Re: Preview

1
One of the Senate's fiercest partisans. This senator reflexively sides with the party's extreme wing. There's no record of working with the other side of the aisle. None. It's basically been my way or the highway, combined with a sanctimoniousness that breeds contempt among those on the other side of any issue.

Senator Dog-on-Man introduces himself. He seems to have no self-knowledge whatsoever. I really and truly thought that was the Inquirer's sketch of Santorum.

This isn't from The Onion, is it?


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:32 AM
horizontal rule
2

Worry not. It's important to remember the country will face a pretty clear choice in November, whichever candidate the Democratic party nominates: the Democrat or a shriveled old crone. Peace abides in the American contempt for the old.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:38 AM
horizontal rule
3

What on earth is Santorum talking about?


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:43 AM
horizontal rule
4

Crone? McCain's so old he's female?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:44 AM
horizontal rule
5

McCain's so old he's like Tiresias without the foresight.


Posted by: Populuxe | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:47 AM
horizontal rule
6

2: True -- clearly Old Man McCain like Old Man Reagan before him is completely unelectable.


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:50 AM
horizontal rule
7

I've actually been wondering whether youth will be a big factor in who McCain chooses as a running mate. I haven't seen a lot of speculation in any direction.

(Cala, if you're asking literally, he's referring to votes Obama made in the Illinois legislature as well as the US Senate about abortion.)


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:52 AM
horizontal rule
8

I don't know that it's contempt so much as the acknowledgment that we're talking about a ridiculously demanding job. Perhaps one that is best left to people under 70. Also, McCain is no Reagan.

Re: the article, they better come up with something better than that or they're going to see a serious smackdown in the popular vote margin.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:52 AM
horizontal rule
9

6: We're a lot shallower now. Old people without Botox are getting rarer and rarer.


Posted by: A White Bear | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:52 AM
horizontal rule
10

Peace abides in the American contempt for the old.

Historically, American contempt for the old hasn't held a candle to the far better established American contempt for blacks and liberals.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:53 AM
horizontal rule
11

Heed, liberals, the lessons of the war
And make babies, you who hardly ever make them!
Dear audience: Make babies!


Posted by: Guillaume Apollinaire | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:53 AM
horizontal rule
12

7: Abortion isn't killing completely delivered healthy babies.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:53 AM
horizontal rule
13

Let's hope way out wingers like ex-Sen Santorum keep pounding on abortion: it puts the lie to McCain's "liberalism." And makes victory (if we win) a mandate.


Posted by: Napi | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:54 AM
horizontal rule
14

Call me Pollyanna, but I don't think the infanticide charge is going to stick, and they call every Democratic candidate the most commie ever, so whatevs.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:54 AM
horizontal rule
15

Also, it's not like Santorum has a Senate seat. Anyone who believed that abortion was infanticide wasn't going to vote for a Democrat anyway.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:56 AM
horizontal rule
16

12: I didn't say he was making a sane or coherent argument.

I don't have the heart to go look up the congressional testimony he references. I find it extremely hard to believe that this is an accurate representation:

That bill was the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. During the partial-birth abortion debate, Congress heard testimony about babies that had survived attempted late-term abortions. Nurses testified that these preterm living, breathing babies were being thrown into medical waste bins to die or being "terminated" outside the womb. With the baby now completely separated from the mother, it was impossible to argue that the health or life of the mother was in jeopardy by giving her baby appropriate medical treatment.

Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:57 AM
horizontal rule
17

Unfortunately, the Democrats are too soft to hit back hard on the partial birth abortion act or the act that should be known as the Deny Women Medically Necessary Treatment Act.


Posted by: Will | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:59 AM
horizontal rule
18

Peace abides in the American contempt for the old.

Still, it sure would have been nice if they'd nominated a Mormon.


Posted by: politicalfootball | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:59 AM
horizontal rule
19

What on earth is Santorum talking about?

Nobody knows, but he would like it to be the conventional wisdom. Let's see how well it works.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:59 AM
horizontal rule
20

I suspect it's probably 'no heroic measures' in reality.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 8:59 AM
horizontal rule
21

I've been reading Obama's book Audacity of Hope, by the way. It's not making me rethink my support. And it's actually readable.


Posted by: Napi | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:00 AM
horizontal rule
22

Rick Sanctimoniom needs to buy a dictionary


Posted by: John Hall | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:00 AM
horizontal rule
23
There's no record of working with the other side of the aisle. None.

This lie is amazingly baldfaced and refutable. Obama has co-sponsored like a hundred bills with Dick Lugar, for example.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:02 AM
horizontal rule
24

Other than being crazy, what derailed Santorum?


Posted by: Will | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:03 AM
horizontal rule
25

22: Congressman John Hall?!?


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:03 AM
horizontal rule
26

Dear Diary,

I tried and tried to reach out across the aisle by saying that the Democrats are infanticide-supporting terrorists, but those grouchy-faced poopieheads still refused to work with me. Then they defeated me by smearing me with the fact that I did not actually live in Pennsylvania and only maintained a token residence which I also used to rip off a middle-class community to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars to support my kids, who actually lived here in my mcmansion in the Virginia exurbs, going to cyberschool. No More Mister Nice Guy!


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:05 AM
horizontal rule
27

You couldn't ask for a more concise proof that Santorum is either living in an insane alternate reality or is able to knowingly serve up the Big Lie without even a residual sense of shame. Most of his party leaders fall into the latter camp, but having seen Sanctimonium act as our Senator for a term, I actually think he may be a case of the former, a true believer who has long since seceded from the reality-based community.


Posted by: Timothy Burke | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:08 AM
horizontal rule
28

9: I hope this is right, but I worry, because while old decrepit-looking white guys have been elected president, there has never been a president with either dark skin or a foreign-sounding name before.


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:10 AM
horizontal rule
29

Abortion ban stuff doesn't even survive a popular vote in the the Dakotas.

"Get out the evangelicals" ain't gonna work this time.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:11 AM
horizontal rule
30

or a foreign-sounding name

Well, there's Van Buren.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:12 AM
horizontal rule
31

By the way, Nader is announcing his VP pick in about an hour.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:13 AM
horizontal rule
32

30: I forgot about Van Buren! Now, I feel better!


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:13 AM
horizontal rule
33

24: Mainly, I gather, ridiculously over-the-top statements like that Obama is in favor of "infanticide" and that gay sex is equivalent to bestiality. If this is who will represent the real wingers this fall, man, I cannot wait for November. Remember the look of anguish on Santorum's family's faces when he lost last time? I savor it. I honestly do. By now the actual image has so long been steeped in my pleasure at his removal from office that the image in my memory involves lens flares and a deep, inner glow and the gods themselves doing a chorus line in the background.

I really do hate Santorum and I really do hope this is the social conservative wing keep him out there as their face. Better yet, let this indicate that McCain will pick him as his running mate to try to solve all the age/not-conservative-enough/let-Huckabee-suck-on-it issues in one fell swoop. Gods, that would rule.


Posted by: Robust McManlyPants | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:14 AM
horizontal rule
34

Reagan was old as hell, but he was really good on tv. McCain comes across as a crazy old fart.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:15 AM
horizontal rule
35

Nader is announcing his VP pick in about an hour.

I can't wait. I'll bet he picks himself.


Posted by: Populuxe | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:18 AM
horizontal rule
36

24: Running against Bob Casey, Jr., a guy who basically negated Santorum's one issue (pro-life) without being crazy.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:23 AM
horizontal rule
37

Crone? McCain's so old he's female?

More or less:

3. An old man; especially, a man who talks and acts like an old woman. [R.] [1913 Webster]

Myself, I think of a crone as a women who has had her gender worn away by time. On the strength of McCain's appearance, that happens to men as well.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:24 AM
horizontal rule
38

37 was me.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:24 AM
horizontal rule
39

In any case, ick.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:28 AM
horizontal rule
40

Is Bob Casey the ugliest Senator?


Posted by: FL | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:29 AM
horizontal rule
41

39: Because of the gender issue, the ageism, or the implied rotting away of genitalia?


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:29 AM
horizontal rule
42

That can't possibly be an answerable question. Senators explore the full spectrum of humanity's possible ugliness. (Heavily weighted toward older white guys, but there's a lot of ugly out there.)


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:30 AM
horizontal rule
43

41: Gender issue. "I want to say something really insulting about an old man. What's worse than just being old? Being an old woman is really really contemptible, so I'll call him that." And saying that old men are still gendered, but old women are genderless doesn't change the analysis much, does it?


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:33 AM
horizontal rule
44

Is Bob Casey the ugliest Senator?

What? He's a totally normal-looking guy. How can you even ask that when Arlen Specter is a Senator?


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:34 AM
horizontal rule
45

42: It is weird, isn't it, that American politicians are so often so hideous? Even Gore Vidal, during his political-campaign phase, seemed to look all mush-faced and strange. And both before and after he was a handsome fellow. (See the photos in Palimpsest if proof is needed.)


Posted by: Frowner | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:35 AM
horizontal rule
46

And saying that old men are still gendered, but old women are genderless doesn't change the analysis much, does it?

I'm actually saying (or thought I was saying that) neither is gendered, and that the lack of gender--and the devolution into little more than talking pudding--is the point of a word like "crone."


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:35 AM
horizontal rule
47

LB is famously resistant to the use of the word "crone," but I don't think that's necessarily because of her lesbian fantasies about Althouse.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:36 AM
horizontal rule
48

Can we call him a hag?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:37 AM
horizontal rule
49

36: Running against Bob Casey, Jr.,

Who was/is about as dynamic as an undertaker on quaaludes, but still a vast improvement over Pee Wee Herman's Evil Twin. I will add that the Santorum's overall hypocrisy did finally catch up to him (fueled to a large extent by the school situation, which really was egregious, especially as it burdened a semi-struggling school district).


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:37 AM
horizontal rule
50

46: Yeah, but that's just not what 'crone' means. It means specifically an old woman, and a man only insofar as you're insulting him by calling him a woman.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:41 AM
horizontal rule
51

Personally, I think "McCain's genitals are rotting away" polls better.

#45. One of the Vidal campaign photos in that book makes him look remarkably like Rod Serling.


Posted by: Populuxe | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:41 AM
horizontal rule
52

Can we call him a humorless feminist?


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:44 AM
horizontal rule
53

and a man only insofar as you're insulting him by calling him a woman.

Not "only," but "especially." And words can be repurposed. But I'll stop using it.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:44 AM
horizontal rule
54

44 gets it right.

50: Are you suggesting that calling McCain a shriveled old woman was somehow intended as an insult? Why, I think the LizardBreath campaign should be ashamed of itself.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:44 AM
horizontal rule
55

Bob Casey seems better looking to me than Lieberman.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:46 AM
horizontal rule
56

Do you reject and denounce the use of the word crone to describe genital-shrivelled old prune John McCain, LB?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:47 AM
horizontal rule
57

By the way, Santorum accusing somebody of "sanctimoniousness" cracks me up.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:49 AM
horizontal rule
58

But I'll stop using it.

Pussy.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:49 AM
horizontal rule
59

McCain comes across as a crazy old fart.

And this is why I really can't wait until the debates between the nominees. Especially given the practice that both the Democrats have had, and the huge amount of polish they've gained in the 1,273 one-on-one debates held thus far. McCain will have gone months since he last had to squeeze a word in edgewise between 6 other Republicans on the same stage.


Posted by: Po-Mo Polymath | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:49 AM
horizontal rule
60

56, 58: She makes a fair case, and, on the very off-chance that I've misread the use of the English language, I'm not the one who suffers the consequences. Not until I turn 70, anyway.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:52 AM
horizontal rule
61

Is Bob Casey the ugliest Senator?

Mikulski ain't giving up without a fight.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:53 AM
horizontal rule
62

58: That's what you're going to stop using, Ogged? Lent is already half over, y'know.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:55 AM
horizontal rule
63

Interestingly, there are no actual crones in the Senate, despite several of their male counterparts.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:55 AM
horizontal rule
64

In Oggedville, pussy use you.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:56 AM
horizontal rule
65

This leads me to believe that cronedom is to a certain extent class-linked. Senators can afford really good hair-dye jobs, for example.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:56 AM
horizontal rule
66

Why am I not surprised that ogged is a masochist?


Posted by: Merganser | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:57 AM
horizontal rule
67

Ducks with teeth, however, tend to be sadists.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 9:59 AM
horizontal rule
68

Other than being crazy, what derailed Santorum?

Everyone else has been right, but one more on this point: Rick always ran as a sunny, friendly kind of guy. It wasn't until his second term that it became obvious that he is, in fact, a horrible, horrible human being. PA isn't the most liberal blue state out there, but its natural representatives are not frothing Dominionists.

Also, for whatever reason, the PA Dems refused to put up a credible candidate in 2000*; he was probably beatable that year, but only by a solid Dem (I'll grant that it's a pretty weak bench here).

* Also against Specter in 2004; for awhile, Jim Capozzola was talking seriously about running because it wasn't clear that anyone else would do so. The eventual candidate, Jim Hoeffel, is a nice guy, but not Senate material (without a machine to put him in place).


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:01 AM
horizontal rule
69

Mikulski ain't giving up without a fight.

Poor closeted Babs.

(Also, I know Fort Meade is part of her constituency, but the FISA votes from her were incredibly ghastly and have made me want her to retire so Tony Brown or Chris van Hollen or someon can take her seat. I really liked her as a politician until recently.)


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:12 AM
horizontal rule
70

If Obama becomes president, Tony Brown could fill his spot in the Jugeared Biracial Guy Caucus.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:13 AM
horizontal rule
71

Listening to this made me wonder if McCain really has it in him to want the presidency anymore.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:14 AM
horizontal rule
72

The McCain candidacy reminds me of an episode from the 1996 Dole candidacy, during which a frustrated staffer wrote an internal memorandum complaining that the strategy of "pissy old man" wasn't working as well as planned.


Posted by: Millard Fillmore | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:16 AM
horizontal rule
73

Unless 72 is a McCain staffer, the presidentiality puzzles me.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:18 AM
horizontal rule
74

Look, he may not be the most famous president, but there's nothing wrong with people naming their children after Millard Fillmore.

I like it, Millard. Very traditional.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:21 AM
horizontal rule
75

The McCain candidacy reminds me of an episode from the 1996 Dole candidacy

Word. It's 1996 all over again. The Republicans know they are going to lose this one, so might as well give the old guy his shot and shut him up.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:23 AM
horizontal rule
76

Pot Pourri:

there has never been a president with either dark skin or a foreign-sounding name before

"Kennedy", to an extent. Granted, a far lesser one.

On Born Alive, from NARAL:

"In response [to the Supreme Court decision striking down Nebraska's "partial-birth" abortion ban, anti-choice lawmakers launched a new attack through the Born Alive Infants Protection Act. This legislation ... seeks to further mischaracterize Roe v. Wade to the American public as a decision that has recently been 'expanded' to the point that newborn infants are now at risk. Although the legislation [is] statutorily unnecessary because newborn infants already receive full legal protection (and thus NARAL did not oppose its final passage), [when introduced last year] it was openly used by its anti-choice sponsors to lure pro-choice lawmakers and advocates into the trap of defending against their preposterous mischaracterizations of the current state of abortion-rights law"

Wrongshore take: it was a tar baby, and Obama swung at it. More research needed, perhaps.

On old men becoming crones: way OT, but >New York Doll is a great and subtle treatment of this. The New York Dolls rank with Bowie and Little Richard as the founders of glam androgyny; when they regroup in old age, time has accomplished what mascara once tried. Do rent it. One of the filmmakers went on to make King of Kong.


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:24 AM
horizontal rule
77

75: My feelings exactly. The way Obama replied to JSM's "He may not know this, but al Qaeda's already in Iraq" was almost shiver-inducing. He practically took the old man's cane, bopped him on the head with it, and put it back in his hand before McCain knew what was happening.

I have mild fears about the media's love for McCain, but Obama is far too adept for him, and the contrast is far too obvious. As long as Obama is this quick - and this good - in response, nothing will stick to him.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:36 AM
horizontal rule
78

I'm sure that there were plenty of people to whom "Eisenhower" and "Roosevelt" sounded furrin. There were, infamously, people who took great pleasure in deliberately mispronouncing "Roosevelt" as "Rosenfeld" during the New Deal.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:43 AM
horizontal rule
79

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/28/iraq.afghanistan

Interesting.

[No idea which thread to pop this in]


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:43 AM
horizontal rule
80

OT, but LB, it looks like Kofi Annan has brokered a power-sharing agreement in Kenya:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7268903.stm


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:45 AM
horizontal rule
81

There were, infamously, people who took great pleasure in deliberately mispronouncing "Roosevelt" as "Rosenfeld" during the New Deal.

Is FDR the first significant case where we see people in the US worried about the "pernicious influence" of Jews in American politics?


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:46 AM
horizontal rule
82

80: Yay!

79: Man. I like what Stiglitz is saying here, but I had some professional contact with him that makes me think ill of him (he put in an expert opinion in a case I was working on that was really inexcusably result-driven and shoddy.). And now I have a hard time taking anything he says seriously.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:50 AM
horizontal rule
83

It really amazes me how audacious the right is in its lies.


Posted by: yoyo | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:50 AM
horizontal rule
84

re: 82

I presume the raw numbers and some of the factual stuff about soldiers being made, for example, to pay for kit is true.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:51 AM
horizontal rule
85

84: Yeah, it's all consistent with other stuff I've read. I just have a personal reaction to Stiglitz that's probably completely unjustified outside of the context where he's testifying as a hired-gun expert.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:54 AM
horizontal rule
86

Somewhat off-topic, but since the economy will play a role in the election, some important news: we're not heading into a recession. The President says so himself! Whew, dodged that bullet. Since there's no recession, there's no need for the government to do anything more for the economy, happily. Also: our strong dollar policy continues, and the prospect of $4/gallon gasoline is "interesting."

You know, having that bastard in office for the past seven years has been infuriating, but I'd have a hard time pointing to specific ways it's hurt me in particular. Watching the incomparable Bush governing style applied to an event that might actually have some direct, painful consequences for myself, though, moves it beyond anger, straight on to cold dread.


Posted by: JL | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:55 AM
horizontal rule
87

Crone


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:56 AM
horizontal rule
88

Crone.

I blame Sifu.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:57 AM
horizontal rule
89

Is FDR the first significant case

I guess it depends what you mean by "significant." There were anti-semitic conspiracy theories for decades, ordinarily involving the Rothschilds and so forth, and some of those theories infected the People's Party movement of the 1890s. AFAIK, there wasn't much concentrated opposition to Theodore Roosevelt putting Oscar Straus in his cabinet (partly, TR is supposed to have said, "to show Russia and some other countries what we think of Jews in this country.")

The general story you get is that anti-Semitism along with all other kinds of racism became much more publicly acceptable in the 1920s, and so it was much more widespread in the 1930s.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
90

LB: Well, I was talking with a poli sci prof friend of mine from another institution about my class on the institutional history of development in Africa, and he asked me what I was using. When I got to Stiglitz, he rolled his eyes and said, "Well, that fills the quota of outsized egomania on your syllabus", and then I said I was teaching Easterly, and he said, "You have now filled the egomania quota of your syllabi for the next five years". But I have no personal knowledge of either guy myself: their books read well and are really useful to teach with. Easterly seems very articulate as a talking head, too.


Posted by: Timothy Burke | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:04 AM
horizontal rule
91

Only an unreasonable man persists in attempting to change the world, or something like that.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:06 AM
horizontal rule
92

Since Stiglitz jumped ship, it's been OK to badmouth him. People tend to be dismissive or condescending at DeLong's. Apparently he lost 40 IQ points the day his criticisms of free trade came out. Much the same thing happened to Krugman when he started attacking Bush; probably he's not on the short list for the Nobel any more. His attacks on Obama are just another nail in the coffin.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:08 AM
horizontal rule
93

Seriously, I agree with him politically. I've got an issue with his reliability based on some professional contact, but I shouldn't generalize too much based on that.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:11 AM
horizontal rule
94

"Kennedy", to an extent. Granted, a far lesser one.

Plenty of wasps named "Kennedy." It's as much a Scottish name as an Irish one.

Eisenhower is pretty clearly German, though. And elected only 7 years after the end of a war with Germany.


Posted by: Wry Cooter | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:20 AM
horizontal rule
95

I'm not really clear on this Scottish versus Irish distinction vis a vis 'WASP'-ness. I suppose there are more Protestant Scots.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:21 AM
horizontal rule
96

33

"... Better yet, let this indicate that McCain will pick him as his running mate ..."

Not very likely because of things like this .


Posted by: James B. Shearer | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:21 AM
horizontal rule
97

What I honestly wonder is why newspapers offer space to people like this for "editorials" that are 100% content-free propaganda. And I mean content-free in that there isn't even any advocacy for or against any policies. It isn't even ideological. It's just partisan. It has no news value, nobody wants to read it, and I don't see how it can even lead to a quid pro quo from the writer. What kind of favor could Santorum do for the Philadelphia Inquirer?

Santorum : Inquirer :: Kristol : NYT?


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:32 AM
horizontal rule
98

The general story you get is that anti-Semitism along with all other kinds of racism became much more publicly acceptable in the 1920s, and so it was much more widespread in the 1930s.

Slightly before the '20s -- isn't the rise of nativism and the return of the KKK (in the heart of the old Confederacy: Indiana and West Virginia) something that happens in the teens? And the ADL dates from the teens, too, I think. I'm not sure how much of this singles out the Jews for ethnic or religious reasons as opposed to being part of the great tide of non-Anglo-Saxon immigraition, though, and people like Father Coughlin don't really hit their stride until the late '20s.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:36 AM
horizontal rule
99

Eisenhower is pretty clearly German, though. And elected only 7 years after the end of a war with Germany.

It probably helped that he was on the American side during the war, ordering pilots to drop bombs on German cities and so on.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:36 AM
horizontal rule
100

97 - It's owned by a local Republican activist who made his bones trying to cover up the Philadelphia diocese's pedophile problems. You tell me why he'd want to give a prominent spot to the state's most prominent wingnut Catholic.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:40 AM
horizontal rule
101

What I honestly wonder is why newspapers offer space to people like this for "editorials" that are 100% content-free propaganda.

Presumably that's a rhetorical question. Publishers and editors are far less professional and far more right-wing than people think.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:41 AM
horizontal rule
102

It probably helped that he was on the American side during the war, ordering pilots to drop bombs on German cities and so on.

How did he overcome the allegations of race treason?


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:42 AM
horizontal rule
103

96: Quit harshing my fantasy, man.


Posted by: Robust McManlyPants | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:43 AM
horizontal rule
104

95: Protestantness, and there wasn't a big 19thC wave of poor Scottish immigrants.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:45 AM
horizontal rule
105

Slightly before the '20s

Sure; when we're talking in terms of decades I'm willing to be generous--anyway it depends what you're dating. The Second Klan, you're right, was founded in 1915, but it reached its peak influence in the 1920s. In 1921 you got the first quota immigration act, which was revised and made permanent in 1924. They drew on trends in anti-immigrant sentiment that had been building through the 1910s (tying national origin to particular forms of bad behavior).


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:48 AM
horizontal rule
106

it depends what you're dating

Anti-speciesism has gone TOO FAR!


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:51 AM
horizontal rule
107

98, 105: Are you two distinguishing between worries about Jewish influence and other kinds of antisemitism ("not my daughter," "dirty immigrant," beatings for fun and profit, etc.)? (Is there a difference?)

In part, I'm wondering whether antisemitism as relates to power and influence arises (or importantly increases) because of (a) the rise and fall of finance, and any association it might have had with Jews, and (b) the rise of communism and any association with Jews.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:54 AM
horizontal rule
108

Has finance ever fallen?


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:55 AM
horizontal rule
109

Anti-speciesism has gone TOO FAR!

I leave a blank line in this comment so that one might make one's own man-on-dog joke in that space.


Thank you.


Posted by: Robust McManlyPants | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 11:56 AM
horizontal rule
110

I'm not sure how much of this singles out the Jews for ethnic or religious reasons as opposed to being part of the great tide of non-Anglo-Saxon immigraition

There's a neat article on the Klan's business model which points out that they marketed themselves differently depending on local prejudices. So you would get different reasons to hate the Jews (and sign up for the Klan) depending which part of the country you were in.

The 1920s Klan was, from this angle, a vast quasi-pyramid scheme -- you ponied up $10 for membership, and $6.50 for the official robes, plus they had their own insurance programs and taxation plans whereby local chapters supported the Imperial headquarters.

Man, a lot of Americans really are chumps.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 12:02 PM
horizontal rule
111

Listen, Tim, I'm not here to help you write excuses for your anti-Semitism. You're going to have to do that on your own time.


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 12:04 PM
horizontal rule
112

Man, a lot of Americans really are chumps.

This is what we get for letting in all the [whatever the hell slol is]. Fetch me my burnin' cross.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 12:05 PM
horizontal rule
113

Fetch me my burnin' cross

...sez the guy named "Roth."


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 12:06 PM
horizontal rule
114

111: If you were really white, you'd help out.

No, I just didn't know if the answer was common knowledge among those well read in history. "Jewish influence" seems, initially, like such a peculiar sort of worry, yet I think of it as the one that has, today, the most currency.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 12:06 PM
horizontal rule
115

The link in 96 has increased the chances I might vote for McCain. Unfogged, news you can use.


Posted by: Idealist | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 12:11 PM
horizontal rule
116

I'm hoping 115 is meant in a relative sense.


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 12:15 PM
horizontal rule
117

"Jewish influence" seems, initially, like such a peculiar sort of worry

Right, well, there were people who got exercised over "the Rothschilds," but they don't seem to have been many or influential. There were of course casual Jew-hating WASPs in genteel Long Island, but they don't seem to have done much about it on a given day--i.e., they weren't incredibly highly motivated, unlike the cross-burning types.

So throughout the nineteenth century and the early twentieth century it seems like you could say something nasty about Jews and get away with it, but you probably couldn't effectively rile a lot of people with it either.

Except when you could, of course. Alexander McNutt, governor of Mississippi, went off on a big Christ-killer rant when the state repudiated its debt in the early 1840s, which may have helped him or not. In 1913 there was a very strange case that led to the lynching of Leo Frank.

You're also right in supposing that there were conflicting hysterias about Jews: that they were über capitalists and that they were über Bolsheviks. These worries came together during WWI, when people accused German Jewish financiers of underwriting the Bolshevik Revolution to get the Russians out of the war. There were forged documents and everything (google Sisson documents and see what you get).

As to whether you're right in thinking this is a peculiarly current concern today, I've no idea, you bigot.

(There's a great story about Bull Connor being condemned by, I think, the Anti-Defamation League. Reportedly Connor was wounded by this, saying, "Blacks, maybe. But Jews, why?")


Posted by: slolernr | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 12:20 PM
horizontal rule
118

McCain's lost the Santorum endorsement, but he does have John Hagee's blessing and that's the kind of support a white man wants when he's running against the Anti-Christ.


Posted by: Populuxe | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 12:29 PM
horizontal rule
119

I'm not really clear on this Scottish versus Irish distinction vis a vis 'WASP'-ness. I suppose there are more Protestant Scots.

its an american thing. You wouldn't understand.


Posted by: yoyo | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 12:29 PM
horizontal rule
120

Stiglitz is:

a) an incredible dick, according to personal reports,
b) the greatest economist since Keynes; the greatest microeconomist since Marshall.
c) surprisingly left for an economist.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 12:34 PM
horizontal rule
121

95 - The "Anglo-Saxon" part of WASP should be taken to mean "from the British Isles," rather than "English". English, Welsh, Scots, and Scotch-Irish all qualify as WASPs, in everydary parlance. Only the Catholic Irish are excluded. (Catholics from the other parts of the British Isles might also, theoretically, be excluded, although I'm uncertain - isn't William F. Buckley a quintessential WASP, despite being, you know, Catholic?)


Posted by: Wry Cooter | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 12:57 PM
horizontal rule
122

I think "worry about influence" is a natural extension to common or garden prejudice when the relevant minority is insufficiently downtrodden. It also fits with the American inclination to paranoia that goes back much farther.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 1:02 PM
horizontal rule
123

I'm so pissed that this thread drifted away from hating on Santorum before I could participate.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 2:26 PM
horizontal rule
124

I'm totally with B. How dare you people move on before I get a chance to play?


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 2:31 PM
horizontal rule
125

123: It's never too late to hate on santorum.


Posted by: the Other Paul | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 2:31 PM
horizontal rule
126

123: It's never too late to hate on santorum, IYKWIM.


Posted by: the Other Paul | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 2:31 PM
horizontal rule
127

123: It's never too late to hate on santorum, OSTMWHYB.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 2:35 PM
horizontal rule
128

Americans are not paranoid. Would paranoid people respond to ">http://www.amazon.com/Playmobil-3172-Security-Check-Point/dp/B0002CYTL2"> toys like this ? Also, a paranoid people would not make comments like those describing the toy. (Link from Schneier)


Posted by: lw | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 2:36 PM
horizontal rule
129

Here's the link , sorry about that.


Posted by: lw | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 2:38 PM
horizontal rule
130

The reviews in 128 are hilarious. That said, Playmobil isn't an American company, and that toy's been around for a long time, I think. It's part of the airport set, and airport metal detectors are way pre-9/11.

/humorlessness.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 2:40 PM
horizontal rule
131

Those comments really are great. My fav:

What's next, the Drug Checkpoint and Asset Forfeiture playset?


Posted by: Invisible Adjunct | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 2:43 PM
horizontal rule
132

How dare you people get me all excited for some continued and extravagant hating on Santorum and then fail to deliver.


Posted by: Robust McManlyPants | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 2:44 PM
horizontal rule
133

Here ya go, Robust.

Also, I'm sure this makes me a bad person, but this still makes me chuckle.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 2:47 PM
horizontal rule
134

"Thank you Playmobil for allowing me to teach my 5-year old the importance of recognizing what a failing bureaucracy in a ever growing fascist state looks like."


Posted by: rob helpy-chalk | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 2:49 PM
horizontal rule
135

Another one for McManly:

So here's Santorum, emerging from the men's room, sighing in relief....

...I get the grin.

"Senator," I say.

He extends a hand.

It's soaking wet.

"It's okay," he shrugs. "It's just water."



Posted by: Invisible Adjunct | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 2:52 PM
horizontal rule
136

Yeah, I feel kind of bad that the second pic in 133 makes me all schadenfreudy. But. God how I hate that man.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 2:53 PM
horizontal rule
137
Here at the Carlisle courthouse, the College Republican rally draws to a close. The Santorum campaign is filming the event for a campaign commercial to be aired sometime next spring as the election heats up. Little 4-year-old Patrick becomes overwhelmed by the crowd and the cameras and begins to cry. Santorum takes his son in his arms and seeks out a quiet spot on the edge of the crowd, just a few feet from where I'm standing.

"You did wonderful," he says, hugging and comforting the child. "You're such a brave boy."

The cameramen pick up on the touching moment and rush over to film it. Karen follows and notices that Patrick's tear-streaked face is turned away from the camera. Karen tells her husband to turn around so their son can be filmed.

The senator obliges.

OMG THAT IS SO FUCKING EVIL. Okay. Between this and the "cradle the fetus" story, these people are fucking child abusers.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 3:02 PM
horizontal rule
138

...sez the guy named "Roth."

Been out, but, just for the record:

A. Not, AFAIK, any Judaism - it's just a German name.
B. Not that there's anything wrong with that
C. Excepting my English maternal grandfather, we're all Catholics.
D. It's actually an adoptive name - my gr.-grandmother threw out her drunken Irishman (Hester) and his replacement kindly adopted her 3 boys, inc. my grandfather.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 3:20 PM
horizontal rule
139

132

"How dare you people get me all excited for some continued and extravagant hating on Santorum and then fail to deliver. "

More Santorum hating
.


Posted by: James B. Shearer | Link to this comment | 02-28-08 5:21 PM
horizontal rule
140


The 1920s Klan was, from this angle, a vast quasi-pyramid scheme -- you ponied up $10 for membership, and $6.50 for the official robes, plus they had their own insurance programs and taxation plans whereby local chapters supported the Imperial headquarters.

Early Bogart classic The Black Legion had a similar scam at the heart of its plot. Surprisingly watchable.


Posted by: Martin Wisse | Link to this comment | 02-29-08 12:46 AM
horizontal rule
141

re: 119 and 121

Yeah, I was wondering, because if you're purely an 'ethnic purity' kind of a racist, there's no appreciable difference between the Scots and the Irish [apart from a more dense concentration of big ginger fuckers in the north and west of Scotland] and very little, really, between the English, the Scots and the Irish. So, it's the 'protestant' part that seems to be doing a lot of the work.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 02-29-08 1:19 AM
horizontal rule
142

141: Worth noting, I think, that WASP was popularized by the American sociologist E. Digby Baltzell, though apparently he did not actually coin the label/acronym. He was writing about an American Anglo-Protestant elite (in, e.g., The Protestant Estalishment: Aristocracy and Caste in America), and I don't think he used the label in an ethnic (as in "ethnic purity") way to suggest, e.g., that these Americans could literally and directly trace their ancestry back to the Angles and the Saxons.


Posted by: Mary Catherine | Link to this comment | 02-29-08 8:23 AM
horizontal rule