Comments: Our "Woefully Inadequate Grasp Of History"

It's always the Left's fault...after all, it has been all downhill since the Socialists voted war credits to the Kaiser.

Posted by bobbyp at November 11, 2008 09:15 AM

New York Magazine was founded by CIA man Clay Felker (partner in crime with Gloria Steinem at the Helsinki International Student Festival). At its foundation it, like Ms., was a CIA propaganda rag. Our international police not only kill political leaders and supply us with their own people to run things, they also provide us with lifestyle reading material.

(Did you know that Robert Gates wasn't a registered Republican?)

Just saying.

Posted by Bob In Pacifica at November 11, 2008 09:15 AM

Yes, of course they don't walk the walk, but how dare they talk the talk? It's unnerving.

Posted by abb1 at November 11, 2008 09:27 AM

Newt had Ken Starr Obama needs a Robespierre

Posted by par4 at November 11, 2008 11:12 AM

You can't ignore or bypass the "lobbyist establishment." It is the mind, likely the heart and soul too, of Washington. It is the glue of gummiment.
So there seem two choices:
1. Get an armored division and do a Warsaw Ghetto job on K Street. Very messy, bloody, with lots of collateral damage.
2. Move the federal government to Iowa City. Require entry visas for anyone from DC seeking to live or work there. Deny visas to all members of the "lobbyist establishment.
Otherwise, keep on wailing forever about money and corruption ruling Washington.

Posted by donescobar at November 11, 2008 12:41 PM

donescobar: Might I suggest Jacksonhole Wyoming on point 2? That WE could ALL save money on Dicks commute.

Posted by Mike Meyer at November 11, 2008 01:22 PM

Could be " That way WE---" and also hard to determine if "Dicks" should be singular or plural possession. (seeing how it is Washington WE're talking about)

Posted by Mike Meyer at November 11, 2008 01:40 PM

Those remember history are condemned to know it.

Posted by bobbyp at November 11, 2008 01:44 PM

It's interesting. Normally this sort of thing deeply annoys and saddens me but considering what I read yesterday I can only say, well at least he isn't advocating for the environmental homicide of the Third World.

Posted by Mark at November 11, 2008 02:05 PM

And let's not forget this:

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/10/09/business/09greenspan.inlin3.ready.html

Posted by me at November 11, 2008 03:33 PM

He was also involved in the deregulation at the root of the recent collapse of the housing loan derivatives market (might not have quite the right name for it) triggered by sub-prime lending (by institutions not covered by the act making low-income borrowing easier that was passed in 1977, I should add).

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/09/business/economy/09greenspan.html?pagewanted=3&_r=1

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/14/AR2008101403343_2.html?nav=rss_world&sid=ST2008101403344&s_pos=

Posted by me at November 11, 2008 03:44 PM

you could get rid of the lobbyists but it would require a few new laws (like blind donations in which the candidate never knows who gave them money and much shorter campaign season) and probably a constitutional amendment clarifying that corporations do not have rights under the constitution. and since laws are required the lobbyists that usually write the laws for Congress would either not participate or would put in some loopholes.

Posted by BillCinSD at November 11, 2008 04:00 PM

...blind donations...

You've gotta be kidding. Their wives, brothers, sisters, children, grand-children, and pet iguanas are on corporate payrolls with $250K/yr no-show jobs. They openly negotiate for CEO jobs for themselves, like that Billy Tauzin guy. Donations...

Posted by abb1 at November 11, 2008 04:41 PM

That's pretty good Cemmcs.

But uh, did nobody else notice that just yesterday the Obama crew promised to rescue three of the most reactionary, scientifically illiterate, destructive political forces in the country from bankruptcies of their own reactionary, scientifically illiterate, destructive making?


Posted by buermann at November 11, 2008 04:49 PM

I'm amused by the idea that Obama has never had a "sister souljah moment." Maybe the bar is now set based on how many you have per week, & occasionally Obama went 3 or 4, or even 5 days without one.

Posted by tiffa at November 11, 2008 05:18 PM

Nicely done, Jon. I just came from recounting in a comment thread the late-seventies wave of rewriting immediate past history (and how it laid the groundwork for Reagan's Morning in America schtick), and here you are delineating how the rewriting is done in real time.

The Lloyd Bentsen line made me laugh out loud.

Posted by Nell at November 11, 2008 10:36 PM