Happy Anniversary, ATiM

Posted on September 13, 2012 by ScottC

Today is ATiM’s first anniversary, and I think a hearty congratulations are in order, both for the site and for everyone involved in making it the success it has become.

Success, of course, was (and, if we are honest, remains) not assured. Bringing together strong personalities with passionate opinions from as wide a range of ideologies and perspectives as we have here to discuss political issues was always a risky prospect. And while many blogs survive and thrive on the combustible energy and oftentimes unpleasant atmosphere created by such a diverse mix of opinions, from the beginning All Things in Moderation was, as the name implies, intended to be something different. As I wrote in What ATiM is All About, “we created ATiM as a place where political discussion and debate can take place in the absence of the kind of unproductive vitriol that has come to characterize much of blog commentary these days.”

Naturally, we’ve (and especially I’ve) not always succeeded. We lost a few early invitees almost immediately, and a couple more along the way. We’ve had our share of sharp and pissed off exchanges, and a couple of times it seemed, to me at least, like the whole enterprise was going to collapse. But here we still are, going strong, and a lot more positive than negative to show for it.

On a personal level, I truly appreciate ATiM. I have long been a political blog junkie and have been posting on comment boards since I first discovered them over 15 years ago. I’ve jumped from place to place, and had spent the two years prior to ATiM’s inception posting at Greg Sargent’s Plum Line. It had become an extremely unpleasant place to be, but I hung around primarily because of some of the relationships I had developed while there, notably with QB, McWing, and lms. ATiM has allowed me to maintain those relationships, and develop others I never would have, outside of the cesspool that is the Plum Line. I know many of you still participate there, but I for one am thankful that I have no more reason to visit there anymore.

I want to send out a couple of personal thank you’s on this first anniversary. First, to Brent, who’s Morning Report has been crucial to ATiM’s continued existence. I truly believe that without his daily efforts ATiM probably would have died more than once over the last year. He is the unsung hero of ATiM. Also to Mark and Kevin for their efforts at getting ATiM started, Mark behind the scenes recruiting and Kevin for being the technical genius at actually creating the site itself. (I also miss Kevin’s daily Bits n Pieces). And finally, a big thanks to lms. She was the catalyst that got ATiM off the ground. If I am not mistaken, lms and I were debating each other at the Plum Line for longer than anyone else here (except for possibly QB), and given the tone of some of those debates (one early one resulted in lms literally telling me she hated me), she could easily have chosen to leave me out. But she didn’t and for that I am eternally grateful. Here’s to hoping for a lot more debates in the future, lms.

Happy anniversary, ATiM.

ScottC

(Please feel free to add your own anniversary thoughts to the bottom of this post, if you don’t want to make your own new post.)

Filed under: administrative, Birthdays, lmsinca's folly | 23 Comments »

For Marks Eyes Only

Posted on December 3, 2011 by lmsinca

Just kidding.  But I did come across a piece this morning that made Marks avatar, with his curly white hair, immediately jump out at me.  I’ll either have to vote for a Republican Presidential candidate for the first time in 40 years or “flip flop” on a comment if this happens.  I don’t know if I can really vote for someone so conservative or not, but if Huntsman will really take on the TBTF banks and promise to choose Simon Johnson as his Secretary of the Treasury (see what I did there), I’d at least be open to the idea, all bravado aside.

I’m not sure which statement stands out the most — Michele Bachmann’s assertion that the American Civil Liberties Union runs the Central Intelligence Agency; Cain trying to name the president of “Ubeki-beki-beki-beki-stan-stan”; Gingrich claiming that a luxury cruise around the Aegean gave him experience to deal with Greece’s foreign debt crisis; Rick Santorum stating that he wants to go to war with China; or Mitt Romney asserting that if Barack Obama is re-elected, “Iran will have a nuclear weapon,” but if Romney is elected, “They will not have a nuclear weapon.” My favorite is Bachmann (again) telling an Iowa crowd that if she is elected, she will close the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. Only one problem: the U.S. hasn’t had an embassy in Iran since 1980, when 52 Americans were held hostage for 444 days — something you would expect Bachmann, a member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence, to know. 

There’s plenty of entertainment in this crowd and most of the conservatives I have respect for are willing to admit that Republicans are struggling to find that electable candidate.  Even some of our conservatives here are predicting an Obama win, regardless of almost 9% unemployment and a 43% approval rating, when they consider the alternatives.  There’s speculation now that even Newt Gingrich could beat Romney in the primaries, hard to believe, but there it is.

When you also consider Romney’s close connections to Wall Street at a time when left and right alike are ready to storm the castle, it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to imagine Romney winning states like Michigan. Ohio might have been feasible had he not full-throatedly flip-flopped to support the anti-collective bargaining referendum, which Ohio voters rejected by a nearly two-to-one margin. And with Romney suggesting we let the housing market hit bottom as a solution to the housing crisis, it’s hard to imagine victory in places like Nevada, where more than 1 in 10 families with children have lost their homes.

So, what’s the answer? I believe it is staring Republicans in the face: Jon Huntsman. He’s not just the most experienced candidate — he’s also the most electable Republican.

Huntsman has been dismissed from the start — largely because he worked for “the enemy,” as Obama’s first ambassador to China. Yet Huntsman is no less a conservative than Mitt Romney. He is pro-life, pro-business, and deeply religious; he even favors Congressman Paul Ryan’s budget plan. He still holds that global warming is real, a position Romney has retracted.

Unlike Romney, however, Huntsman has the chops to be president. An ambassador three times over, a wildly popular two-time governor who cut taxes while creating jobs, and a global businessman, Huntsman is the only one standing who can negotiate with the Chinese. As Joe Klein recently observed, his ideas are resolutely conservative, and his economic vision “is the closest any candidate has come to diagnosing the real problems at the heart of the Great Recession — and proposing a reasonable path forward.” 

Some of this stuff truly bothers me about Huntsman, Ryan’s budget plan, really?  I just don’t know if I can go there.  And I don’t have a lot of faith in campaign promises.  I’ve been at this game long enough to know that even the best intentions run up against the reality show.
  
He is the kind of candidate independent voters fawn over. His quirks — he rides Harleys, played in a rock band, speaks Mandarin, and dropped out of high school before earning his general equivalency degree — helped him get re-elected governor in Utah in 2008 with a 58-point margin of victory, even as Republicans fell around him. Were he to win the nomination, he would be difficult for the president to attack. After all, if President Obama thought Huntsman unqualified, would he really have appointed him to the most important ambassadorship in the world?  

Jeeze, he’s more like Sarah Palin than Sarah Palin is.  Harleys and a GED.  But he’s apparently smart enough to pick up Mandarin and serve out two terms as Governor of Utah.  Michi, help he out here.

Here you go Mark, a little hope for the Holidays.  Please don’t hold me to my previous comments though.


This same time last election, John McCain was trailing badly in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. He even took out a personal loan just to keep his campaign afloat. And yet, when Mitt Romney lost the Iowa caucus to a candidate who wasn’t really a national contender, the opening for McCain became clear, he won New Hampshire, and eventually the nomination.

It is not hard to imagine the same Mitt Romney losing to the same kind of far-right candidate in Iowa a month from now, giving Huntsman the window he’ll need. It may not seem like it now: but my prediction is that Romney will lose in Iowa, Huntsman will win in New Hampshire and eventually be the Republican nominee for President.

*****The comments above are not meant to be a political endorsement*****

Filed under: lmsinca's folly, TBTF Banks | Tagged: , | 28 Comments »