A reader has trouble reconciling the numbers reported in various news stories. “Something,” the reader says, “doesn’t add up.” The problem, I think, could be in the data sources and the news stories themselves.
It has always bugged me that the Obama campaign reported raising enormous, unprecedented sums of money from small donors. According this study, Obama’s campaign reports that about 3 million people gave to his campaign, and about 2.5 million gave less than $200. This number sounds about right (I have a better estimate below) given than he raised about $335 million from under-$200s according to the FEC, meaning the average donation was $134. That sounds plausible.
However, I read on an Instapundit link to this story that he sent out emails to 13 million people asking them to sign a pledge in support of his budget, and got back 114,000 pledges.
Now, based upon FEC data, John McCain probably had about 650,000 individual donors, while Obama probably had about 2,850,000 – a difference of 2.2 million donors. But 2 million of that difference was in the under-$200s, or about 90% of the difference. And a huge number of these small donors gave through the internet, so they’re presumable savvy enough to fill out an e-commerce form.
So here’s the rub. My gut tells me that there is no way Obama had this many legitimate small donors. I can’t quantify this – no one can since Obama has not released any data on the under-$200s. But we’ve been told that there was a huge surge of small donors, motivated for change.
The thing is that, intuitively, it should be harder to get someone to give you money than sign a pledge form. And, presumably, if you gave Obama money, you are motivated to help him. Moreover, you have to assume the 2.85 million donors were included on the 13 million-person list.
Now let’s just ignore the other 10.15 million people on the list. If someone donated to Obama’s campaign, and they get an email asking them to sign a simple pledge, wouldn’t you expect a pretty high response rate? But 114,000 of 2.85 million is 4%. This seems really low. Only 1 out of every 25 donors signed the pledge (and this assumes none of the other 10.15 million signed – the more that did, the higher this ratio goes).
This super-low response from his most ardent fans is consistent with the hypothesis that Obama didn’t really have that many small donors, but rather was taking in large amounts of money from phantom donors through the “hole” in his credit card processing form. If these people really existed, you’d expect more response from them on the budget pledge. But the scanty response raises serious red flags on how much of his money was legit.
Essentially the problem is this: why could Obama persuade nearly 3 million people to send him campaign contributions yet be unable to convince any more than 114,000 to send him back a pledge? The reader says this means he got only one out of 25 donors to signify support for the budget. (The 1:25 is the ratio between 114,000:2,850,000.) The reader argues that the two statistics are unlikely to come from the same sample and conjectures that Obama really didn’t have that many small supporters, just more big supporters who sailed through some kind of loophole.
The reader may be right, but there’s a second possibility, one I will call the “Japanese Marine’s Watch” problem. When I was a child, many of the older people told me how during the Battle of Manila, the Imperial Japanese Marines went on an orgy of looting and roamed the battlefield with half a dozen watches strapped to each arm. Watches were then very valuable objects and prized for loot. But they had to be wound up in those days and were much more fragile than the waterproof, shockproof, no moving parts timepieces that we know today. In consequence the average Imperial Japanese Marine finished up with 10 or more watches all displaying different times, some being wound and others running down; some running slow and others running fast. It was then very common to say, “if you have too many watches, like a Japanese Marine, then you won’t know the time”.
The analogous problem here is which of the numbers reported by the newspapers to believe. Which watch is telling the correct time? The alternative hypothesis to asserting that the number of Obama campaign contributors is inflated is that the newspapers simply reported wildly inaccurate or incomparable numbers. Perhaps most of the mailers to 13 million people wound up in the junk mail bin whereas during the elections they more motivated to act and more efficiently harvested by a superior outreach system. So we really are looking at two different yields on an identical physical base whose virtual size differs because of differences in marketing techniques. Or maybe the numbers are so fudged we are really pulling numbers out of the air. For comparison consider the Lancet’s survey of the civilian casualties in Iraq. According to the prestigious British medical jounral, 654,965 excess deaths were related to the war, or 2.5% of the population, through the end of June 2006. To put that number in perspective, the Lancet had accused the US war effort of killing about three times as many as the combined deaths at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 between the years 2003 and 2006. You would think it would be possible to find more than a half a million extra dead. But controversy dogged it from the beginning. The study has become something of an embarassment to the journal. Wikipedia writes:
The Lancet surveys are controversial due to their methodology and because their mortality figures are higher than other reports that used different methodologies, including those of the Iraq Body Count project, the Iraqi Health Ministry and the United Nations, as well as other household surveys such as the Iraq Living Conditions Survey and the Iraq Family Health Survey. On the other hand the ORB survey of Iraq War casualties estimated more deaths than the Lancet survey. Out of all the Iraqi casualty surveys so far, only the Lancet surveys and the Iraq Family Health Survey were peer-reviewed. The Lancet surveys have triggered criticism and disbelief from some journalists, governments, the Iraq Body Count project, some epidemiologists and statisticians and others, but have also been supported by some journalists, governments, epidemiologists and statisticians.
In particular the Lancet survey attributed a whopping 13% of deaths to air strikes — nearly the number of dead in Hiroshima. At the time I wondered how those huge numbers could be reconciled with the very low tonnage of bombs dropped in the theater and the absence — you can crank up Google Earth — of craters. Where are the craters? I asked myself. In some sense the reader is asking himself the same question: if Obama had nearly three million supporters, how come he can’t get more than 118,000 to sign his pledge? It’s one of those questions that turns out to have no good answers when you try to reconcile one set of figures to another. How many “small supporters” did Barack Obama really have or were they inflated? I don’t know and I doubt the numbers will ever add up any better than the time told by the watches of the dead. Maybe it really is better to pick one book of fiction and believe it.
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
135 Comments
1. Aether:To summarize, the readers question is “How many actual persons contributed monies to Obama’s campaign?”
My question is “How many actual persons VOTED for Obama?”
Perhaps ACORN has the answer to both questions.
Apr 3, 2009 - 4:35 am 2. Jim in Virginia:When Obama’s approval rating hits 40%, the MSM will decide this is an interesting story and some enterprising reporter will do a little research. It might even win a Pulitzer.
Apr 3, 2009 - 4:41 am 3. wretchard:Hey, I can dream, can’t I?
What is truth? The AP reports that another report that may not turn out to be so factual.
They say that the news is the “first draft of history”. But sometimes it only get copy edited when someone spots the typo.
Apr 3, 2009 - 5:04 am 4. Boonton:The thing is that, intuitively, it should be harder to get someone to give you money than sign a pledge form. And, presumably, if you gave Obama money, you are motivated to help him. Moreover, you have to assume the 2.85 million donors were included on the 13 million-person list.
Errr, the campaign dragged on for over a year whereas the 13 million person email blast was a single marketing event! Duh.
We could also factor into the mix the fact that the election was somewhat dramatic where the outcome, at least for a little while, could be in doubt. With a Democratic majority in Congress & 95% of his term yet to go many Obama supporters probably feel comfortable turning their attention to other things.
If someone donated to Obama’s campaign, and they get an email asking them to sign a simple pledge, wouldn’t you expect a pretty high response rate? But 114,000 of 2.85 million is 4%
Getting even a 1% response rate (response meaning that the person opens the email and clicks a link, not that they put their credit card in or sign anything) from mass email is usually pretty good. Even when people opt into receiving email offers they tend to hit the delete button quite often.
Apr 3, 2009 - 5:36 am 5. RWE:Some years back I heard an interesting item on the radio.
A noted feminist, an actress, said in a speech that 100,000 women in the U.S. die of eating disorders each year. Now, that sounds like a big number, but consider that is TWICE the number of people killed in traffic accidents in a single year. If the number were true we should not be able to go to the mailbox without tripping over an expiring bulimic.
They tracked down where she got that number. She got it from someone else who had used it in a newspaper article. They had got it from a news release that said that 100,0000 women in the US SUFFERED from eating disorder. Needless to say, not all of them died from it. And that number turned out to be total, for all eternity since the Big Bang, not in a single year. And who released that number? The National Association Of Women With Eating Disorders or some such. The actual number of woman who die from eating disorders in the USA in a single year is something like 12.
Back in the 80’s the homeless activist Mitch Snyder, darling of the press, was asked how many homeless there were. He gave a number in the millions. Reporters took that number and ran with it. Later, asked where he got the number he complained about “Western man’s obsession with precision.” Translation: he got it from his rectal database.
Apr 3, 2009 - 5:39 am 6. rab:Figures coming from the Obama camp (13 million and 114,000) are bandied about as though they come from a
truthful source. They have shown themselves to be deceitful. Turbo Tax Tim and Ballerina Rahm are just two of a large cast of shady characters.
Ronald Reagan said “Trust but verify”. This doesn’t work with Obama. Does anyone think the 2010 census will be a faithful attempt to accurately count the population?
Apr 3, 2009 - 5:43 am 7. wretchard:I’ve been thinking about a more basic problem. How do we know how much of what we’re told is the truth? Some things are verifiable against collateral sources. “Fair weather today.” Look out the window. “The prices of gasoline have fallen.” Go to the gas station. But a lot of facts today get their authenticity from the fact they’ve been widely reported. “I saw it on TV”. “I read it on the Internet.” For many people — maybe even most — that’s enough. But consider the following propositions: “the world is facing global catastrophe due to Global Warming”; “the War in Iraq made us less safe”; “missile defense sytems are unproven”; “we need stimulus to save the economy”. True or false? Every single one of those propositions is contested. I don’t know the truth value of any of them for a fact, one way or the other. There is no easy way to check, yet we make the biggest ticket decisions based on … what exactly?
It’s a helluva way to run a railroad.
Apr 3, 2009 - 5:55 am 8. markb:JimInVA #2
When Obama’s approval rating hits 40%, the MSM will decide this is an interesting story…
——————————————
When congresses approval rate went below 20%, it should have been an interesting story.
Apr 3, 2009 - 6:03 am 9. Glenmore:If it doesn’t make sense, you probably don’t have the whole story.
Apr 3, 2009 - 6:18 am 10. wretchard:The LA Times reports on The return of Ward Churchill.
So what was the furor about AIG about? They were paid bonuses after language specifically allowing it was inserted into the bill at the insistence of the Treasury Secretary, some say at the insistence of the White House, but in any case with the signature of the President. And Barney Frank threatens to haul them all before the committee. But Ward Churchill gets his job back, plus a million dollars in damages. There are Howling Mobs and there are Howling Mobs.
I think the real lesson here is not whether or not it is right to be shameless, you can argue that both the AIG execs and Wardo were shameless, but that it pays to persist in shamelessness. Keep the wheel squeaking and the grease will sooner or later be forthcoming.
Apr 3, 2009 - 6:22 am 11. Neil Craig:Presumably one option would be for some lawyer’s office to put 1 million payments of $10 on their credit card & nobody in Obama’s team to have noticed.
Apr 3, 2009 - 6:28 am 12. Boonton:Actually the only thing that doesn’t make sense is getting a 4% response rate on direct email. Even if those email addresses are committed double opt in people. I suspect, though, that the pledge was open to anyone….not just people who received emails so some of the signatures came from those landing on it from the web, word of mouth etc.
In terms of plausibility, it is totally believable. He got 69 million votes in the popular election. Why wouldn’t it be plausible that over a year’s worth of marketing would produce over 2 million small donars?
Go back and look at the figure of 114,000. That’s for a single event in one month. Over a year that would translate into 1.368million. That’s in a relatively quiet non-election period. Now granted getting 114K ’signatures’ is not as hard as getting 114K people to open up their wallets, you still have to consider that a hot election season would have many more events, much more excitement and a lot more energy dedicated to fund raising and networking.
Apr 3, 2009 - 6:30 am 13. joe buzz:Another fib about the source of money…this time from Biden:
“Biden brags about stimulus at fire station”
But most of the money for the Pikeville station was secured under President Bush last year.
By Mark Johnson
mjohnson@charlotteobserver.com
Posted: Thursday, Apr. 02, 2009
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/local/story/637747.html
hat tip Kinshasa on the Potomac
Apr 3, 2009 - 6:34 am 14. zhombre:http://kotp.blogspot.com
In Chicago politics, where Obama & crew got started, all things are possible. If the dead can vote, why are you concerned about phantom donors?
Apr 3, 2009 - 6:54 am 15. wildiris:Obama’s campaign “claims” that the donations came in small enough sizes so that they were not required to report their sources. But is this claim a verifiable fact to start with? If not, then the whole of wretchard’s analysis above becomes a fruitless effort. I would be very appreciative to know if anyone here has independent sources to validate this claim?
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:04 am 16. TigerFan:Having fielded many internet surveys I too find the 114,000 number quite low. Typically for an opt-in list I will have responses in the 10% to 12% range for any given survey. Mind you the types of surveys I conduct are for financial institutions dealing with satisfaction with bank products, not exactly a subject that invites a response. Even with this we will see a 10% response rate over a 3 to 4 day period. Typically if someone doesn’t respond by then they won’t no matter how many reminder emails you send to them.
What is puzzling about the low response rate is that all they were asking for is a pledge to support Obama’s position. They weren’t asking for money or to fill out some long satisfaction survey. They were asked to pledge support for a person that they have already supposedly given money to. Why wouldn’t more people do it? I’m not buying the argument about leaving the window open longer will result in more responses. It just doesn’t happen that way.
Obama’s campaign quite simply found a great way around campaign financing. It provided them with a lot of money, they were able to conceal their large donors and they were able to advertise without any media prying that all these new people donated money to their campaign.
Have your big backer buy $100,000 in gift cards in $200 increments. Go to Survey Sampling and buy a listed sample. Heck they can even get names by demographic segments if they wanted to. It only costs about .06 per record. Enter in the 500 gift cards and attach the names you get from Survey Sampling to the credit card numbers and let it fly. No one from the FCC is ever going to call these people ask if they actually donated the money.
The Obama campaign can claim this wonderful internet recruitment system and there is no way to check it. Heck they would be foolish to put in fake names. Just use real ones, no one can ever verify it.
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:17 am 17. Benj:More “Who Sent Him” flailing from Wretch…
I’m guessing I don’t have to convince folks at the Club that I’m a fairly strong Obama supporter – I gave 3 tiny (less than $50!) contributions to the O campaign. He’s the ONLY presidential candidate I’ve ever ante-ed up for. I’m on OBama’s email list – Not too many communications lately – Much more frequent – and in staggered bunches durign the campaign. I recall something a few weeks ago about hosting parties relating to (I think) the stimulus package. And there was somethign re the budget a few days back. I definitely didn’t focus enougth to see/sign the pledge. My unresponsiveness is indicative (I think) of relative levels of urgency that characterize American politics. I’m probably a little more engaged than most folks by the daily grind of DC back and forthing. Still, llike many folks my, ah, focus was much more intense during the election season…
But go ahead Wretch – keep on telling yourself OBama didn’t actually mobilize an amazing # of people who had previously been unengaged by American presidential politics. Anyone elso who’s interested in the real deal – as opposed to an ideologue’s conspiracy-mongering – check this account by Lawrence Goodwyn (America’a great historican of social movements) of how it went down in North Carolina. – http://www.firstofthemonth.org/archives/2009/01/i_had_studied_s.html
Wish there were similar accounts from all the battleground states. But you’ll get the idea…
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:24 am 18. RWE:Wretchard #7:
Read an article the other day by Ollie North. He deconstructed Obama’s speech from 24 Feb 09, the one on the budget.
“We import more oil today than ever before.” In reality US oil imports have declined from their peak in 2005.
Obama said that failure to pass the Porkulous Act would have produced weak economic growth for years. The Congressional Budget Office says that the Act will cause lower long term economic growth, not more.
Obama said that loans are required for us to buy almost anything. I have not taken out a loan in 16 years. It was thinking you needed a loan for everything that caused this mess.
Obama said that even during the Civil War we built a national coast to coast railroad. In reality the transcontinental RR started 30 years before the Civil War, was not completed until 4 years after the war ended, and was a private venture.
Obama said that the U.S invented the automobile and thus must support our industry. In reality the first car was built by a Frenchman and the first patent for a car went to a German.
And there are more.
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:26 am 19. always right:Well, can’t the Obama camp fudge the number on the e-pledge a week later? I expect the response rate would jump wildly.
Plus the Project Combing Neighborhood will come up with another few millions (via ACORN methodology).
Everything to fit the narrative…
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:39 am 20. Herb:Nobody in the press or anywhere else asks questions. 90% of the guns in Mexico come from the US. Automatic weapons, RPG’s? Not from Fred’s Bait and Gun. Somebody asked and found out that it was 90% of the traceable guns. The rest from the usual bazaar in South America, China and Ru.
We are just before adding a huge financial element to the society with “cap and trade” in response to the Global Warming scam. Nobody asked any questions about the data. What was the baseline? How valid was it? What was the expected error? Please provide some simple statistical characteristics of the estimate (SD, COV, number of points, etc.)? By the time it gets around to action its too late.
Its not that nobody cares its just too hard. “I cant figure it out” We elected these people to know. Just like we have cops to keep us safe. We’re out of ‘know’ and ’safe’ and money and the tank is empty and the pump burned out.
I expect only the strong to survive.
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:41 am 21. The Old Guy:wretchard @7:
I’ve been thinking about a more basic problem. How do we know how much of what we’re told is the truth?
About 30 years ago I stopped watching local TV; the S/N ratio was vanishingly low and the value of the information in the signal was too low to justify the time spent to acquire it.
About 25 years ago I stopped watching CBS,NCB,ABC national news; the S/N ratio was not good, but the main problem was that the signal (1) poorly sampled reality, and (2)was then distorted (we say slanted now). CNN was better for a while …
About 7 or 8 years ago, I realized that an AP byline meant the signal was often maskirovka – intentionaly distorted or just made up out of whole cloth. And that this appears to be not just an accasional lapse, but systematic. AP now means propaganda to me.
I now expect incompetence (accidental injection of noise) plus active misrepresentation (biased sampling plus intentional injection of noise and intentional signal distortion) from most of the media. I automatically put a very low confidence weight on anything from the MSM.
Its an interesting situation vis-a-vis your question above. How does one get a reasonable picture of reality?
Its one of the reasons I read this site. I don’t know of a good way to counter the sampling problem, but The Belmont Club (and other internet sources) combine into sort of a neural network that provides the best signal detectors I know of.
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:43 am 22. bob:I’m with Old Guy, maybe even a little further down the trail. For print media, I’m nearly down to the monthly news bulletin from my church.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:10 am 23. Boonton:Having fielded many internet surveys I too find the 114,000 number quite low. Typically for an opt-in list I will have responses in the 10% to 12% range for any given survey.
You must be very well compensated if you can consistently generate such good response levels. Back in 2001, according to http://www.1to1media.com/View.aspx?DocID=20461, a CTR (click-through-rate) of 2.74% for an opt-in email list was considered pretty good. Our inboxes get a lot more spam now than in 2001 so I’d be surprised if the typical click through rate on email blasts has tripled since then.
According to http://kickstartall.com/blog/?p=26 in 2009 a survery of marketers reported an average response rate for ‘lead generation campaigns’ of between 3.2% up to 5% ‘with personalization’. I imagine to sign the pledge the receiver of the email had to click a link and maybe click something on the site or fill out a form. This would, I suspect, be roughly equal to a click through rate. Click throughs, though, are the highest number. Even if no purchase is involved, people will drop out before completing whatever you want them to do (survey, fill out a form, etc.).
Of course, this is also assuming a totally professional job. If the email was poorly crafted, if the site was not well done, if the form maybe hung up browsers for a while it wouldn’t be surprising to do a lot worse with a 13 million opt-in email list. The 2009 survey consisted of marketers whose living depends on driving sales from their efforts. Simply collecting names on a petition or something like that does not have the same type of urgency.
Have your big backer buy $100,000 in gift cards in $200 increments. Go to Survey Sampling and buy a listed sample. Heck they can even get names by demographic segments if they wanted to.
Ohhh sure, it could be done. On the other hand Obama had lots of voters, lots of youth voters, and a very good presence on the net, social networking sites etc. It would be very surprising if he didn’t get lots of small donations.
The Obama campaign can claim this wonderful internet recruitment system and there is no way to check it. Heck they would be foolish to put in fake names. Just use real ones, no one can ever verify it.
69 million votes goes a long way to verifying it. Unless you’re going to tell us that was ten homeless guys ACORN got to vote 3 million times.
As a practical matter no you can’t verify it little more than you can verify 4 out of 5 dentists say Crest is great toothpaste.
RWE
Obama said that the U.S invented the automobile and thus must support our industry. In reality the first car was built by a Frenchman and the first patent for a car went to a German.
Wow, that’s really important. That changes everything. Amazing.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:13 am 24. Lifeofthemind:Many bad things in the Obama administration are emanations from the Clinton years. Remember Wen Ho Lee and the Bundlers? The millions of phantom small donors that donated via the unsecured web system to Obama’s campaign were a refinement on that. No need to send Al Gore to a Buddhist Temple, just set up Hamas operatives in Gaza with a PC and a list of stolen credit card numbers.
wretchard is correct with a proposed refinement.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:19 am 25. Jamie Irons:Rumsfeld’s Razor
The problem is no longer Rumdfeld’s “Unknown unknowns” but the deliberate desire to create a wilderness of mirrors to prevent the reflective study of issues needed for the citizenry to give informed consent. Journalism becomes replaced by melodrama or conspiracy mongering that creates an atmosphere of helpless paranoia. That reduces the electoral process at best to an emotional referendum.
It’s very hard for me to accurately quantify all the value I derive from reading this site, both from wretchard himself and from the comments — it’s something on the order of “a huge amount”
— but every now and then a really striking and memorable idea, courtesy of our host, vividly captures or illustrates at least the Platonic idea of that value.
Such an instance is “The Japanese Marine’s Watch Problem.”
Jamie Irons
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:28 am 26. buckets:As much as I would agree the evidence supports Obama’s encouraging donation fraud and the flouting of federal law, these statistics aren’t really proof.
Let’s not go down this road: that way lies the Daily Kos and damnation!
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:38 am 27. joe buzz:I submitted a comment at 6:43 with a couple links to Biden arithmetic news and it is still awaiting moderation.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:41 am 28. Habu:here is part of it to determine if the links are holding it up:
“Biden brags about stimulus at fire station”
But most of the money for the Pikeville station was secured under President Bush last year.
By Mark Johnson
Wretchard in his #7 put his finger on it. One has to measure what they see in pictures and read in papers with their lifes experiences. Many,many times they do not coincide.
This is not pretention but I have had experiences beyond what the average citizen has or will ever experience. CIA operative for 14 years in the 1970’s and 1980’s. I’ve been involved in many operations. USMC and SE ASIA prior to the CIA. IBM huckster in Beverly Hills ,CA, Wall Street broker for Lehman Brothers ,Smith Barney and Merrill Lynch. Been on every continent on the globe. Lived in foreign countries. Dined with ambassadors,SecStatesthe DCI, and shared a sandwich with Edward Teller. At this moment in time I would say we, as a nation ,are in great and perhaps irreversible peril. I for one will not go gently into the night.
This is all after attending 18 diffferent schools and living in 22 different places before I matriculated to the University of Florida. Such is the life of a Marine fighter pilots family.
But all I present here is to buttress what Wretchard said. One must gauge their own knowledge and experiences with what they read and see. Much of the real world is pure illusion to the man on the street. News as propaganda has been with us since clay tablets and papyrus, and it’s getting harder to separate fact from fiction.
The often cited Wiki is infiltrated with disinformation. It’s a lurid state of affairs but one we must be vigilant in opposing.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:42 am 29. Lifeofthemind:BTW, I just commented on the Murphy and Good Samaritan threads, which are amazingly alive.
Habu,
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:08 am 30. Charles:You have done more and better than I have. Hope you have some security to salvage from this wreck. I’m damn near at the wall. Always liked Marine pilots, they played cards badly and paid up like gentlemen.
Likely a lot of the money came from overseas. here’s the payback
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:09 am 31. Professor Guvinoff:Obama Begins Turnover of USA Sovereignty to International Body
19. The Old Guy:
Agreed. A surplus of “information” (a mixture in which everyone looks for one particular ingredient, his or her own “truth”), and no objective measure of credibility, so what to do?
We have long relied on formalized acclaim, like the Pulitzer prize, the Nobel prize, etc.., These are good examples of “acceptable” objectivity. Yasser Arafat, who earned his stripes as a murderer, received 50% percent of a Nobel prize; Al Gore, the prophet of thermocarbonic doom with a baritone voice and a powerpoint show, received 100% of a Nobel prize.
So, what is the origin of our skepticism? I propose that it is our legacy of science. Science is also a discipline arbitrated by peer review, so why would it be superior to other models of thought? Because it also requires the vindication of measurable facts.
Unlike the Pulitzer and the Nobel prizes, science has accomplished two feats:
1. It has grown steadily over more than 4 centuries, with no sign of decline, only the opposite.
2. It has brought about tangible benefits which receive the acclaim of non-scientific cultures, as testified by third world societies, in which people are not about to give up their cell phones, at least not willingly.
Is there any science of information? Yes there is! In 1949 Claude Shannon submitted a theory of information which answered the quest of Harry Nyquist in 1928, and opened the floodgates of communication technologies. In 1951, Andrew Viterbi discovered a clever shortcut through the tedium of performing an exhaustive “maximum likelihood estimation” search.
By the way, the central point of Shannon’s information theory: The amount of information is a measure of the degree of unexpectedness in the message. If the content does not surprise you, the quantity of information you received is zero! Does that remind anyone of anything?
Maybe our capacity for boredom is a precious faculty, our natural information quality control tool. It’s not foolproof, but it’s useful.
I see the readership of the Belmont club in particular and Pajamas media in general as a modern case of “vindication by acclaim” from cyberfolks who would are hoping for substance in “information”.
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:14 am 32. Thrasymachus:The donation issue was discussed in The Corner at National Review before the election. The Obama campaign deliberately disabled the credit card verification system to allow donations from foreign sources with false addresses. I made a token donation in the name of Benito Mussolini (occupation, “motivational speaker”) from a foreign credit card with a false address and it went through.
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:14 am 33. JMH:One must gauge their own knowledge and experiences with what they read and see. Much of the real world is pure illusion to the man on the street. News as propaganda has been with us since clay tablets and papyrus, and it’s getting harder to separate fact from fiction.
And I think this was one of the reasons the Founders didn’t have any nationwide (or even statewide) elections in the Constitution. A man might know, and be able to judge the character of, the people who lived around him. He’d have some chance to sort out facts from lies when events in question were local. But the average voter from Richmond would only have second or third hand accounts of what happened in Boston and no personal experience with the individuals involved.
Originally, congressional districts had about 30,000 people, and Representatives were expected to be well-established, prominent residents. That’s the size of a town, and people in towns have a decent sense of what their prominent citizens are like. Today, each district has almost 700,000 people in it. That’s total anonymity.
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:16 am 34. Charles:Probably a lot came from Soros
Obama Endorses Soros Plan to Loot America
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:22 am 35. Charles:Say does anyone know how to get ahold of Obama’s original long form birth certificate? Its in one of the records departments in Hawaii.
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:23 am 36. Eggplant:wretchard said:
“However, they awarded him only $1 in damages, an amount Churchill dismissed after the verdict as unimportant. … But Ward Churchill gets his job back, plus a million dollars in damages.”
I don’t see Ward Churchill getting his job back. He was awarded a token settlement based upon a freedom of speech defense. My guess is that decision will be appealed. Ward Churchill is a very bad man (essentially a left wing con artist posing as an academic). It’ll be a disaster for university standards if he is reinstated.
Habu said:
“The often cited Wiki is infiltrated with disinformation. ”
Never trust Wikipedia! Only a few days ago, here at Belmont Club, I was embarrassed by quoting a scientific number from Wikipedia that was wrong by many orders of magnitude. Wikipedia was a good idea in theory that failed in execution. Wikipedia needs to be replaced by something that is reliable (peer reviewed) or have flashing banners over every page saying the information is idle gossip and unreliable.
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:33 am 37. Eggplant:Charles asked:
“Say does anyone know how to get ahold of Obama’s original long form birth certificate? ”
Your whipping a dead horse. I don’t like Obama but the birth certificate angle won’t make him go away. It’s a waste of time.
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:37 am 38. geoffgo:Buckets@22,
Let’s not go down this road: that way lies the Daily Kos and damnation!
Of course if the allegations are true, your advice delays the serving of justice, and at some point is exactly what the Kos crowd would want you to advise the damned.
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:39 am 39. JMH:Wikipedia needs to be replaced by something that is reliable (peer reviewed) or have flashing banners over every page saying the information is idle gossip and unreliable.
The problem with Wikipedia isn’t that it’s idle gossip and unreviewed. The problem is that several controversial subjects have been taken over by biased editors who censor unfavored views and present propaganda as an encylopedia entry.
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:42 am 40. Habu:Lifeofthemind,
Because of my life’s experiences when I went to Wall Street I realized they were almost as good as the CIA at lying. And in their field they were even better,so I cashed out six months prior to the world collasping and went 100% cash. I had amassed seven figures and bought some gold at $600 although not enough.
I have no debt. I own a place in Montana and one in Florida. I’ve made mistakes sure but I just happen to have accumulated enough street smarts and real life experience to know when to punch out, which I did. Then I had the good fortune to inherit another half million.
I am doing nicely with the exception of watching our country go socialist and perhaps even further. I fought the Soviet proxies in Angola and Rhodesia to name just two hot spots of my era. Now we are, I am convinced, being lead by a false flag operator and his cadre of useful idiots who are subverting the intent of this countries very being. It rankles me. I’m not use to sitting back and “taking it” ..’tis more blessed to give than to receive and boy would I love to give and give and give to the likes of the Daily Kos crowd and their ilk.
Apr 3, 2009 - 10:21 am 41. Roy Lofquist:I consult Wikipedia often, as much as 30 times a day. On noncontroversial subjects, such as Lithium-ion batteries, they are very good and very accurate.
On anything that involves politics or opinion I use it for a broad overview to guide further inquiry.
Peer review is not a good answer. A very large percentage of these papers are subsequently found to be unreliable or false. Nothing sinister here, just the normal groping of science to understand the world.
Apr 3, 2009 - 10:23 am 42. Boonton:The millions of phantom small donors that donated via the unsecured web system to Obama’s campaign were a refinement on that. No need to send Al Gore to a Buddhist Temple, just set up Hamas operatives in Gaza with a PC and a list of stolen credit card numbers.
Yea ok, two million stolen credit card numbers and no one notices on their statements that they are getting hit for donations to Obama they didn’t make?
Here’s the problem, you guys are full of crap. You have no idea what you’re talking about. You think ‘evidence’ consists of your hunches about what the world should look like therefore deviation is evidence that something fishy is going on unless you are provided with an infinite amount of proof to the contrary.
OK, out of 69 million who voted for Obama how many *should* have made small donations under $200? Zero? Two? One million? Since John McCain must automatically have nothing but pure, honest donars his 650,000 will be a baseline, I assume. Since Obama clearly was and is more popular than McCain we have to increase 650K by something. (BTW, prove it, show me the Excel sheet with 650,000 small McCain donars by name, address, phone and occupation). What does your ‘hunch’ say? Shall we go up to 2 million? Ok. So that means 2.8m donars must have 0.8m frauds. But what is your 2m hunch based on? What the hell do you know about this anyway? People in direct marketing would never presume to be able to ‘know’ how many sales they will get. You complain about the media and other sources giving you bogus numbers but you guys are just spinning numbers out of your….well there you go.
Apr 3, 2009 - 10:24 am 43. Habu:A new supermarket recently opened in Topeka, KS. It has an automatic water mister to keep the produce fresh. Just before it goes on, you hear the sound of distant thunder and the smell of fresh rain. When you pass the milk cases, you hear cows mooing and you experience the scent of fresh mown hay. In the meat department there is the aroma of charcoal grilled steaks with onions. When you approach the egg case, you hear hens cluck and cackle, and the air is filled with the pleasing aroma of bacon and eggs frying. The bread department features the tantalizing smell of fresh baked bread and cookies.
P. S. I don’t buy toilet paper there any more.
Ok a little levity..life’s better when you smile, no matter how bad it seems.
Apr 3, 2009 - 10:35 am 44. Boonton:In relation to how do we know something, the question is what do you want to know and how much is it worth to you to know it?
Take something simple like 13 million emails were sent. How do you know this? Because someone says so. How do they know? Because they asked the guy who did the email blast. How does he know? Because he told the server to send emails to the database. He came back an hour later and the server said 13m emails were sent. Did the server capture return receipts to confirm 13m were really sent? Does the database really have 13m emails or are there defunct addresses? Did 13m emails leave the server but only 5m arrive on the other side because spam filters and other software stopped them?
If this was direct mail, the confirmation would come from the fact that postage was purchased for 13m pieces. Since postage is expensive, various controls would be in place to confirm that 13m stamps were used as opposed to, say, the direct mail company keeping a few million for itself.
On the other side, your bank’s web site says your account went down $10.94 because you brought something this morning. How do you know that? How does it know that? Because it spent a lot, a real lot, of money to make sure that any transaction that changes account balances is confirmed and checked by multiple controls. It hires security experts, auditors and outside consulting companies to make sure the systems are providing a perfect count. Even then the data is backed up and every transaction has an audit trail so that, if necessary, agents can walk into the local Starbucks and ask if they saw a man who looked like you buying 2 drinks in the morning at 8:34 am.
Now if someone wants good information they have to pay for it. Donars are tracked by the campaigns, reported to the FEC and audited by them. If you want something more then propose it and propose that it is worth our time and money to pay for it. If you have real evidence of fraud then report it to law enforcement. Please, though, try to avoid demanding that the information you receive be of the highest quality but then turn around and feed us information of the lowest quality….which is basically what your ‘hunches’ are.
Apr 3, 2009 - 10:47 am 45. michael hoskins:boon @ 38. While your screed has some merit, please remember that to a large extent BC is a family room of chit chat and speculation. As per the main topic of this thread, we are not making statements of fact, but ASKING QUESTIONS that we, in our collective opinion, would like to see answered.
Therefore, numbers spun out of our waste system become starting points…remember, one beasts waste is another’s feritlizer.
Added note…some dude who knew about type fonts on typewriters asked questions about inkjet printers and National Guard forms…and sent the Professional home.
Apr 3, 2009 - 10:47 am 46. Uncle Jefe:“Now we are, I am convinced, being lead by a false flag operator and his cadre of useful idiots who are subverting the intent of this countries very being.” BINGO.
Apr 3, 2009 - 11:05 am 47. Eggplant:Every one of my family and friends feel the same.
So, Habu, what do we do?
Roy Lofquist said:
“I consult Wikipedia often, as much as 30 times a day. On noncontroversial subjects, such as Lithium-ion batteries, they are very good and very accurate.”
I also refer to Wikipedia more often than I should (I wish there was a better alternative). The articles on controversial subjects are mostly garbage and I don’t bother reading them. However even noncontroversial subjects can get one into trouble. For example, when I go into a technical article like the one about lithium-ion batteries, I typically bring along a trusted known fact that I can check against the article to validate it. If the facts match then I might be inclined to trust the article. However all I’ve really done is validate the part of the article written by the guy who knew that one correct fact. The rest of the article could have been edited by congenital idiots (I don’t know!). I wrote a lengthy article in Wikipedia on a topic related to my profession. The original article was obvious garbage but I like to think that after I rewrote it, the article was more accurate and people could use the information. However now after the fact, I think rewriting that article was a mistake. People have come in after me and added misinformation. Prior to my rewrite, that added misinformation would have had no impact. Now it does. Consequently I feel a moral compulsion to go back to the article and clean up after idiots. Unfortunatley I then found myself butting heads with Wikipedia volunteers who were also idiots. I now regret having rewritten thr article.
Along these lines, it occurs to me that Wikipedia vandalism might actually be a “good thing”. If you’re reading an article about the mathematics of the quartic equation and come across the sentence “George Bush is a moron!” then you’re reminded that Wikipedia is no better than bathroom graffiti.
Apr 3, 2009 - 11:07 am 48. Lifeofthemind:When I was a Junior Officer I performed the ritual known as inspecting the troops. Sometimes it could be fun, as when we were returning to port after a long deployment and the guys would put a hat and a pair of shoes on the deck so that I would stop and ask “Who is this?” and they could reply “Seaman Short Sir” or a guy would show up in dungarees with his dress uniform in a dry cleaning bag to prove it was inspection ready. The lesson for me there was, never stop people from acting cute, we all need comedy. Civilians have asked about inspections as if they were some big mystery. Is the officer some incredible genius with a superior attention to detail that ferrets out each flaw? Of course not, the trick is in fact simple. You have six or twenty or forty men lined up. One looks different. Bingo. We learn from new and unexpected information. We learn to recognize outliers from our data set. The ways that our ability to gain knowledge fails fall into (guess how many?) three categories.
Apr 3, 2009 - 11:25 am 49. whiskey:1. New situations where we don’t have prior data to measure against.
Anybody know how to wear the new uniforms?
2. Corruption or collusion among the sample pool.
Everybody looks the same, wait a second, nobody shaved.
3. Balancing of priorities on the part of the observer.
The Admiral inspected a fan room and asked one of my men 3 Questions:
a. Is this your space Son?
b. Do you know what is wrong in this space?
c. Am I going to find it?
The answer was “No Admiral,” the Inspection ended with all of us happy.
OK, add variable number four and call it Schrodinger’s Cat or the GE Effect. There sometimes is or is not new information to discover because you are looking for it.
Wretchard the Lesson of Ward Churchill is that is pays to be part of the elite, the “Gentry” or New Class.
There IS a cultural, political, and social war going on all throughout the West between the Yuppie Class of Seinfeld, Sex and the City, Curb Your Enthusiasm, and Friends, and basically everyone else (those TV programs give a satirized idea of Yuppie life and values, in the endless mating dance that powers status obsession).
And Yuppies know very well Global Warming is a crock. That nuclear terrorism means dead Western cities. That their only protection is through strength and specifically, Western Warriors who are uncouth, dangerous, and don’t care about the latest hot car, laptop, or soup Nazi.
Obama of course got Middle Eastern, specifically Saudi money, funneled to him. Who else had the cash? Look at his bowing and scraping to his master at the meeting.
Yuppies know all this stuff. They just don’t want to deal with it. They have more important things to discuss, like who is “hot” this season, etc.
Apr 3, 2009 - 11:45 am 50. Habu:LOM,
My father ended his career as Chief of Staff, Marine Corps Bases, Eastern Area doing so under the command of Maj Gen Marion Carl..(now there is a bio you must look at)
However for the first half of WWII he was CO of the Marine Detachment on the USS New Mexico. Buried him in Arlington 2 1/2 years ago…a great guy. By the time I went through Quantico it was a cakewalk.
BTW, some people might get the idea that since I have done well financially that I live in a big house, drive a Porsche etc. nope. Remaining with the Wall street firms I moved South, bought a 1000 sq foot home on a lake and my wife and I are going on 25 years in that same house. Haven’t bought a new car since my Lotus in 1980. Staying out of debt and living below your means is the formula for me. One day I hope to buy an RCA victrola! I am buying a Birkin sportscar soon for Montana driving in the summer….you can drive for hours on roads and not see ten cars..zoom, zoom.
Apr 3, 2009 - 11:50 am 51. Habu:whiskey,
So right about the culture war. Been hot and heavy since Vietnam. In the last twnenty years most white guys are characterized as totally doofus. We’re definitely not cool on TV sitcoms from the reports I get. I don’t watch much TV so I can’t say first hand.
There’s an old parable about evenly distributing all the money in the USA and how within a year it would be right back in the former distribution….couldn’t be more true. That’s why the marxists in congress are attempting to establish a permanent state of redistrbution (along side our tax codes).
And piggy backing on that, obama was warmly received in Europe because they’re all socialist countries so he was just going home.
Apr 3, 2009 - 12:01 pm 52. michael hoskins:LOM,
I can’t help adding a sea story. In my JO years I routinely heard the standard variety of excuses for this or that minor miscue. After a while I started a small note book. The cover was labeled…”My car it… My dog he…My wife she…” Thence forward I wrote down each excuse, making it known to my guys that once an excuse was used by anybody in the division, it was on the list and not useable. A new excuse or a particularly clever re-hash of a standard got written down and circled, a pass for the sailor.
It worked well, with lots of laughs in the wardroom, CPO mess and amoungst the guys. Bad news, I lost it…it would have made a great book.
Facts of course were spurious at best. In hindsight, it is interesting that facts no longer affected the outcome, only cleverness, or persistence or creativity etc.
Lately, in the real world, I have had to deal with “desired facts”, that is, someone has predecided what they want and demands the facts fit. This is especially interesting when the desired fact contridicts nature. Rain falls down, not up etc.
The value of the desired fact is much as Whiskey @ 45 describes. Elites make statements and facts will fit…
God’s facts will win out.
Apr 3, 2009 - 12:03 pm 53. Mad Fiddler:There is a small book titled “The Year 1000″ which describes life in Britain in the last decades before the Norman Conquest of 1066. Good stuff.
The Year 1000: What Life Was Like at the Turn of the First Millennium
by Robert Lacey & Danny Danziger
Paperback version ISBN-10: 0316511579
It’s good to think about other times. We get to being absurdly proud of ourselves, thinking we are the crown of history and creation. We are clearly smarter and more clever and brilliant than humans have ever been, right?
A thousand years ago – not just in Britain but throughout Europe – more than 99 percent of all people were illiterate and superstitious farmers, crofters, and peasants bound to servitude. Villages in the same county might be only vaguely aware of each other. Communities separated by just a few miles might go for generations without a visit from outlandish folk. The dangers of wolves, boars, bears, and outlaws roaming the untamed woods imposed a relentless isolation, allowing speech patterns to drift so far that people from hamlets separated by a day’s walk might be unintelligible to each other. “Knowledge” was passed by word of mouth and demonstration of skills and techniques. Human waste was generally tossed out the door of the cottage, to combine with the animal wastes and mud.
Kings gathered wise ones to be their advisors; men who had traveled and dealt with foreigners, or who had traffic with or training from one of the many monasteries where knowledge was savored and preserved.
Seems like a lot of folks now believe there’s a straight line of evolution in intellectual power from the ooze to the present day. Go back a couple hundred years, and you find humans are only 99 percent as smart as people living today. Go back a thousand years, and they’re intellectual adolescents, counting on their fingers and toes. Go back to the time of the Ancients, and you find nations of children, just able to pick up fruit from the ground and with a little pondering distinguish it from the scat of the beasts.
Of course that line of thinking is nuts. Three centuries before the time of Christ, Aristarchos of Samos had worked out a reasonably accurate (i.e., within the modern order of magnitude) reckoning of the size of the earth’s globe and the Sun-Earth system, using logic, geometric methods, and his own and his contemporaries’ observations of cast shadows at widely separated locations. Fifteen hundred years before that, the Babylonians had done meticulous observations of the stars and planets that allowed them to work out enduringly useful calendar systems. In Jordan, ruins of a dam and water catchment system survive from five thousand years ago during the fer-Pete’s-sake Bronze Age. The Antikythera “mechanism” discovered in the 1950’s and studied and reconstructed by Derek de Solla Price and others, is a complex gear-driven calculator of astronomical cycles dating from over 2,000 years ago. And of course, there are the better-known geniuses Plato,Pythagoras, Euclid, Archimedes, et centera.
Today things are in retrograde motion. Several generations of U.S. high school graduates are unable to make change at fast food counters without assistance. To operate the cash registers, they need icons of the food items. They cannot compose a coherent paragraph or read and respond to the questions and instructions on a job application. If they can’t do those simple tasks, it’s crazy for us to be surprised that they can’t spot the errors and inversions of logic in political messages. This is not because they are any less capable than humans have ever been; it’s because our public school system has a policy of promoting students regardless of performance, to praise them and stroke their “self-esteem” regardless of whether they get the answers right.
We want citizens to be able to rationally choose between nuclear power and fossil fuels, but our schools don’t teach them the difference between a proton and a crouton.
Interesting times coming.
Apr 3, 2009 - 12:06 pm 54. Lifeofthemind:Habu,
The dirty secret of the Marine Corps is that they are the true home of the Liberal Arts among the Armed Forces.
The Navy is focused on the back end of the Ship and the Air Force, well OK I meant to limit myself to military branches but still, they focus on Industrial Organization and Human Resource Management Theory like they believe that stuff and the Army has always been devoted to Engineering and Artillery as the fast tracks, although they would find Brains and then hide them until needed. A friend of mine 25 years ago was a damn good Officer of Marines and a French major at Berkeley.
A heard that study that examined the services by socio/economic background of the enlisted entrants had the following ranking.
1. Coast Guard, say what you want the quality of the Knee Deeps are
Apr 3, 2009 - 12:21 pm 55. Leo Linbeck III:outstanding.
2. The Marines, if you are going into a tough situation do it with the best.
3. The Air Force, it’s the best hospitality industry outfit out there.
4. The Navy, the Soviet troops mutinied and couldn’t get to Finland but the
US Navy troops can do it all.
5. The Army, as an economist I know all the arguments for an all
volunteer force and I still think that we should draft everyone for 6 months
of training after the 17th birthday and then recruit a more middle class
army by limiting non-service related scholarships.
Boonton,
A few quick comments:
1. The response rate was not 4% – I believe that was a “hypothetical” set up in W’s intro. The actual response rate was 114,000/13,000,000 or .88%. More like a typical response rate. The question is, if Obama’s machine was that effective, why a typical response rate?
2. Not all donors are monitored by the FEC; only donors above $200. The Obama campaign has refused to release the names of donors who gave less than $200. So there is no way to know who actually gave the small donations. They may be legit, they may not. But there is no way to verify.
3. I agree that the campaign was much longer than the budget blast. But does that really account for the low response rate on the budget blast? It may, but it may not.
Basically, this could all be cleared up by having Obama release the names of all donors below $200. He is not required to, but if he wants transparency, why not?
Cheers.
L3
Apr 3, 2009 - 12:26 pm 56. Lifeofthemind:No preview for me pffft. Now where was that phone number? OK try this one
Apr 3, 2009 - 12:27 pm 57. Lifeofthemind:michael hoskins,
Apr 3, 2009 - 12:40 pm 58. Benj:My Department Head once asked why I requisitioned a big set of special request chits, the old 4 color paged carbon paper probably cost a fortune type. He was pleased when I explained that I had the troops fill them out for requests for Special Overtime Pay whenever they bitched. I had Deck Division, all stories were true. I faithfully filed the requests in my bottom drawer so we could have a laugh over them later. The troops knew they were getting nothing but giving them an outlet to record their frustration worked. Nowadays they would probably complain to the world off the ship via email or blogs, much more destructive.
@42 Michael Hosk – Your equation is off – It’s Wretch who’s the closer equivalent to Dan Rather – W. wasn’t responding to scandal-mongering, he was cultivating B.S. P.S. waiting on some Clubber to insist I am Boontu (as per posts of past irrationals)…
Apr 3, 2009 - 12:41 pm 59. Lifeofthemind:Bad news from Binghamton, massacre at an immigration office.
Apr 3, 2009 - 12:45 pm 60. buddy larsen:Mad Fiddler, look into that kit found on the Iceman –and the Cro-Magnon cave art –naw, we’re not a bit smarter, probably a good deal less. I’m sure your average joe fifty thousand years ago was a good deal more serious about the truth of his perceptions, too. Stands to reason he would be, being alive.
Apr 3, 2009 - 12:46 pm 61. Wadeusaf:Boonton,
If you were to ask the same questions of Sen. John McCain’s Presidential campaign, you would get real numbers and real answers that match real dollar figures and real donor name and/or accounts. Why? Because Senator McCain pledged to run and open and transparent campaign and then followed through on his pledge. Senator McCain acted in good faith like a honorable and decent man.
Then Senator Obama made the same pledge and used the same methods of accepting and rejecting pledges as Senator McCain, except that at some point during the long and arduous campaign (in the closing months of the race),then Senator Obama’s campaign determined it was more to their benefit to disable the accounting, turn a blinded eye and deafened ear to the folks who asked why and refuse to address the question. The MSM has not so much as hiccoughed at the possibility that this disconnect is at the bottom of what is potentially the largest voter fraud since Clinton sold out to the Chinese, because they ignored the facts and the questions that were raised then too.
Apr 3, 2009 - 12:47 pm 62. Kirk Parker:Your reader’s intuition needs some serious recalibration. Giving political contributions is a common thing, happens all the time, etc… it’s only the quantity of online contributors that’s at all out of the ordinary here. Whereas in “signing a pledge” to a sitting president in response to some kind of marketing campaign–the respondents are being asked to do something never done before in American politics, as far as I know.
Apr 3, 2009 - 12:53 pm 63. Charles:33. Eggplant:
Charles asked:
“Say does anyone know how to get ahold of Obama’s original long form birth certificate? ”
Your whipping a dead horse. I don’t like Obama but the birth certificate angle won’t make him go away. It’s a waste of time.
……
You may be right but its worth knowing what people are saying. Here is Gov (commerce secretary elect)Bill Richardson
saying in Spanish that Obama is an “immigrant.” (So he understands
understands “immigrant” issues.)The context suggests that by
“immigrant” bill richardson may mean “illegal immigrant”
The thing has become a joke in washington. Joe Biden Joked at the Gridiron Dinner in March 09.
After mentioning one of the Republican speakers for the evening, Arnold Schwarzenegger,
was born in Austria and that one of the Democratic speakers, Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm,
was born in Canada, Biden chortled: “Folks, this is going to be Lou Dobbs’ worst nightmare. ”
Here in plain English is the Kenyan Ambassador suggesting that Obama is born in Kenya.
Then of course there is a video of Obama’s grandmother saying that Obama is born in in her village in Kenya
There is a case to be made that Obama mother didn’t mean Obama was born in her town but rather that he is a “son of this village”.
An argument for baraks people might be that of course the Kenyans would have an interest in claiming that obama was a
“son of the soil” both as a matter of pride and as a matter of
bucks coming their way. However, if Obama was not born in Kenya — then why wouldn’t Obama release his original long form birth certificate. Why has he had a highly paid legal team set up to squash the lawsuits on the matter.
Obama’s own flacks deny that obama was born in Kenya but do acknowledge that he had a dual citizenship up until 1982
From obama’s own site factcheck.org by way of fightthesmears on his dual citizenship at birth
“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was
a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire.
As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose
citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948.
That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.
Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn
an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically
expired on Aug. 4,1982.”
Justice Roberts agreed to read the documenation on the matter.
The National Review thinks that Roberts will come up high on democratic enemies list because he was appointed by bush and because he’s a strict constructionalist. But I think its because he accepted the obama birth documentation.
Apr 3, 2009 - 1:01 pm 64. Wadeusaf:More highly questionable numbers reported about the Mexican border. The numbers being used by folks like General Barry McCaffery in a private paper his website refers to as an AAR, and Kathleen Kennedy Townsend in a Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence press release the via CNN, include numbers of automatic weapons (crates full of AK47’s) making their way into Mexico by the truckload because of lax US gun laws.
It is not just that the numbers are ridiculous by any modest measure of common sense, it is that the same people who are taking these figures for fact and demanding something be done are targeting the types of people who let Bernie Madoff invest their dollars for them and did not care how or if any investment were made, counting on the kinds of people who are allow the Obama Administration and government bureaucracies for the past twenty or thirty years to make all kinds of decisions about the budget, about monetary policy, about health care, about education and about what to eat for breakfast without questioning the veracity decision. These are the same people being told about the Crises of the hour, and spooned non-informating factoids wrapped in honey and attributed to a ghost to support the claim that something needs to be done and the government better do it because it is too complex for me and you to figure out.
The source of the numbers about the guns seems to have fed to Al Jazeera English version, and been used by an Al Jazeera reporter to say the US military is giving guns, teaching terror interrogation techniques and generally messing up Mexico’s valiant efforts at fighting the Cartels.
Michale Yon’s web site has posted a link from a “friendly reader” which Auto Play piggybacks the Al Jazerra report on the end of Justice Watch’s Lou Dobbs report about Mexican Military incursions on the southern order, in a manner that leads the viewer to believe they are part of the same report. Shocking they are using Michael Yon’s site to link to it.
Now I have my moments of knee jerk reactions but they are few, and most of the commentators here have thought through thoroughly the issues before they hit submit, and debate the facts as best as they can be known before they would submit to any spam-botticaly poor reasoning.
Benj, you are crying wolf, but you have not yet cried “shut up” al la Klavan on the culture at PJTV.
Apr 3, 2009 - 1:06 pm 65. michael hoskins:LOM @ 50 and Habu. OT, but its Friday.
I was an NROTC type. During freshman year we had a chance to take an Interest Profile Test, or what do you want to be when you grow up. You know how they work, the questions ask things like “would you rather ride a bike or shoot baskets” or some such. Tests were given to successfull people in a variety of fields. Students took the same test and results were compared.
At a largely male all engineering school, (Ga. Tech) you can imagine the results. In my case Mech Eng led the list. But, as a 3rd generation sailor, I asked about military officers. The answer was interesting. The successfull officer was described as a full bird. There are in fact stereotypical colonels. Where, I asked, are Navy Captains? Consistently inconsistent. There was not a statistically identifiable norm.
Intrigued, I read a bit and formulated a theory. Land based (including land air) are still somewhat tied to HQ. In the old days of sail, Naval officers left home with a great big expensive piece of the crown’s property and were gone for years, sometimes winning and losing ground, fortunes and chunks of empire. Can’t write enough orders, so you select and send someone whose personal goals and objective match the crown’s. I.e. one of us.
Later, I worked in East Africa and Mid East. Even as a very junior person, when in uniform, I recieved a lot more deference than my military counterparts. In Kenya, there was a great little reception where I was a principle guest. Not so at home of course.
Naval service, blue or green, taught me more than I knew at the time. (I am retired reserve now, finishing out after returning from Desert Storm.)
Apr 3, 2009 - 1:17 pm 66. pendejo grande:I was a kid in the 60’s and 70’s and remember occasionally reading a news story about something that had been printed in Pravda in order to discredit the west. Maybe a story about Americans starving in the streets or the mass lynching of a certain segment of the population. I used to wonder if the Russian people had any suspicions that their press organs were lying to them or whether they accepted everything they read or heard at face value. I never in my wildest dreams thought that the press in this country would get to that point. There are some of us that are reasonably sure that the MSM is consistantly sending out faulty information, but there are some who still buy the message lock, stock, and barrell. Looks like about 52% in the latter subset to me.
Apr 3, 2009 - 1:24 pm 67. michael hoskins:Grande, 27% who are sucked in and 25% who generate the bovine defication.
Apr 3, 2009 - 1:32 pm 68. buddy larsen:I don’t know how Boon or Benj or anyone can defend this sort of crap. They can’t. So, attack whomever is so rude as to discuss it? Izzat the plan?
Re Mexican guns, when a man of truth like John Kerry goes to the border, you can rest assured that he will dig up and report the truth (just as he did in 1085 when he went south and learned that the Sandinistas were not USSR-backed Communist insurgents but local farmers who loved freedom.
Since we’ve all come to know the senator very well, and we have the facts on his patriotism vs his personal ambition, then we know we can know the truth about Mexican guns (indeed, about any issue whatsoever) by simply reversing whatever the senator says by somewhere in the neighborhood of 180 degrees. Good that he is such a reliable reverse-indicator, since we have to pay him for all his dumbo scheming.
Apr 3, 2009 - 1:34 pm 69. buddy larsen:Oops, i was off by 900 on that date. I must be a Democrat!
Apr 3, 2009 - 1:37 pm 70. bigr:I decided to add several more questions. How does a newbee raise triple the amount of money other well known candidates have raised. Most of Obama’s base line supporters do not have any credit or money so how do they donate via a credit card? And finally where did all that money go? For a candidate that talks about transparency this whole donation process is too slick and too opaque.
Apr 3, 2009 - 1:37 pm 71. Benj:Wade – Crying Wolf? What did I say that was untrue? If you really want a clue about how OBama won, read Goodwyn on the election season in North Carolian at the FIRST site – Here’s the conclusion as a taste -Try it and then try to convince yourself it was all about voter fraud! You’re the one crying WOLF! And Cornell Jones (see below) is smiling politely as you look away and walk on by to the G.O.P.’s next defeat in Southern periphery…
The 16-day period of early voting for the general election began in mid-October amid a mobilization of Obama’s volunteer army that was so overwhelming it had become the talk of the city. Obama canvassers simply swamped the shopping malls of Durham. In all of them, people had begun to put their hands up defensively and nod their heads vigorously: “Already registered.” “Already voted!” Starkly declining registrations confirmed only one new registrant per canvasser per hour. The well had begun to run dry. A structural dilemma appeared, mandating new tactics: the ground game could now deploy thousands of trained canvassers who were instantly reachable by email – and a rapidly declining number of places to send them!
This was the moment for specialists. One of them was Cornell Jones. Born 64 years ago to a North Carolina sharecropper, Jones had been sent to New Jersey at an early age to live with an uncle and eventually found his way onto the New York City police department where he served for twenty years. Retiring to Durham, he soon established himself as a “public man” with useful skills in commercial and residential real estate and a cool hand in the newly relevant world of voter registration. He taught by example. For Cornell Jones, eating a meal involved first registering the staffs of fast food places. Getting gas involved the same drill. With enough time and logistical support, he could have registered every black service worker in North Carolina as well as a carefully sifted sector of the white citizenry as well. He had different riffs for different folks, but, he explained, “when they cannot manage to find the words to talk straight to you, or even look you in the eye, you can confidently resign from offering assistance without feeling like you have let your candidate down. You haven’t.”
By early October, with the pace of registration in sharp decline, a plan materialized. Though registration was through the roof in Charlotte, Raleigh, Greensboro and Winston-Salem, a fair number of outlying rural counties were severely under-registered – at least by the new standards to which we were all becoming accustomed. I accompanied a band of Cornell Jones’ recruits one Saturday morning to Granville County on the Virginia border, while an even larger group of Durhamites mobilized a caravan and trekked 80 miles to the town of Goldsboro. Combined, the Saturday excursions into the countryside added 800 new voters to the Obama data base.
Another form of “outreach” came through the efforts of Radio One – the consortium of 52 urban black radio stations scattered across America’s metropolitan centers. The relevant one for our purposes was, of course, the Durham station. Three of its components – featuring gospel, hip hop, and what might be called “general audience programming” – combined their resources to launch a variety of news and voter registration programs that reached far beyond Durham to include regions as distant as Petersburg, Virginia. As might be expected, the Obama campaign integrated itself into black radio with an intensity not previously achieved in any previous presidential campaign. It also became yet another base from which Cornell Jones could practice new varieties of outreach to unregistered voters. The man was beyond “cool.” He gave new meaning to two time-honored words of political description: energetic and creative.
Cornell and I got back to Durham in time for what was, for me, the most revealing and educational moment of the entire eight month campaign. The occasion was the mid-October briefing on the Staging Locations, the organizational linchpin of the get-out-the-vote campaign for election day. The “briefing” involved much more; it would be accurate to describe the topic of discussion as the formal unveiling of an elaborately integrated canvassing-phone banking operation repeated two to three times over the final days of early voting and election day itself. Seventy persons were in attendance. While I knew only a few as intimate acquaintances, most of the faces were by now familiar, a good number dating back to the early weeks of March and April that culminated in the decisive victory over Clinton in the May primary. Collectively, they represented the hard core of volunteers of the local Obama ground game. Here were the people who ran precinct phone banks, precinct canvassing, liaison with other precincts concerning recruiting locations, and data entry projects. They were the absolute heart of the ground game.
Eighty percent of this activist core were women. Perhaps as many as ten percent were under thirty. Far more were over 50. Also, I became aware I was looking at one of the last hurrahs of the ‘60s generation. They seemed to be about 20 percent of the room. Highly energized gray panther types. Presiding, so to speak, was good old Spencer, age 23, an area coordinator who never made any pretense he was “running” anything. He was the consummate paid staffer: he respected, he included, he enhanced and was, in turn, respected and well-liked. The first thing he did was suggest that we go around the room and find out what each person had to say.
It was like turning on a spigot. A fair number wanted to offer a personal perspective on the Obama ground game. “I first got heavily involved in presidential politics in 1968 for Gene McCarthy and there was real passion in that campaign, but nothing like this. Nothing compares to this.” And “We absolutely have to win this.” And “I started with Bobby Kennedy and I thought the stakes were high then, but never like now.” And one person spoke one quick sentence – “This is the most important political campaign of our lives” – and sat down. “By Far” was one of the most recurring phrases. Electing Obama was “by far” the most important thing. “I have never worked so hard for so many weeks and months. By Far. Not even close.” But there was another idea, from the elders, that was repeated three times: “I never thought I would live to see this day.” Old warriors, telling stories to each other, a few nights before the onset of two weeks of Early Voting.
We had all received, upon entering, a 24 page, densely packed instruction pamphlet which Spencer read from rather than explained. I will skip over the details, faithful reader, though Spencer did not. Indeed, he read from the 24 page pamphlet in a tone that betrayed he was as dazzled by all the detail as he guessed (correctly) we were. I won’t try to convey the magic in the figures here – maybe those formulas are a little out of time now – but I will offer a short description of the red letter day.
Seven hundred and forty five people signed in at a familiar Obama residence on the corner of Watts and Trinity Street on election day. They came, they picked up things, they left, usually looking somewhat determined. The ones who stayed behind looked driven. You could ask anyone to do anything and they would just do it. Right then. And if the task at hand required a level of expertise they did not have (which happened, but not often), someone within hearing distance would know what to do, or who to get, or somebody else would just step in and begin. Volunteering was not necessary. To get yourself “integrated” into the scene, you simply had to sit down on the floor in any room (except the kitchen) and wait. People came through bearing stacks of stuff to be pasted or tied to, or folded into other stacks of stuff. “Yell out when you finish and we’ll pick it up.” The norm at a Staging Location was the sense of urgency. It was like a giant ground-level mist that failed to obscure much of anything because people were breathing it in and out – a nice equilibrium of rhythmic anxiety.
There’s one more paragraph of figures that is surely relevant, as follows. Early voting turnout in Durham totaled 97,000 people. In my precinct, 3900 early votes were cast leaving only 1300 remaining for election day. The names of all 3900 early voters were on printed sheets of paper taped to the gymnasium walls of Forest Hills Elementary School. In 2004, John Kerry got 77,000 votes to 37,000 for George Bush. On November 4, 2008, Barack Obama got 103,000 votes to 32,000 for John McCain. All voting records were shattered. And the custodians of Durham for Obama had 11,000 active volunteers in the data base.
“Going forward,” as they say.
Apr 3, 2009 - 1:38 pm 72. buddy larsen:Not surprising, benj, after a half-decade of blizzrd press about how Bull Connor Bush engineered that Katrina disaster.
Apr 3, 2009 - 1:45 pm 73. maineman:It helps, in determining what’s true, to have a belief that there is such a thing. Most of us here agree that there is a reality that can be approximated, if not known. Modern liberals, on the other hand, think it’s just a matter of competing narratives and inevitably end up slinging mud and impugning motives to support their arguments.
Knowing the truth about any specific aspect of Obama is difficult, but approximating the truth about who he is, what he thinks in a general sense, and what he is attempting to do, conscious or not, is relatively easy. The answers lie not in specific data like numbers of contributors but in that which is available in his history, his behavior, and in those hard facts that we can obtain.
Buddy said, in another thread, that he firmed up his opinion on him when his campaign relabeled welfare transfers as tax cuts. For me, I started to form my negative opinion when he chastised Modo for commenting on his ears, but the smoking gun was when he was exposed as a fraud by his 20 years in a racist, Marxist cult and proceeded to excoriate US for being racist (in a speech he borrowed from Bobby Kennedy, no less). My wife, meanwhile, sniffed out his EddieHaskellness after just watching a few minutes of his speeches.
In each instance the truth has become clear through the convergence of not just facts but other sources of data, including the subjective. If the conclusions are correct, then they get validated by subsequent data, some of which may be misinterpreted via biases but the bulk of which should fall within the distribution of prior opinion. If the distribution of prior opinion is diffuse, then any new data helps to narrow that range. If it’s precise, then outliers can be discarded unless they’re profound.
So we have a long history of lying and a constituency (which includes the MSM) that doesn’t believe in the truth as such and will just say whatever seems to serve their/his purposes. None of THEM are to be considered reliable. On the other hand all information that appears to conform to prior opinion (in this case, that Obama is a grandiose fraud) can be considered reliable until convincingly demonstrated to be otherwise. From the available data, it seems clear to me that it would be unreasonable NOT to suspect that his college transcripts are secret for a reason, that he may well not technically be an American, and that he probably didn’t have primary authorship of his books. The intentional distortion of the financial contribution process is a virtual certainty, as far as I can tell, based on the bulk of the information that is available.
For that matter, he is to be judged never by what he says but by what he does, like an unruly adolescent.
Apr 3, 2009 - 1:49 pm 74. bob:The only really good press President Reagan ever got was in the days right after he got shot. By the time he healed the bloom had pretty much faded off that rose, as I recall.
Apr 3, 2009 - 1:59 pm 75. Benj:Bud – Just checked to see if my post was ok – and saw yours. Hmmm Aren’t you getting way slippery on us? Debaters’ tricks don’t bug me but sorta lame to resort to em given that ‘most everybody here is already on your side…Guess you must REALLY be ashamed for Wretch this time. You KNOW neither Boon nor I “defended” any claim in the story you linked to which was posted at 4:18 p.m. We were responding to Wretch’s early a.m. posts and folks here who attemtped to justify his rumor-mongering…You want to stoke outrage at iffy figures offered up by the propaganda arm of the Democratic party – be my guest. A DNC (or RNC?) spokesperson not giving you straight goods – I’m SHOCKED SHOCKED!!!!!!!!!! Might be wiser, though, for YOU to worry re that “strategic” idiot running the G.O.P….
Apr 3, 2009 - 2:03 pm 76. joe buzz:I was just driving west on the Dulles toll road and came upon a vehicle with the following bumper stickers and more placed haphazardly on the bumper, trunk and rear quarter panels:
Apr 3, 2009 - 2:21 pm 77. blert:NoBama, Comrade Obama, Democrats for Palin, Palin 2012.
As I passed I gave a thumbs up and was glad to see a young African American behind the wheel. This was a little glimmer of hope that I needed after reading the comments in the Wash. Post in response to Charles Krauthammer’s latest piece.
I wonder what Boonton and Benji (in six sentences or less) would say about the math in Mr. Larsen’s link and exactly why a campaign that claimed to be open and transparent would choose not utilize credit card validation software.
H’s college records are very likely to show that he was admitted as a non-American….
As for his birth, H is an American. It’s just that his biological father is most certainly Frank Marshall Davis, member of the CPUSA — and the man who could ‘introduce’ H even after death.
We now know H has blood type AB… Is there any public record of Stanley’s blood type? FMD? Obama Sr?
Ayers is almost certainly the ghost writer for H. They worked out of the same office during its prep. Ayers even stayed with the same style when he wrote under his own name, later.
Merkel has his measure/ stink. It seems that married adult women have him dialed in the fastest.
In the end, all those projecting their hopes on to H’s blank screen can only find a crisp resolution by treating H as a Pollack canvass. Grab your buckets!
Apr 3, 2009 - 2:33 pm 78. Benj:72- So all those black service workers Cornel Jones was registering in N.c. didn’t see Obama as a culmination of one sequence of history in the American south. Nope. They were just taking their cues from MSM…In your soul – if not your Sowell – you know better…
Apr 3, 2009 - 2:33 pm 79. blert:Joe Buzz…
The default condition of the software is for the screens to be UP!
H & Co had to monkey around to set them to ‘rape the process.’
Apr 3, 2009 - 2:35 pm 80. Wadeusaf:Benj,
So what you are telling me is that the majority of people voting for Obama really want the crap he is attempting to spoon? I do not for one minute believe that the majority of people at the time they cast their ballot knew what he stood for, and I would by your own admission, have to include you in that group. For despite all relevant action to the contrary, you insist on feeling good about the man, supported by others who feel good about the man, encouraged by others who feel good about the feeling good.
Substance and history allow folks to determine more about character than an autobiography, despite the revealing self portrait it is still self description, and by nature self deception. Would you feel the same knowing that Senator Dodd and Senator Frank were supported By Senator Obama in defeating efforts to reform Fannie and Freddy and the treatment of securities backed by poor performing mortgages. Don’t it feel good knowing that had SSI funds (not now and not ever placed in a lock box), been placed the market and controlled by the folks with an interest in their performance (aka the real owners), would have been lost due to the shenanigans of Senators Dodd, Frank (and Obama.) Would you feel the same knowing the stance taking by Senator Obama on Education would by design lead to the destruction of the familial bonds between you and your offspring? Check it out for yourself, the parent is now just the night time warden, but don’t worry because the state is in control. And don’t worry about all those fatherless kids, despite the real and relevant core of knowledge about the role of fathers and the results of the lack of a father figure, that part of Welfare reform has been discredited as being anti female, and not in conformity with the NEA’s goals for socialization and domination of community schools.
Wait, you did know that and more, and still you accuse us of Obama-phobia, for raising questions and expecting rational and reasonable answers…, still waiting…
I was only accusing you of being a poor and slightly paranoid guest.
…
Apr 3, 2009 - 2:42 pm 81. Whitehall:Back in my college days, the easiest girls to seduce were journalism co-eds, with sociology majors and psych majors right behind.
Any guesses as to how most of them voted?
Nursing students came after you.
I think we ALL knew during the election that Obama was cheating.
Apr 3, 2009 - 2:48 pm 82. Benj:Though Blert don’t. As for Wretch (to go back to that last thread) – You’re right I’ve assumed he’s slicker than the many conspiracy-mongers among his fans, which is why he seems like a fraud to me…Be interesting to see if he chooses to distance himself (FOR ONCE!) from conspiratorial nonsense like Blert’s. Or whether he implicitly says to all the fantasts he’s loved before – keep it coming …
Running for the weekend Bud – Got a story re my day with my boy and WHITTAKER CHAMBERS that I ‘d think you’d really enjoy – I’m going to write it up for FIRST – But too long now…
Apr 3, 2009 - 2:49 pm 83. buddy larsen:Benj, if you and Boon weren’t defending the campaign on the topic, what were you doing? Did y’all have another topic in mind, and the words just happened to match up?
I’m sorry, I didn’t follow the strategic idiot running GOP –can you give a hint –initials maybe?
Your 78, no doubt those service workers DID see, or DO see, Obama as deliverance from the past –but do they also see him as deliverance from the future of a Constitutional Republic?
If not then you and Mr. Jones were only proselytizing the yesterday, not the tomorrow, which is of course, unlike yesterday, the thing we will all have a hand in creating.
Apr 3, 2009 - 2:54 pm 84. buddy larsen:I wanted Jesse Lee Peterson as America’s first black president, but noooo. Can’t let an actual patriot stand up –someone who talks up the unique value of the nation, and reminds people that slavery was all about all our great great great grandaddies, and at this late date, with all the cultural breakdowns and foreign threats we have going on, no one who really cares about the country’s future would still be trading on it.
Apr 3, 2009 - 3:04 pm 85. Benj:Wade – GOT to go – no prob with you (and Bud) starting other hares running – but (from a good guest pov) not the most, ah, honorable way of argufying. – “So you’re telling me…” What I was telling you was clear as day. It wasn’t close to your paraphrase. But since you ask – my experience suggest that O’s voters are with him. And that those who may peel off (for a time) tend to be on the left. I’m thinking of folks who will be pissed by his slow go approach to gays in the military, Truth and ReC Commission (or prosecutions) for torture, failure to nationalize banks…etc. Surely y ou understand that there’s strong constitutency to the left of OBama! Doesn’t sound like you’re figuring that into your analysis – But -what do I know – I’m sure you’ve got a better sense fo the revulsion toward Obama’s policies that coursing through America’s African American hoods…
Apr 3, 2009 - 3:11 pm 86. buddy larsen:and lastly, benj, re worrying ab/ GOP, I’m not a Republican –I’m an indie. In fact a 16th real indie, a Cherokee –so should my politics center around the Trail of Tears, ya reckon?
Apr 3, 2009 - 3:11 pm 87. buddy larsen:“Truth and ReC Commission” –Benj, if you side with the likes of Leahy the Lizard, you’re selling yourself down the river –by your own hand.
Apr 3, 2009 - 3:16 pm 88. Benj:Damnk I GOT to go – But C’mon Bud – What I -and Boon were questioning was Wretch’s suggestion that the paltry # of responses to the Dem’s ask for pledges in support of the budget indicated that OBama’s campaign had likely WILDLY inflated the # fo small donors to his election. Wretch set the terms of this thread – we simply busted his b.s.
Apr 3, 2009 - 3:17 pm 89. buddy larsen:look forward to the story, Benj –your writing is oodles better than your politics –re WHITTAKER CHAMBERS yes, a mess, as a person. But wrong on the One Big Thing? ‘fraid not. Think “Venona Papers”.
Apr 3, 2009 - 3:22 pm 90. buddy larsen:How come the canpaign made three copies of each pledge and then released THAT number as “the number of returns”? THAT is the story. The other is a spec on stats –but the story of how that campaign gotta be watched closely or it’ll run something on ya, THAT’s a story.
Apr 3, 2009 - 3:26 pm 91. buddy larsen:Benj, i know you gotta go, so leave this for later, i won’t take silence as no response, but you shoulda heard the Rev Peterson, just yestterday arguing on tv with some white girl Democrat partisan, he said something like “If you think the Democratic Party is right for America, just look at the black community in the cities –what else could go wrong –everything that can go wrong has already and THIS is the Democratic Party as it is, with no influence from any other party….”
I just wish they hadn’t all four on the panel kept talking over each other –that man needs to be heard. and you know it, too, Benj.
Apr 3, 2009 - 3:40 pm 92. Habu:52. michael hoskins
Great sea story on keeping the excuse notebook.
I was always told by my father the the maximum effective range of an excuse was zero meters. He abcked it up.
As a squadron CO (one of five he had) he took VMA-311 to the Naval Air Weapons Meet at El Centro (the precursor for TOP GUN) and were it not for a hung bomb they would have won the meet. As it was he won the CNO Award for the best Marine Fighter Squadron in 1958.
He retired with more carrier landings in an F4U Corsair than any other Marine Aviator…zero accidents. He flew every aircraft in the Marine Corps inventory (fixed wing), won the Navy Cross and two DFC’s and was the First Marine to CO a squadron of A-4 Skyhawks and that squadron was the first in the Corps to have nuclear bomb capability in that aircraft type. He developed the delivery profile, tested it and put into operation.
Apr 3, 2009 - 4:54 pm 93. buddy larsen:the Chance-Vought F4U Corsair
Apr 3, 2009 - 5:32 pm 94. Jamie Irons:Habu,
What a great man your dad was.
I’ve always had a fondness for Marines, and marine aviators seem almost godlike to me.
From your description of your life, I would say you’re a far braver individual than I am! Must run in the genes of the Habu clan!
Jamie Irons
Apr 3, 2009 - 5:38 pm 95. Charles:77. blert:
I agree that — if Obama’s birth records were opened and they did not show that he was born in Kenya–then likely the alternative would be that he is the son of Frank Marshall Davis, member of the CPUSA. Marshall was the friend of the family that Obama wrote about in his book: Quoting from this article:
In fact, the 1951 report of the Commission on Subversive Activities to the Legislature of the Territory of Hawaii identified him as a CPUSA member. What’s more, anti-communist congressional committees, including the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), accused Davis of involvement in several communist-front organizations.
Apr 3, 2009 - 6:02 pm 96. rickl:I’m getting here late and I haven’t read all of the comments, but I’d like to mention that my boss and his wife both had their credit cards charged for Obama campaign contributions: a $10 charge and a $15 charge. They most assuredly did not support his candidacy.
So there may be some good old-fashioned credit card fraud involved in O’s “small donations”.
Apr 3, 2009 - 6:06 pm 97. Lifeofthemind:rickl, See my #24. They should charge him in small claims court, millions should.
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:13 pm 98. erc rodson:On the subject of inspections: dogma was, if you can’t do it right, everyone do it alike, be consistent. As Bill Mauldin said in one of his Willie and Joe cartoons, which showed the two disheveled dogfaces eying a tank: “A moving foxhole draws the eye”. Management by exception works the same way. And Dion of Syracuse had an object lesson on how to be a successful tyrant, cutting off the heads of the tallest stalks of wheat as he walked through his fields. Safety often lies in numbers, but not if the herd is going over the cliff.
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:21 pm 99. Wadeusaf:“starting other hares running”, well, it is all about the numbers, used to skew debates and screw the public. So if we are hunting and hares are in season then I suppose hares are going to run.
The problem is the current administration is loosing credibility especially where numbers are concerned because the numbers they are using and have used do not stand up to scrutiny.
I have yet to be convinced, and neither have others been convinced that was the case under President Bush, even in those areas where I disagreed with him, the honest effort at an honest assessment was made, and the rational was displayed. I have not had the same pleasure from President Obama, despite his promises and despite his rhetorical flourishes. I figure that is a door that is swinging two ways, cause I hear the Kos kids are disgusted too only for reasons I would tend to celebrate.
Our form of government does not need major change, I don’t think, but like our monetary system it needs a lot more sunshine, and far less shadow in which to function in an appropriate way. That is not happening under Csarist positions, it is not happening on the web, in fact I think there is far less information available in the different cabinet offices under this administration than the last one.
Benj, I have little reason to trust this President, I have little faith that his approach to anything will work and I have no reason to believe any of the hopy changy stuff that the majority of people voted for him mantra’d. From personal observation and discussion with a wide number of folks from a wide number of states and circumstances I certainly do believe that confluence of history line as a reason for much of his support, but understanding what he stands for is not a part of the equation.
In fact if truth was told I think the majority of those folks of all colors,(with the exception of those who attended his church of course) had they known, would have passed on Obama. But surly you would know this as well or better than me.
Apr 3, 2009 - 7:22 pm 100. jj mollo:I didn’t give anything to Obama, but my wife did. So I’m figuring that his base was severely underestimated. That’s 50 percent, right? Using comparable techniques to the Johns Hopkins study, I’d guess that 150 million Americans must have given.
BTW, I wrote an extensive critique of the Hopkins Iraq mortality study at the time and and reworked it later when the second one came out. I came up with at least 25 distinct specific issues that any survey statistician should have seen.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:24 pm 101. buddy larsen:The one thing he said before election day that has proved out afterwards, is the promise of transparency. Despite his rhetoric, misdirection, exaggeration, minimization, and fast & loose treatment of meanings, he IS becoming more and more transparent every day.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:32 pm 102. red:—-Obama said that the U.S invented the automobile and thus must support our industry. In reality the first car was built by a Frenchman and the first patent for a car went to a German.
—Wow, that’s really important. That changes everything. Amazing.
Messiahs are infallible.
Obama made a false statement.
Therefore Obama is not a Messiah..
______________________________________________________
Americans are proud of our history of innovation.
People who are proud of their history know details about it.
People who are seizing industrial power and remaking an industry should know something about it.
Obama knows nothing about the American auto industry.
Therefore he is not proud of his country’s history
Therefore Obama should not be remaking the American auto industry.
Yes, if you are a thinking person, it does change everything.
Apr 3, 2009 - 8:46 pm 103. vanderleun:On the Lancet study you write “Where are the craters? I asked myself.”
And even more telling question would be, “Where were the funerals?”
Given the level of critical reportage at the time it beggars belief that with 654,965 funerals we didn’t see a huge number reported and displayed.
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:12 pm 104. buddy larsen:JJ, remember the Lancet Study –how hilarious (if the topic will allow such a word) the methodology, once it slipped out into the public domain? Basically, they sampled the combat zone, then extrapolated to the entire population –most of which has never yet seen any fighting. People wonderedd, are they crazy, didn’t they know they’d be exposed? But meanwhile, their number got used a thousand times a day in all media, for years and years. It became a powerful “talking point” –bashing dissenters daily, long, long past its exposure as a blood libel.
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:22 pm 105. buddy larsen:duh, now reading link, Lancet = Hopkins –duh duh duh
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:26 pm 106. Fat Man:If you start from the assumption that BO is an empty suit from the Chicago Machine, it is all very simple.
Apr 3, 2009 - 9:36 pm 107. Karen Yvonne:Charles @ 63: here’s a very good interview in which the birth certificate issue comes up: “interview with Alan Keyes”. Scroll down to the April 3 episode and click play. The interview is almost 2 hours long but is worth it if you have time. Well-articulated and fervent.
Apr 4, 2009 - 2:09 am 108. Boonton:Wadeusaf
So what you are telling me is that the majority of people voting for Obama really want the crap he is attempting to spoon? I do not for one minute believe that the majority of people at the time they cast their ballot knew what he stood for,
Ahhh another hunch based approach to reality. So Obama’s high approval rating, and the inability of the right to either formulate a coherent anti-Obama message or achieve at least respectability as the ‘loyal opposition’ supports your hunch that 69 million people were duped by Obama? Or was it that 69 million people never voted for Obama, just the one homeless guy ACORN drove to 69m polling places?
buddy
but you shoulda heard the Rev Peterson, just yestterday arguing on tv with some white girl Democrat partisan, he said something like “If you think the Democratic Party is right for America, just look at the black community in the cities –what else could go wrong –everything that can go wrong has already and THIS is the Democratic Party as it is, with no influence from any other party….”
I won’t argue that one party rule, anywhere, almost always ends up badly. (Although Republicans do sometimes get elected in big cities since they can play the ‘we are outsiders against the machine’ card). However a lot of what went wrong for blacks has little to do with politics. The deindustrialization of America, the huge economic shift away from low skilled labor, the credentialization (can’t have this job without a HS degree, college degree, grad. degree etc).
rickl
I’m getting here late and I haven’t read all of the comments, but I’d like to mention that my boss and his wife both had their credit cards charged for Obama campaign contributions: a $10 charge and a $15 charge.
I assume they disputed the charge which means the credit card company would have yanked the $25 out of the campaigns account. I worked for an ecommerce business for a while, chargebacks were a major issue. We had only 3 days to respond to a disputed charge that came in by fax. If our chargebacks ever went over 1% of our charges for a month they would suspend our merchant account…which we didn’t learn happened until all in the sudden web site sales stopped or a customer would call saying he couldn’t make a purchase. We ended up trying to steer large purchases towards check or paypal when we had a $2,000 charge disputed by a guy who was trying to rip us off and we had to spend days arguing for our merchant account to be restored.
Wadeusaf
The problem is the current administration is loosing credibility especially where numbers are concerned because the numbers they are using and have used do not stand up to scrutiny.
BHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
hahahahahahaha
ahahahahahah
hahahahahah
ahahahah
hahahaha
hahah
ha
ha
…
haha
ha
good one. I really hope you’re not talking about the 114K response thing. I really hope you’re smarter than that.
Apr 4, 2009 - 7:05 am 109. buddy larsen:jeez, Boon — that’s a LOT of ha ha’s.
Apr 4, 2009 - 7:37 am 110. COG:Enthusiasm for the Obama candidacy as described — and personally shown by — Boon and Benj reminds me of the joyous enthusiasm shown upon the acquital of O J Simpson by folks of the same race. I suspect that particular affinity however is more broadly tribal than just racial, based on widespread loathing of conservative blacks by other blacks as evidenced for example by black opposition to Justice Clarence Thomas’s nomination to the US Supreme Court.
In those remarkable NC GOTV efforts on O’s behalf, one suspects ongoing legacy black reservations about political white Dems didn’t apply to O, thus liberating latent fervor.
Apr 4, 2009 - 9:52 am 111. buddy larsen:I just do not understand why Benj is so proud of that 96% AA bloc vote. To me, that’s a bug, not a feature. I grew up across the deep deep south in the 50s and 60s and i guarantee you race relations were a LOT more trusting and helpful and taken-for-granted then than now after two generations of the Great Society.
I never lived in a northern city, but whatcha want to bet the same applies. As a people, Americans were on their way to something new, back then.
And it’s not as if there aren’t plenty of AA conservative –or anti-plantation party –intellectuals around propounding the truth of the damn near incredible destruction the Democrats have done to african americans –in order to establish that bloc vote. It’s guys like Benj who could break the bloc, which would also break the backlash, which would also force the Democratic Party to stop sandbagging AA economic progress (except for whatever illusion of progress comes via a gov’t which almost literally murders its beneficiaries, and creates ever-deeper resentment in everyone else).
Instead we get Benj inexplicably proud of how adroitly he uses his talents to leverage history into a near unanimous bloc vote for the party that, surface appearances to the contrary, has been for a half-century actively selling his people down the river, one hundred and fifty years after America fought a civil war (which cost a percentage of lives that extrapolated to today’s times-ten population would be seven million) in order to start putting that formerly world-wide and history-long ‘peculiar institution’ behind us.
Can’t get rid of a barrier by making it so huge and pervasive that no one even notices it anymore, but instead just resigns and accepts it as a natural restriction, like ants walking around a brick. that’s all colors of ants, not just the one.
I know, i know, easy for me to say because i’m not AA –but i HAVE spent a confoundedly long life cast by that whole propaganda corpus as collectively guilty of some sort of demonic power over others that needs to be beat down at every opportunity, because in Utopia nobody is responsible for what they do *except for* white southern Christian males from 150 years ago, who are all somehow miraculously still alive and still marching around oppressing the now after 150 years obviously willing to be oppressed. The pantheon of victims just keeps growing (along with the Democratic party coincidentally), so hell i’ll NEVER be able to make enough penance for having been born.
Apr 4, 2009 - 12:23 pm 112. Wadeusaf:Actually Boonton,
The 114K thingy wasn’t uppermost in my mind, although there are a lot of interesting side streets a thorough accountant to take that crooked story.
Don’t hurt yourself chortling, not now. I have actually considered (and rejected) President Obama to be the embodiment of Henry M. Turner’s warning to the Georgia Legislature in 1867. As one of 32 unseated state legislators, Mr. Turner told the the whites in office, “you will make us your foes, you will make our constituency your foes, I’ll do all I can to poison my race against Democracy…this thing means revolution,”
The wayward sister’s fate with the union launched Hiram Revels fame in his first speech before Congress. Revels however, viewed himself as a transitory figure between aristocracy and democracy, and was to a great degree.
I do not share even that optimism for Obama, for not only is he hell bent on destroying the free market, but intent on destroying finally the balance between local, state and federal governments. Indeed it does embody revolution, a revolution that will not stand.
BTW Boonton, Is your choice of moniker here appropriate for the times or just a throw back to the historical ties with the Bon Ton, or both. I applaud you for it, kind of.
Apr 4, 2009 - 12:39 pm 113. blert:The best fictional predictive for H was and is Isaac Asimov’s ‘mule’, the nemesis of Hari Seldon.
The essence of the mule is his ability to charm and manipulate people in numbers great and small.
It’s interesting that Asimov imagined a metro-sexual omega-male ( nothing as sexless as a mule ) as the ultimate threat to the normal flow of history.
I’d say Merkel picked up on H’s vibe — her gay-dar may have gone tilt.
It says more than a bit that Rahmbo — the ballet queen — is H’s chief of staff: a term that seems pregnant with meaning in this context.
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:14 pm 114. buddy larsen:Jeez, blert, please…we already have Angry Barney’s Fannie trembling like Victor Mature trying to pull the Thampson Opthion down on thith horrid thtraight thothiety that hath tho badly hurt hith feelingth.
Apr 4, 2009 - 1:54 pm 115. LR:They simply found a way to transfer money from foreign sources without much chance of being caught.
Apr 5, 2009 - 6:53 am 116. Boonton:Enthusiasm for the Obama candidacy as described — and personally shown by — Boon and Benj reminds me of the joyous enthusiasm shown upon the acquital of O J Simpson by folks of the same race. I suspect that particular affinity however is more broadly tribal than just racial,
I don’t get it. Supporting Obama is like supporting a murderer? What tribal affinity do I have with OJ Simpson?
based on widespread loathing of conservative blacks by other blacks as evidenced for example by black opposition to Justice Clarence Thomas’s nomination to the US Supreme Court.
So if blacks support someone you don’t like who is black that’s tribal. If blacks don’t support someone who is black because they disagree with his philosophy that too is tribal. Thomas is a conservative Republican, most blacks are not. Why are they obligated to support him simply because he is black?
I just do not understand why Benj is so proud of that 96% AA bloc vote. To me, that’s a bug, not a feature.
Indeed, although you do have to admire a political party that manages to alienate 96% of a group. As for being proud, I think Obama’s impressive showing among whites, esp. youth and blue colar workers is more worthy of praise. Your attempts to depict Obama’s victory as some sort of revenge fantasy of the Black Panthers combined with an unprecedented outpouring of white guilt is pretty silly. Many in the black establishment didn’t even support Obama until he started beating Hillary.
Wadeusaf
I do not share even that optimism for Obama, for not only is he hell bent on destroying the free market, but intent on destroying finally the balance between local, state and federal governments. Indeed it does embody revolution, a revolution that will not stand.
I think you take yourself too seriously. The balance between state, local and federal govts is almost the same. If you want to take 1867 as your baseline you may have a case for a revolution but statements like this just illustrate a general detachment from reality.
BTW Boonton, Is your choice of moniker here appropriate for the times or just a throw back to the historical ties with the Bon Ton, or both. I applaud you for it, kind of.
Just a town in NJ. Don’t jump to any conclusions.
Apr 5, 2009 - 10:32 am 117. Nine-of-Diamonds:” a political party that manages to alienate 96% of a group…” Nah; Just said group [logically] voting for the party that will give them the most handouts. Self reliance doesn’t sell nowadays – especially amongst self-pitying blacks. Like tapeworms or leeches, they consume mindlessly and fail to consider the consequences of killing their hosts (i.e., productive, disproportionately white/asian taxpayers).
“Impressive showing” amongst whites? Frank Marshall’s jug-eared bastard lost them big time, and he’s starting to trend below GW Bush pre-9-11 amongst the country as a whole. Even with a hated predecessor and a fawning media.
Kind of interesting, how the misguided votes of the SWPL crowd = the dawn of a new racial era. I seem to recall that, on the campaign trail, 0bama’s self-hating SWPL volunteers & black volunteers practiced strict segregation, despite their messiah’s “post-racial” blatherings. We’re in for medieval-level nastiness in the coming decade or two, thanks to 0bama’s and Bush’s mismanagement. Look for MORE and more intense racism & tribalism – not less. Posters on Stormfront, etc. were beside themselves with glee on Nov. 5th for a reason. The likes of Benj & Boonton will soon be disappointed; the Hammerskins, OTOH, will not.
Apr 5, 2009 - 2:19 pm 118. buddy larsen:Boon, what’s “kinda silly” is your generalizing my comments on Benj’s anecdote into some sort of black-panther phobia. But ignore all that and let’s focus on your neat reversal of the meaning of a 96% bloc vote. No debater’s tricks, not asking you to do any time-consuming research, but, can you just generally describe from your point of view how the GOP (which i’m not defending per se) managed to achieve this 96% alienation?
What actual real things did it do to earn this universal rejection?
Remember, when (if) you answer, the bullshit meter is on the table plugged in, so try to keep it real.
Apr 5, 2009 - 2:42 pm 119. buddy larsen:LR/115; –that’s what i think –no stealing (or very little) that would cause blowback after all –rather, the ‘hide’ here is just programmatic scofflawing, such as single doners giving through multiple cut-out transactions.
Apr 5, 2009 - 4:36 pm 120. Wadeusaf:“statements like this just illustrate a general detachment from reality.”
Bingo, I was poking fun of the whole confluence of “We are the ones you’ve been waiting for” and the search for a Democrat leader. It mattered not a bit what the man said or did, who he associated with or what he stood for or what his record said about him. What mattered to the vast majority of his supporters was that he was black, young and hip. That is not a very sane nor a solid basis to vote for president.
I took the opportunity of poking fun at your haughty we won, so just shut up, response to the scandal of the credit cards. I really don’t care what is statistically possible, I do want the actual numbers, which we will never have because the Obama campaign deliberately disconnected the feature from the site. Why? After pledging he would keep things on the up and up, did he find it necessary to act like such a sleaze. If you tell me hey he is a politician, they you put the lie to all the special feelings you hold dearly about him. You cannot have it both ways.
Still it is my opinion that Obama and Companies’ mishandling of economic matters will either create a demand for a return to a free and above board market. Either that or everything will shortly go to hell. Either way his “revolution” this will not last.
Apr 5, 2009 - 5:30 pm 121. Boonton:Just said group [logically] voting for the party that will give them the most handouts. Self reliance doesn’t sell nowadays – especially amongst self-pitying blacks.
Self-reliance always sells as a fantasy. Go back to 1867, the north was ’self-reliant’ with its industrial manufacturing and victory over the south….yet their chief economic policy was protective tariffs…massive ones…that protected domestic industry at the expense of agriculture and the poor.
But more recently, you have a double sided coin but you want to pretend it’s one sided. Republicans puff up their groups with a lot of tall tales of self-reliance while protecting their own. How many blacks are getting agricultural subsidies?
Also, this is just common sense PR, trying to win a new customer….one who your firm has not had the best of history with…by insulting them doesn’t work very well. Your message here is “you’re not voting for us because you’re lazy, easily fooled, and like living under the thumb of a modern day plantation manager…..so why not consider voting for us?”. Yea, ok. Good job.
Buddy
No debater’s tricks, not asking you to do any time-consuming research, but, can you just generally describe from your point of view how the GOP (which i’m not defending per se) managed to achieve this 96% alienation?
Well we are over 120 posts here, not much time before it petters out so now’s not the best time to undertake lots of research. But I think it’s fair to ask the question from both sides. It’s not great that Democrats have 96% of the black vote. Or I should say it’s not good for blacks. But I wouldn’t expect the Democratic Party to ask blacks to vote for more Republicans for their own good. But is it good for the GOP to have a party that not only has next to zero black votes but substantially low margins in many other ethnic groups as well?
The claim here is that Obama, his supporters and the Democrats are trading in tribalism and racism. But there’s no need for them to do so. The game has changed and it ain’t 1990 or 1980 anymore. With a slim majority of whites (or slight minority) and supermajorities among minorities Dems have a lock on elections. If Republicans cannot achieve anything more than token support among non-whites, their only viable strategy is supermajorities among whites.
Now supermajorities among whites will not happen by self-reliance ideologies. Whites, like any other group, do not all share the same political ideologies. Supermajorities can only come if whites as a group feel threatened. Racial tension is now in the interest of the Republican Party but not the Democratic one. So yea the question is not just why do 96% of blacks vote Democratic but also why can’t Republicans get more than 4% black support?
Now I also think, hope, that Obama is a bit of an outlier. He is charismatic and his election was historic for blacks. Scoring 96% isn’t unexpected considering the circumstances but going forward the ‘first time’ moment is gone so the numbers will come down a bit (not like they can go up much). Likewise Republicans spent the primary this time around seeing who can be more nasty towards Hispanic immigrants. Needless to say, maybe, if they don’t bend overbackwards to offend everyone next time around they may make some modest inroads among minorities and not have racial tension as their only viable option.
Wadeusaf
took the opportunity of poking fun at your haughty we won, so just shut up, response to the scandal of the credit cards. I really don’t care what is statistically possible, I do want the actual numbers,
Who cares what you want. I demanded to see an Excel sheet showing me every under $200 donation to the McCan campaign with name, address, occupation and phone number. I have yet to receive it. As for what’s statistically possible, I demolished the charges here pure and simple. Go ahead and feel free to claim that 69m people couldn’t have voted for Obama because the cab driver you had last night told you he has yet to meet anyone who says they voted for him and your World of Warcraft Clan all says they know no one who voted for him. I’m sure the only reasonable conclusions are either the whole world has gone insane or the most diabolical plot ever devised has been pulled off.
Apr 5, 2009 - 8:23 pm 122. Wadeusaf:Probably insanity, but hey, I am not saying that 69 million people did not vote for him. What I am saying is that the reason given for many of that 69 million voting for Obama is not rational, or reasonable from either a self interested POV.
I agree with you that the Republicans have not done much with the gift given them and and did not earn America’s trust. I disagree strongly that it is due to any racist tendency on the part of the GOP. I do not think it is me that wishes to make 1867 the base line today, especially given discussions of reparations that arises from time to time.
So the question still is the relationship of the individual to the larger sum of individuals. What is in your best interest is not necessarily defined by the color of your skin, but manner in which you pursue happiness, how you define happiness. There are many reasons why black people have not assimilated or been allowed to assimilate into the larger stream of American society, a struggle that begins and ends with the bias associated with looking at the issue as the matter between you people or your people or my people, instead of a collection of individuals.
If the appeal of the Democratic party is an appeal to black people, or brown people based on a patronage system that favors unproductive behavior, how is it racist to oppose such thinking? I am guilty then, I make no protestation of innocence. That I want you as a person to do better than your perceived race, or even my perceived race, because it is in my and your interest, I am guilty. That I refuse to lump you in with a group with which you have no compelling financial interest, nor could said group represent itself as somehow supporting your interests, I am guilty.
That is not what Obama promised. It is not what Obama is delivering, it is why I oppose him and why I distrust him. It is why I view him as setting American and human relations back to reconstruction era thinking. But hey, I am just a racist, right?
BTW,McCain’s campaign would be correct, from a privacy rights pov, to deny you your personal copy, but demonstrations of the ability to make a copy of that list to proper authority should suffice. No such demonstration is possible for the Obama Campaign, there is a reason. That is fact not fiction. World of War craft Clan??? On line game??? You (and my son too, I suppose) know more about that than I, sorry to disappoint you.
Apr 6, 2009 - 1:33 am 123. Nine-of-Diamonds:Two sided coins… irrelevant 19th Century comparisons… anyone care to tell me where this guy is heading? ‘Cause I don’t think HE knows. Kinda like his mocha messiah, actually.
“Also, this is just common sense PR, trying to win a new customer….one who your firm has not had the best of history with…by insulting them doesn’t work very well. Your message here is “you’re not voting for us because you’re lazy, easily fooled, and like living under the thumb of a modern day plantation manager…..so why not consider voting for us?”. Yea, ok. Good job.”
Don’t patronize me, and don’t perceive me as a salesman. You assume that I consider blacks to be my “customers” (rather than another (or my own) race), and that I view my job as winning votes for the GOP. I could give two fracks about whether or not the fools in the GOP manage to win their quota of blacks because I know it doesn’t matter, as far as the country’s concerned. Instead, I think I’ll leave “mah-nori-tay” outreach to Michael Steele, a dying party’s own version of the underqualified “Magic Negro”. Good luck to him and his “hip hop” out reach, BTW.
“Likewise Republicans spent the primary this time around seeing who can be more nasty towards Hispanic immigrants.”
Here’s a hint. Worry less about the Repukes and worry more about race relations between your beloved colored people and Hispanics. You should hear the anti-hispanic rants at predominantly black City Council meetings in my area. Also witness the peace and racial harmony of Los Angeles, where immigrant gangs violently drive out the “mayates” (Google is your amigo). The dems will likely continue to win at the national level while city/state politics degenerates into tribalist animosity – if not outright political violence – as the economic decline continues. As a general rule, large political coalitions are inherently fragile. While the black/hispanic/jewish/SWPL alliance will continue to win presidencies and senate majorities, it will consistently fail to address underlying structural flaws w/in modern America due to breakdowns at the local level.
0bama has won the presidency precisely at the point when it is least likely to matter. As internal and external pressures on the nation increase he may end up becoming little more than the mayor of DC – a figurehead like Hamid Karzai who has next to no control over his country’s interior. For crying out loud, look at how congressional dems already talk past him in stimulius debates, etc. He’s either
(a) token black, and he knows it, or
(b) a giggling neophyte in the grips of socio-political forces he cannot begin to comprehend.
Apr 6, 2009 - 5:16 am 124. Boonton:What I am saying is that the reason given for many of that 69 million voting for Obama is not rational, or reasonable from either a self interested POV.
It is rare to find examples of people voting against their self-interest. The most potent critics of farm subsidies, for example, rarely get elected from states where farming is one of the major industries. Given this fact of life, what evidence do you have that you’re a better judge of other people’s self interest than other people themselves?
I disagree strongly that it is due to any racist tendency on the part of the GOP.
I didn’t say it was due to GOP racism. But I did point out that when one party manages to do so horribly with all but one race over time their incentives will change in favor of racism.
I do not think it is me that wishes to make 1867 the base line today, especially given discussions of reparations that arises from time to time.
Discussions from whom? Some college professor that makes it onto Bill O’Reilly? Show me a serious reparations idea from a serious person and I’ll show you Obama’s support slipping.
So the question still is the relationship of the individual to the larger sum of individuals. What is in your best interest is not necessarily defined by the color of your skin, but manner in which you pursue happiness, how you define happiness. There are many reasons why black people have not assimilated or been allowed to assimilate into the larger stream of American society, a struggle that begins and ends with the bias associated with looking at the issue as the matter between you people or your people or my people, instead of a collection of individuals.
I think here you are missing the correct POV. Black people have every right to say why should we assimiliate? In many cases we were here before many whites. Would you tell members of the Mayflower Society that their problem is they aren’t assimiliating? What I think is happening with the ‘post-racial’ meme that coems with Obama is a moving beyond of race. Society is assimiliating with black culture as well as black culture is assimiliating with white. Among many younger people today the obsession with race appears rather silly. This is a bit ancedotal but I’ve noticed that very little Obama support seems to center around race but a lot of anti-Obamaites are posititvely obsessed with race.
If the appeal of the Democratic party is an appeal to black people, or brown people based on a patronage system that favors unproductive behavior, how is it racist to oppose such thinking? I am guilty then, I make no protestation of innocence. That I want you as a person to do better than your perceived race, or even my perceived race, because it is in my and your interest, I am guilty.
Not seeing it man, not seeing it. I don’t see the election of Obama as either motivated by or in support of a ‘black/brown patronage system’. But you miss the point about the failure of your rhetoric so I’ll say it again. Telling people that they are stupid, that they are easily led astray, that they are essentially fools and should therefore buy your product because you know what’s best for them is highly unlikely to win you many converts.
BTW,McCain’s campaign would be correct, from a privacy rights pov, to deny you your personal copy, but demonstrations of the ability to make a copy of that list to proper authority should suffice.
Has the FEC found that Obama is in violation of any campaign rule or regulation? If so please provide the link, if not then he is not. From a privacy rights POV the FEC is only a proper authority if it has regulations requiring the collection of such data and requires the submission of such data. If the FEC has not requested it, then, I’m still at a loss for what you’re complaining about. And when and where has the McCain campaign ‘demonstrated’ that they could make a copy to the proper authority?
Apr 6, 2009 - 6:08 am 125. Benj:My home computer’s has been wack so unable to listen in this weekend – but Wade – you’ll allow Boon is a worthy foe, no? He’s coming sharp at you – but you’re pretending he’s gone ad hominen – he’s just cleaning up you guys for defending the silly figures thread that Wretch started unspooling a the top of this thread – THanks for your Boon – Wade and Buddy are fine folks – they’ll fight you but honor among argufiers…
Bud – still not time/place to tell you my CHambers – but as a tease – whipped through “Witness” this weekend. Great book!!!!!!!!!!!!! To tell you sumpin I’m guessing you and (a few other Clubbers!) already know!!!
Apr 6, 2009 - 9:36 am 126. Nine-of-Diamonds:“you’re pretending he’s gone ad hominen [sic]”
Because, you know, snide comments about WoW are so non-ad-hominemy. I’m telling you – this forum deserves a better class of troll (sorry, Heath).
I do agree that Wretchard is wrong to focus on what’s pretty much a non-issue. The tapeworms and leeches elected their Affirmative Action tapeworm-in-chief, and we’re bound for the post-racial promised land under the most racially fixated prez ticket since Wallace/LeMay. Thus, who cares about a few overseas millions, one way or the other?
Apr 6, 2009 - 3:38 pm 127. Wadeusaf:“It is rare to find examples of people voting against their self-interest.”
No, it is rare to find examples of people voting against their perceived self interest. I do not believe it can be argued for example that the Welfare reforms introduced under President Clinton were not in the nations individuals best interest. Yet in voting for Obama that is precisely what folks voted for, knowingly or not.
“The most potent critics of farm subsidies, for example, rarely get elected from states where farming is one of the major industries. Given this fact of life, what evidence do you have that you’re a better judge of other people’s self interest than other people themselves?” again where the farm subsidy is in actuality not in the interest of the farm state itself, it is the perception. If a trillion dollar bail out was wrong under President Bush, why is another one right under President Obama? Again, the perception of interest is not the same as best interest. I can not determine for you or anyone what your perception will be, I can attempt to persuade you if you (or the members of the the fourth estate) will allow it.
I didn’t say it was due to GOP racism. But I did point out that when one party manages to do so horribly with all but one race over time their incentives will change in favor of racism.
So are positing that traditional Democratic Party Racism was the cause of the liberalization of the Democratic Party in 1968? I surly am lost by the logic of your point.
Discussions from whom? Some college professor that makes it onto Bill O’Reilly? Show me a serious reparations idea from a serious person and I’ll show you Obama’s support slipping.
Dr. Jerimiah Wright, and Dr. Iva Carruthers for a start, then there is Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn, and depending on the audience a certain Chicago Politician named, ahhh, yeah Barrack Obama, who said…
“”I personally would want to see our tragic history, or the tragic elements of our history, acknowledged. I consistently believe that when it comes to whether it’s Native Americans or African-American issues or reparations, the most important thing for the U.S. government to do is not just offer words, but offer deeds.”
I will leave it to you to determine the credibility of the leader of one of the largest churches in Chicago, a major member of the congregation and the US Senator. Of the question of whether or not Barrack Obama is in favor of reparations lets just agree that perhaps he misspoke, ah, again.
I think here you are missing the correct POV. Black people have every right to say why should we assimiliate? Agreed if you change the word people to individuals.
In many cases we were here before many whites. Would you tell members of the Mayflower Society that their problem is they aren’t assimiliating? What I think is happening with the ‘post-racial’ meme that coems with Obama is a moving beyond of race. Society is assimiliating with black culture as well as black culture is assimiliating with white. Among many younger people today the obsession with race appears rather silly. This is a bit ancedotal but I’ve noticed that very little Obama support seems to center around race but a lot of anti-Obamaites are posititvely obsessed with race.
First the post racial meme was well on its way before Obama, and certainly does not require “the one” to continue. Interracial marriage for one and to some degree that has not been measured a success or not, the integration of Public Schools both of which were made possible by the integration of the Military has been knocking down the last walls of racial
bias in our society. We were slowly becoming Americans, not black not white, but citizens of one nation.
I do not believe that the obsession with race is the case, always with exceptions of course, as the rule cannot hold 100% when individual liberty is involved. The explanation of the POV of the GOP is assumed to be consumed by race. It is not. Folks do insist on projecting on others a racial bias that simply does not exist while rejecting the very plain (vanilla?) and rational logic as an excuse for racism. Could it be a lack of a real grappling with a racist history? Or could it be that in aligning with former Southern Democrats the GOP sinned the unforgivable sin of consorting with former racists, like George Wallace, or Senator Byrd, oh wait yeah those guys were democrats, with only Wallace publicly asking forgiveness. Hummm, as a staunch independent conservative individual at that.
On patronage
Not seeing it man, not seeing it. I don’t see the election of Obama as either motivated by or in support of a ‘black/brown patronage system’. But you miss the point about the failure of your rhetoric so I’ll say it again. Telling people that they are stupid, that they are easily led astray, that they are essentially fools and should therefore buy your product because you know what’s best for them is highly unlikely to win you many converts.
Um Hello, Blagojevich, Chicago and Daily et al. No Patronage? The current administrations selection process? Your kidding right? Spoils of war I understand, cat fighting over the scraps, is another thing.
I do not pretend to know better than anyone else, nor do I wish to impose my thinking on anyone. But I will debate and with luck persuade others or at least come away with a clearer picture and fresh appreciation of the opposing arguments. I am not naive enough to believe that no one has read “The Prince”.
“Has the FEC found that Obama is in violation of any campaign rule or regulation? If so please provide the link, if not then he is not. From a privacy rights POV the FEC is only a proper authority if it has regulations requiring the collection of such data and requires the submission of such data. If the FEC has not requested it, then, I’m still at a loss for what you’re complaining about.” The record keeping required which would prevent the breaking of campaign finance laws was not mandatory. It was a pledge made by Obama that was broken, again. There is no way of which I am aware to investigate or prove the charges against the Obama campaign.
Apr 6, 2009 - 6:06 pm 128. Wadeusaf:The mechanism that remained in place on McCain’s website, did not allow charges by Minnie or Mickey Mouse or other fictional characters. Other safeguards were involved as well. Sorry, but in running a clean campaign, President Obama broke his word that time too. His word is not worth a whole lot.
And when and where has the McCain campaign ‘demonstrated’ that they could make a copy to the proper authority? By virtue of the fact that the software was not turned off, the details were collected. On/Off, it is as simple as that.
Forgive me, this…
“Yet in voting for Obama that is precisely what folks voted for…”
should read… “voted against.”
Apr 6, 2009 - 6:11 pm 129. Wadeusaf:And Benj, the point of the thread header was found in this sentence,
“If these people really existed, you’d expect more response from them on the budget pledge.”
What about that 1 out of 25 ratio, do you not understand? Wasn’t even asking for money!
Apr 6, 2009 - 6:16 pm 130. Boonton:First the post racial meme was well on its way before Obama, and certainly does not require “the one” to continue.
I didn’t argue that Obama created the post-racial idea or that he somehow makes it happen. In fact, the causation is the other way around. Obama was able to be elected because many Americans, especially younger ones, have moved beyond race. This is not the color blind meme that Stephan Colbert does a great job of mocking (“People tell me I’m white, I don’t know since I don’t see color!”) They can acknowledge the historic aspect of Obama’s election but I have to say for most it simply isn’t about race. On the other hand, for more than a few (certainly not all), anti-Obamaites, race seems to be an endless obsession. Your nonsense over reparations, for example. If 7 years and 11 months from now Obama has not proposed, supported or signed any type of reparations bill (the passage you quoted is vague and non-specific…reperations run the gamut from simple anti-poverty measures that are race blind to the deservedly mocked ‘40 acres and a mule for every black person’), will you still be preaching the approaching race war?
Um Hello, Blagojevich, Chicago and Daily et al. No Patronage?
Blago’s election was black patronage? You truely are color blind. The man appears very white to me.
Apr 7, 2009 - 5:47 am 131. Wadeusaf:On reparations, Yes we’ll agree that he, um misspoke, until he proves he did not.
On patonage, So your telling me Blago got elected without patronage? Don’t be absurd, please?
Moved beyond race? yes they are trying?
But tell me what is the celebration of diversity all about? How is it not a direct contravention of everything you would like to claim about Modern American Democrat policy and practice which conveniently forgets that the promise is one of equal opportunity, not a promise of equality. We should not underestimate the value in competition, nor oversell the flaws of it.
40 Acres and a mule, was possible in very narrow areas of the south, and was a boon to the freedmen in LA and Mississippi before the end of the war and on the coastal islands shortly after. It was no more foolish than the Homestead Act. The practice was allowed to be turned on its head and ridiculed by people who did not have the courage of their own convictions and did not act decisively, but with hesitation over the legalities of a perceived land grab and distribution. BTW, There was not ever enough land nor enough old Army mules to make the promise to every former slave a reality. I think there is linkage of sorts to the sub prime scams.
Reparation is the act of compensating a wronged party. Anti poverty measures are not been included in anyone’s definition of it that I am aware of. WANE.
Apr 7, 2009 - 1:27 pm 132. Boonton:On patonage, So your telling me Blago got elected without patronage? Don’t be absurd, please?
I’m sorry, why do I care about this again? Blago got elected, Blago was corrupt, he was indicted and impeached. The guy before him was a Republican, he too was corrupt and is now in jail…where Blago may very likely end up joining him. I’m not seeing what this is supposed to say about blacks, whites or race in general.
Reparation is the act of compensating a wronged party. Anti poverty measures are not been included in anyone’s definition of it that I am aware of.
You may have forgotten, David Horowitz, several years ago, placed some ads in college newspapers implying that welfare was reparations for slavery. There was an uproar because many, naturally, jumped on the point that welfare applies to everyone…black or white. Horowitz, in a pretty witty response, pulled a bunch of quotes from Martin Luther King and other notables advocating an expansion of welfare on the grounds that it would be reparations. Which, if you think about it, has a logic to it. Blacks today who were hurt by slavery’s legacy (and Jim Crow’s) would be more likely to be poorer today. Aid to the poor, then, would flow more to them than to those who are better off today because of slavery/Jim Crow’s legacy. Hence you got reparations by helping the poor.
I’ll try to find the specific response by Horowitz if you want me too.
Apr 7, 2009 - 6:53 pm 133. Wadeusaf:I do not believe you are so dense as to not recognize the web of Chicago patronage, that included the indited and convicted former Governor, the current Teflon President and the leaders of various church groups and affiliations used to grease the wheels. Perhaps I did not express it very well. It is called patronage. It is a major feature of the Democrat Party. In Illinois such patronage is a major part of urban political survival. It is why President Obama joined Reverend Wright’s congregation and why despite never listening to a single sermon, Obama considered the Reverend to be a father figure. He learned about patronage from the Rev. Didn’t you read his books, those autobiographies of Obama?
On reparations, I do recall the conversations, and I believe that Horowitz, using some nifty quotes from MLK, was arguing that the Great Society of LBJ was sufficent payment. It was part of his argument about why reparations were a bad idea, I think. In fact I believe his points were addressed in a First of the Month Club article, but I don’t recall the substance, having only glance at it last year.
But the question for me boils down to this, which neither Horowitz or King address, Does the acceptance of a handout make you richer or does it impoverish a man even more? As it certainly does nothing for ones spirit or self esteem, I firmly believe it is the not the richer answer that is correct. Also, by that definition access to education is a form of welfare and by extension a form of reparations. I do not think, and I hope you can agree, that is not the case. I hope you understand that universal education is a mutually beneficial contract entered into freely because it is in all our interests. While most forms of government and socialized welfare are not in anyone’s interest beyond sustaining a person for a hopefully brief period. The longer a person is dependent on welfare the more beholden a person becomes to the government. I have found that arrangement to be nothing more than a form of slavery. Imo, it is better to go hungry. That is not any form of reparation I would or could agree to.
Just a note, many former slaves were offered a chance to emigrate and start anew, the thinking being that the experience of slavery would have jaded their thinking about America. But the overwhelming majority believed they had no ties to Africa, they were Citizens of the United States.
Apr 7, 2009 - 10:15 pm 134. Boonton:I do not believe you are so dense as to not recognize the web of Chicago patronage, that included the indited and convicted former Governor, the current Teflon President and the leaders of various church groups and affiliations used to grease the wheels. Perhaps I did not express it very well. It is called patronage.
OK I recognize it. Politics is pretty dirty and maybe Chicago is a bit dirtier than, say, Alaska. To date I haven’t seen anything that indicates Obama is or was corrupt in any serious way. Perhaps that will change but the case hasn’t been made yet.
Chicago does seem to have a pattern where its local politics appears to be more corrupt than its national politics. Either way more will be required than simply asserting that Obama is bad because his home is in a city of Bad People(tm).
But the question for me boils down to this, which neither Horowitz or King address, Does the acceptance of a handout make you richer or does it impoverish a man even more? As it certainly does nothing for ones spirit or self esteem, I firmly believe it is the not the richer answer that is correct.
This boils down to the individual man (or woman). I’ve gotten some handouts from society (say free public school, free libraries, etc.) as well as some from family and friends and I’ve given out handouts as well. Some I wasted, other’s I put to good use. One has to maintain their own spirit.
Also, by that definition access to education is a form of welfare and by extension a form of reparations. I do not think, and I hope you can agree, that is not the case. I hope you understand that universal education is a mutually beneficial contract entered into freely because it is in all our interests.
I agree it is mutually beneficial but I actually find myself more in agreement with Horowitz. We value equality of opportunity yet the reality is we are not born with equal opportunities. Some of that is the legacy of past societial injustices (slavery, racism, etc.). Some of that is the legacy of individual injustices (maybe your grandfather was cheated out of his share of his father’s estate….for example) and some of that is simply the randomness of life. When we make provisions for others either with universal education or welfare (which, of course, should be crafted as much as possible to offer people temprorary positive assistance and not dependence except for cases where dependence is the only option (i.e. severe disabilities)) we are in some way making up for past injustices. Think of a criminal who is sentenced to community service. Perhaps there is no practical way for him to identify and compensate his direct victims so the idea is he makes up for crime by giving to everyone in general.
Unlike community service, though, I don’t think of it so much as making good on specific crimes but more along the lines of not taking an unfair advantage. This can often be self-beneficial (after all, there’s really no way to work out the consquences of an injustice. There are blacks today who are better off because slavery provided them certain opportunities. Likewise there are some whites today who are poorer because of slavery….to be a poor white in the south during slavery’s time was not an easy one. So we may very well end up benefiting from ‘reparations’ even though we may not think of ourselves as victims). It very well might also end up costing nothing if, as you say in the case of education, the benefits are greater than the collective costs.
I think this is a better approach to the subject for a few reasons:
1. It is realistic, it doesn’t pretend that we are living in a brand new day and history has no influence over our current lives at all. In that I’m being somewhat conservative intellectually here. The left, here, has a point. History is important and it shouldn’t be glossed over or turned into propoganda. Bad things done 100 years ago aren’t just ‘cultural differences’ or historical curiousities but real tragedies that harm us today as well as back then.
2. It doesn’t turn into a game of trying to get people to find categories of victimhood to fall into. It also doesn’t set people against each other trying to playing games like “my slavery was worse than your Holocaust”. In essence it is saying the chain of costs and benefits of an injustice becomes impossible to trace once you move beyond a particular historical incident. Yes the slave was victimized and the slave owner benefited. Maybe, though, the slave’s son worked harder as a freeman and the owner’s son wasted his family fortune. Flash forward 50, 100, or 150 years and who knows now where any of us would specifically be if our great grandfathers had acted more ethically. It is simplistic and cartoonish to divide ourselves into victims versus victimizers (or those who benefited from victimization), in reality we are all a bit of both.
3. It makes ample allowance for individual self-esteem, dignity and responsibility. It really isn’t possible to know if the past has given you a boost or set you back but you do have control over your present reality. You can squandar what opportunities you have or choose to make the best of them.
Apr 8, 2009 - 5:59 am 135. Wadeusaf:I cannot agree that bad things done to persons 100 or 200 years ago can be judged as anything other than events that affect your and my individual situation. Good deeds and sacrifice also affect us whether or not I suffer from a thing your grand father did is happenstance and good fortune, not intention. If I benefit from something your great grand father did would be an historical fact, for which I should be grateful, but not something which I have standing to pursue for anything more than property claims. And even there, the claim would probably not be found favorable much beyond the grave unless the claim is shown to be airtight as in cases of art theft.
I do not see it as a division of victim vs perpetrator. I cannot do much about circumstance that prevents a person from taking greater advantage of opportunity due to ability. However it is my belief that legal constraint is proper in preventing unfair advantage being taken. We have at our disposal the entire collection of human contracts and human interaction which has been our common inheritance. The principals upon which it is based in the United States of America has served us well and continues to do so.
In deciding that Universal education was mandatory for the functioning of a free republican form of government, our forefathers were not acting to ensure equality, but rather it is the condition upon which the survival of the republic relies. That is a huge difference. The denial of educational opportunities to slaves can not be rectified, ensuring that all citizens have educational opportunity is not a matter of either generosity or penance, but a tool for our survival as a nation. The denial of that educational opportunity is not only immoral, it is criminal. However that mandate for an education can only carry us so far, I cannot nor can any group mandate you take advantage of it nor can you as an individual compel society to provide more than the basic reading, writing and math unless it so decides that it is the interest of the community.
An action by an artificial class of persons (victims by inheritance)against an innocent group individual or other artificial class (lawbreaker by inheritance or birth) is a concept so alien to our Judeo-Christian based common law as to invite scorn, ridicule and revulsion and deservedly so. Horowitz is not merely wrong here his foolishness demands rebuke.
Now just to cover the base, I believe that the separate but still unequal public education provided by states under jim crow until very recently was itself criminal and foolish because in determining that universal education was a good thing beyond the three R’s those communities had no right to offer more unless it was offered universally to all citizens. That was obviously not the case.
Apr 8, 2009 - 8:31 pm