicago, specifically? Folks in jail cannot be out committing crimes, by definition.
LikeLike
"Folks who get shot cleaning their weapons or by examining or playing with a loaded, unlocked weapon"I think the data are skewed by including such incidents in "accidental" shootings, which to me means mechanical failure. The gun discharged due to something other than human error. i recall fighting with an editor over this.
LikeLike