Re: Q.E.D.

1

sweet baby geebus.


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 9:07 PM
horizontal rule
2

Oh whatever, Hitler was a non-ostentatious vegetarian, I like bacon, xkcd rules, y'all are a bunch of haters, and I'm taking my ball and going home.


Posted by: Hamilton-Lovecraft | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 9:07 PM
horizontal rule
3

Just thank god he didn't link here.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 9:20 PM
horizontal rule
4

hey, I love bacon too! I'm just not weird about it.


Posted by: alameida | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 9:39 PM
horizontal rule
5

I sent this to Ben earlier, remarking "Q. E. D."


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 9:43 PM
horizontal rule
6

But it looks like a nice piece of bacon. I mean, shouldn't you get to know it before you get all judgy?


Posted by: TJ | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 9:44 PM
horizontal rule
7

BACON IS AN ACCEPTABLE SUBSTITUTION FOR PROSCIUTTO, IN A PINCH


Posted by: OPINIONATED GRANDMA | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 9:50 PM
horizontal rule
8

Jonah Golberg loves everything he can stuff in his fat fucking face. Proves nothing.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 9:51 PM
horizontal rule
9

I found this thread to be particularly insightful.


Posted by: Spike | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 9:51 PM
horizontal rule
10

Bacon sucks.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 9:52 PM
horizontal rule
11

more spits, usually, doesn't it?


Posted by: soup biscuit | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 9:55 PM
horizontal rule
12

||

An English professor (in "Contemporary Literary Theory", naturally) told us today that in an interview Obama claimed the thing he would miss most as President was his "relation to ambiguity." Google cannot verify this because it is uproariously fabricated, no?

("|>" is for you to provide.)


Posted by: destroyer | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 9:57 PM
horizontal rule
13

I'm more of a lard man, myself.

(I didn't read the other thread. Was there lard?)


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 9:58 PM
horizontal rule
14

11: I was hoping for a more canonical response, but I'll grudgingly accept yours.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:00 PM
horizontal rule
15

I first picked up on the bacon-is-awesome meme from Apostropher's many, many posts on the subject, so I don't know if you can posit bacon as a sign of simplistic I'm-such-a-cool-badassism.

Then again, Apo was praising bacon before it was cool, and certainly before the backlash began.


Posted by: Gaijin Biker | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:00 PM
horizontal rule
16

Bacon? Hah! I eat bacon for breakfast.


Posted by: paranoid android | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:03 PM
horizontal rule
17

I first picked up on the bacon-is-awesome meme from Apostropher's many, many posts on the subject, so I don't know if you can posit bacon as a sign of simplistic I'm-such-a-cool-badassism.

I don't understand. Where is the contradiction here?


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:06 PM
horizontal rule
18

16 made me laugh.


Posted by: essear | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:10 PM
horizontal rule
19

I don't understand.

You seldom do.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:23 PM
horizontal rule
20

Wow, that bacon on the White House website was pretty funny. And speaking of the White House, even the Obama fans on this blog hated Obama's ridiculously intrusive and petty questionnaire seeking to ferret out even the slightest trace of potentially embarrassing behavior by applicants for jobs in his administration:

"Applicants... must include any e-mail that might embarrass the president-elect, along with any blog posts and links to their Facebook pages. The application also asks applicants to "please list all aliases or 'handles' you have used to communicate on the Internet."

So I think all of us, Democrat or Republican, can enjoy the karmic retribution of multiple Obama picks imploding for clear-cut violations of income tax law that have nothing to do with whatever websites they may decide to visit in their free time, and the aliases they may use there.


Posted by: Gaijin Biker | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:32 PM
horizontal rule
21

#19: Ooh, snap!


Posted by: Gaijin Biker | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:33 PM
horizontal rule
22

20: not so much, no.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:40 PM
horizontal rule
23

Why do you Americans fuck up the Cabinet so easily? Two Cabinet members effectively resigning in the first two months would make most British gov'ts die of embarrassment.


Posted by: Keir | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:51 PM
horizontal rule
24

Most British governments have their cabinets set up well in advance of actually taking power, don't they?


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:53 PM
horizontal rule
25

I agree with Robert Reich about Daschle.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:54 PM
horizontal rule
26

Why do you Americans fuck up the Cabinet so easily?

Well, this American never got asked his advice about who should get cabinet positions.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:55 PM
horizontal rule
27

I think this sums up the original post.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:56 PM
horizontal rule
28

25: Seems like he has a little trouble with the copy-paste concept, though.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 10:59 PM
horizontal rule
29

Depends -- there will be a Shadow Cabinet, but that doesn't always exactly go into place.

Bevan didn't know he was getting Health till the morning Attlee went to the Palace, I don't think.

But even at that, the two high profile resignations were (a) a former Senator and (b) a former Governor, so they'd been players already and so-on.

(The real answer is probably just that US Cabinet members are all nominated in one go so there's a different curve, But it looks kinda shocking.)


Posted by: Keir | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:01 PM
horizontal rule
30

12: destroyer, I think that this might be what you are looking for:

I'm still wrapping my head around doing this in a way that I think the other candidates just aren't. There's a certain ambivalence in my character that I like about myself. It's part of what makes me a good writer, you know? It's not necessarily useful in a presidential campaign.

Link here.


Posted by: jms | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:03 PM
horizontal rule
31

went to the Palace

You guys still have Palaces? Oh man, that's rich.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:04 PM
horizontal rule
32

Nobody resigned because nobody was confirmed.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:04 PM
horizontal rule
33

Well, yeah, that's why the first time I said `effectively resigned', and then used `resigned' to save typing.

(Ok, I will admit to rhetorical exaggeration; but I think the basic point stands -- the American Cabinet tends dysfunctional.)


Posted by: Keir | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:11 PM
horizontal rule
34

You guys still have Palaces?

They're not alone.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:11 PM
horizontal rule
35

The real answer is probably just that US Cabinet members are all nominated in one go so there's a different curve

Pretty much, yeah. Obama was actually unusual in naming his cabinet picks so early.

And it is pretty odd that none of this stuff would have come up during the vetting process. Reich may be right that they just never thought this sort of thing would prompt the kind of outrage it has.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:13 PM
horizontal rule
36

33: because people with questionable histories don't get to be in it? I don't get it.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:13 PM
horizontal rule
37

34: If you're not going to help me mock the folks across the pond, then why—oh. Actually, that's interesting, thanks.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:14 PM
horizontal rule
38

37: You're welcome. It's a pretty neat place; definitely worth a visit if you're ever in the area.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:16 PM
horizontal rule
39

And of course...


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:16 PM
horizontal rule
40

Not that it makes our political system any less laughable, in or outside this country, but a capital-P Palace with a real, live queen inside is hilarious and worthy of pointing out, if we're all funnin' each other here.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:20 PM
horizontal rule
41

Nah -- it seems like Daschle was obviously the guy for the job* and yet he's not going to do it. And this is going to cause measurable harm to all concerned,

(That and the fact that the American Cabinet is massive, and isn't really a Cabinet proper, But that's just 'cause I'm a Westminster fan.)

* As in, Obama basically designed the job for him.


Posted by: Keir | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:21 PM
horizontal rule
42

Why do you Americans fuck up the Cabinet so easily? Two Cabinet members effectively resigning in the first two months would make most British gov'ts die of embarrassment.

Having a shadow cabinet is illegal under some sort of antipatronage law. Ergo, there is always a mad scramble to fill hundreds of top jobs at once, with whoever is available.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:21 PM
horizontal rule
43

Not to mention.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:22 PM
horizontal rule
44

Daschle was obviously the guy for the job

I wouldn't really say that. I actually recall some talk at the time of the nomination to the effect that Daschle would be a good guy to have handling a major overhaul of the healthcare system but that HHS Secretary was not necessarily the best position to handle that. Like most American cabinet positions, it's largely administrative in its formal responsibilities, and it's not at all clear that Daschle has any particular skill at running a big bureaucracy.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:26 PM
horizontal rule
45

43: This other one in San Francisco is okay too.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:27 PM
horizontal rule
46

44: Sanjay Gupta will save us?


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:28 PM
horizontal rule
47

but a capital-P Palace with a real, live queen inside is hilarious

One of the advantages of keeping live Royals inside the capital in a well-guarded building is it makes it much easier to turn them into dead Royals if ever the need should arise.

Having a shadow cabinet is illegal under some sort of antipatronage law. Ergo, there is always a mad scramble to fill hundreds of top jobs at once, with whoever is available.

Mmm -- I get that you don't have a Shadow Cabinet. (Although I guess you could have a Defense Spokesperson and then, would you guess! They get Defense! but.) And to be honest I must admit I'm quite unfair about the Daschle thing; it isn't that dysfunctional on its own.

But why are there so many political top jobs? (Why don't you have a proper Civil Service, I guess*.)

* Because we never ran half of Asia may or may not be an acceptable answer.


Posted by: Keir | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:28 PM
horizontal rule
48

the American Cabinet is massive, and isn't really a Cabinet proper

This is an important point too. Despite the name, the American Cabinet isn't really the same thing as a Westminster-style cabinet.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:29 PM
horizontal rule
49

Sanjay Gupta will save us?

He damn well better.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:31 PM
horizontal rule
50

But why are there so many political top jobs? (Why don't you have a proper Civil Service, I guess*.)

Gotta give the people with the money some incentive to support the people who want the power, I guess. The spoils system goes back a long way, and has for quite some time coexisted uneasily with various attempts to cut down on its excesses.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:33 PM
horizontal rule
51

Shorter 50: It's all Andrew Jackson's fault.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:34 PM
horizontal rule
52

45: San Francisco has multiple palaces. There's a good one in Daly City, too.


Posted by: Otto von Bisquick | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:42 PM
horizontal rule
53

Sanjay Gupta will save us?

Probably not. I've heard that Atul Gawande is having him killed.

It's all Andrew Jackson's fault.

This is always already true.


Posted by: ari | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:43 PM
horizontal rule
54

Oh, we've got lots of patronage and spoils. But we also have the worst of both worlds, since candidates absolutely never make it public whom they might pick for any important position, significantly reducing the useful knowledge we have about the candidates.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 02- 3-09 11:59 PM
horizontal rule
55

candidates absolutely never make it public whom they might pick for any important position, significantly reducing the useful knowledge we have about the candidates

But significantly increasing the leverage candidates have with the wide variety of people who hope to get those important positions if their candidates win and can therefore be leaned upon to act as campaign surrogates on various issues. Which is why this problem isn't going away anytime soon, if ever.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 12:04 AM
horizontal rule
56

Goldberg is just the new Archie: if he jumps on a trend it's not just dead, its resurrected corpse is threatening the villagers.

Why do you Americans fuck up the Cabinet so easily? Two Cabinet members effectively resigning in the first two months would make most British gov'ts die of embarrassment.

American cabinets actually seem answerable to their version of parliament would you believe it. It's almost as if they don't want their governments to bring back the same failed cabinet minister three times in different positions.


Posted by: Martin Wisse | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 12:08 AM
horizontal rule
57

American cabinets actually seem answerable to their version of parliament would you believe it.

But Daschle hasn't done any actually cabineting yet, and all the other Senators love the guy, apparently. He really doesn't seem like a failed Minister in the Westminster sense*.

Whereas actually failed Cabinet members can hang on far longer in American than in Westminster systems -- see Gonzales. (And half the Bush Cabinet, let's be honest.)

It's harder to get in, but once you're in you're in.

* And remember that `failed Minister' in Westminsterese includes a bunch of things that basically boil down to incompetent sub-ordinates.


Posted by: Keir | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 12:33 AM
horizontal rule
58

I sent this to Ben earlier, remarking "Q. E. D."

Actually I believe what you said was "the quod has been demonstrandum".


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 12:36 AM
horizontal rule
59

Hilzoy's take was interesting, I thought. So much of this has to do with what the chief executive is willing to put up with -- or percieved to be willing to put up with.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 12:37 AM
horizontal rule
60

The bipartisan love of bacon is just one manifestation of the New Kind of Politics that Obama is bringing to America.

OTOH, I don't see Obama publicly coming out in favor of straight girls making out with one another.


Posted by: pain perdu | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 12:54 AM
horizontal rule
61

hey, I love bacon too! I'm just not weird about it.

This gets it exactly right. And, to paraphrase W.C. Fields, any woman who loves bacon and hates Jonah Goldberg can't be all bad.


Posted by: pain perdu | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 12:56 AM
horizontal rule
62

but a capital-P Palace with a real, live queen inside is hilarious and worthy of pointing out, if we're all funnin' each other here.

She has castles too. For vacationing in.

Why does nobody ever mention fucking Jackson when they're discussing who was the worst President ever?


Posted by: OneFatEnglishman | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 1:31 AM
horizontal rule
63

She has castles too. For vacationing in.

There's hours of fun in the whole 'Black Rod'/'State Opening of Parliament' thing, too.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 1:35 AM
horizontal rule
64

True. And coronations make presidential inaugurations look like a Human Resources induction course by comparison.


Posted by: OneFatEnglishman | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 1:47 AM
horizontal rule
65

So what else fits in the bacon and straight-girls-kissing category?


Posted by: Gaijin Biker | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 1:55 AM
horizontal rule
66

And don't say "motorcycles", smartass.


Posted by: Gaijin Biker | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 3:02 AM
horizontal rule
67

Everything you like, GB. Everything you like.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 3:03 AM
horizontal rule
68

Damn.


Posted by: Gaijin Biker | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 3:43 AM
horizontal rule
69

41: It's the Senate approval thing -- it's not just about real resignation-worthy problems, it's about anything that the opposition will be able to grandstand about (and possibly actually block, if the Republicans can get any Democrats to join a filibuster.)

That's not particularly a defense of Daschle, just that if a UK cabinet pick had some corrected tax problems in his history, I don't think there's the same power for the opposition to make an official stink, rather than just raising a fuss in the papers.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 5:18 AM
horizontal rule
70

50 -- no no no no no. The problem isn't a surplus of political appointees, it's the surplus of political hires burrowing in.

Why would I want the head of the DOJ civil rights division promoted during the prior administration to continue setting priorities among cases? If the means that elections have consequences, good.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 5:24 AM
horizontal rule
71

Does anyone think that Daschle will wind up advising Obama in the Whitehouse in an unofficial capacity?


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 5:39 AM
horizontal rule
72

By which you mean a paid capacity? I wouldn't be surprised.

The subcabinet posts likely include a number of his people. We'll see how that plays out.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 5:50 AM
horizontal rule
73

I was actually thinking unpaid, although I could see him being paid in a year or two a la Sarah Powers.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 5:56 AM
horizontal rule
74

56: Goldberg is just the new Archie: if he jumps on a trend it's not just dead, its resurrected corpse is threatening the villagers.

That is what I was attempting to show graphically with this from #50. But the shark pictures available on the 'net were not cooperating very well.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 6:34 AM
horizontal rule
75

This bacon thing goes back to what I said earlier, that the trouble with vegetarianism for non-vegetarians is that that it problematizes one of the few reliable comforts most people have. Foodies do the same thing, so that anything you put in your mouth is a statement about who you are. The bacon issue and vegetarian-baiting are pushbacks against this, but you can't deproblematize something by argument or resistance or defiance. The horse is out of the barn, Humpty is shattered, and the original innocence has been lost forever.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 6:47 AM
horizontal rule
76

But John, I can relegate preachy vegetarians to the same mental space I reserve for televangelists -- who might after all be right about fire, brimstone, and eternity.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 6:53 AM
horizontal rule
77

The road to Hell is paved with meat.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 6:55 AM
horizontal rule
78

and red bean desserts.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 6:57 AM
horizontal rule
79

As you might imagine, the road to Hell requires very frequent repaving.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 7:03 AM
horizontal rule
80

I usually just switch them off. But last fall, a radio preacher totally had me with a long thing on the psalm that starts with 'by the rivers of babylon.' That guy might even have gotten me to eat Brussels sprouts.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 7:05 AM
horizontal rule
81

I think people might be making a mountain out of a molehill with the would-be Cabinet appointees' problems. I mean, go back to 23:

Why do you Americans fuck up the Cabinet so easily?

You could have left out the words "the Cabinet," and the question would still have been the kind of thing that gets asked around here all the time.


Posted by: Cyrus | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 7:18 AM
horizontal rule
82

80: Between this and the Rabbit Ears thread, today's Unfogged theme song.

Blow up your T.V. throw away your paper
Go to the country, build you a home
Plant a little garden, eat a lot of peaches
Try an find Jesus on your own


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 7:18 AM
horizontal rule
83

If there were a Rasta preacher on TV I'd listen to him.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 7:39 AM
horizontal rule
84

The Daschle nomination was a mess because right now people are very sensitive to issues of money. Having some guy driven around in a chauffeured limousine cheating on his taxes hits the same nerve as Auto Execs flying in private jets to DC to ask for a bailout.

The problem is that to a DC insider that's de nada. The important bad things are diddling your secretary or being an outspoken atheist.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 7:53 AM
horizontal rule
85

Having some guy driven around in a chauffeured limousine cheating on his taxes hits the same nerve as Auto Execs flying in private jets to DC to ask for a bailout.

Exactly. I'm not shedding any tears for Daschle. I can believe that it just didn't occur to him to report his free limo and chauffeur as income. Probably wouldn't occur to me either, but then no rich Democratic donors are offering me free chauffeured limousines.

I think there may be a change in the national culture around issues like this that will parallel the change after the Clarence Thomas hearings, when sexual harassment went from being a mostly accepted part of the office environment to a potentially career-ending activity and it took a while for that to sink into the heads of people who had lived under the old regime for decades.

Ostentatious consumption, so celebrated during the Reagan/Clinton/Bush years, has turned into extremely bad form. Probably not a coincidence that the Obamas are decorating the White House with Pottery Barn which, while not exactly cheap, is still available at the local mall.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:03 AM
horizontal rule
86

Daschle was such a Washington insider, with so many top-dollar connections, that I'm glad he's out of there.

I haven't seen it discussed, but small state Senators are easy to buy. Campaign costs are absolutely low even if they're high per-capita, and the amount of graft and earmarks and pork needed to keep 600,000 people happy is a lot less than the amount needed to keep Californians or Texans happy. As soon as a guy gets in he has a lot of big-time friends. Once he's got a bit of seniority, the donations, favors to donors, and favors to constituents flow like water, and with any luck at all the guy will have a long career.

My guess is that every single one of the small-states Senators (Alaska, ND, SD, MT, WY, VT, RI, DL) is the political point man for some major interest group that has nothing in particular to do with their state.

Case in point: Cheney.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:03 AM
horizontal rule
87

and red bean desserts.

Woot.

Why does nobody ever mention fucking Jackson when they're discussing who was the worst President ever?

Because he's on the $twenty, and it's hard to comprehend that we put a fucking genocidal maniac on our money.

Also, the American definition of bad President depends on losing either the economy or a war. Winning a bad war doesn't really enter into it.

Also, Jackson is viewed, rightly or wrongly, as the emblem of the death of aristocratic rule in the US and the rise of populist rule. There's a lot wrong with that view, of course, but as a symbol, it's potent and mostly positive.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:10 AM
horizontal rule
88

Jonah Goldberg: Today's pig, tomorrow's bacon

Re: Cabinets & civil service
Despite having a parent in the federal bureaucracy, and reading the newspaper obsessively, and taking lots of political science courses in school, I've never been able to figure out exactly how the interaction between politcal appointees and civil servants works. I.e. most (if not all) of the federal bureaucracies have political appointees not just at the top, but down a couple of rungs on the organizational ladder as well. So the Secretary probably talks directly to a few civil servants, but they're also in the presence of people whose job depends on the same patronage that got them their job a lot of the time. But at some point, someone actually has to do the high-level administrative work of the department (as opposed to sitting around in meetings all day like the Secretary). How does that actually work? It's very mysterious. In my father's office here in the provinces, the regional heads were always people who had bounced around from one job to another in the department, and usually had very little direct knowledge of the department's business, or even of its power. And that's way, way below the level of the Cabinet, like, even the lowest political appointee in the Department would never hear the name of the regional head unless there was some kind of major scandal. Confounding.

Re: 83: This is my complaint about the Strib's idiotic "Faith and Values" section. All they ever talk about is mainstream Christianity and Judaism with an occasional leavening of Islam. No Rastafari, no Jainism, not even any Hinduism or Buddhism for chrissakes! Blood! Fire!


Posted by: minneapolitan | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:14 AM
horizontal rule
89

Probably not a coincidence that the Obamas are decorating the White House with Pottery Barn which, while not exactly cheap, is still available at the local mall.

I didn't realize that Presidents had to redecorate the White House; I thought that it was already decorated.

I knwo that a lot of presidents have redecorated the Oval office, but does George Budh get to take teh old furniture with him? I mean, I know that Jackie Kennedy did a lot of redecorating by getting people to donate antiques, but the Eisenhowers had some tacky stuff in there.

I've known of professionals (with law school debt mostly) whose partners have gotten part-time jobs at Pottery Barn just so that they can get the discount.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:14 AM
horizontal rule
90

My guess is that every single one of the small-states Senators (Alaska, ND, SD, MT, WY, VT, RI, DL) is the political point man for some major interest group that has nothing in particular to do with their state.

I really doubt that Bernie Sanders does.

And the credit-card industry and incorporation business is so critical to Delaware's economy that I think its Senators are representing their State when they take the big bucks from those companies.


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:18 AM
horizontal rule
91

My guess is that every single one of the small-states Senators (Alaska, ND, SD, MT, WY, VT, RI, DL)

Hey, now, Sheldon Whitehouse seems to be a legitimately good guy.


Posted by: mrh | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:19 AM
horizontal rule
92

I think there may be a change in the national culture around issues like this that will parallel the change after the Clarence Thomas hearings, when sexual harassment went from being a mostly accepted part of the office environment to a potentially career-ending activity and it took a while for that to sink into the heads of people who had lived under the old regime for decades.

Ezra has a good line this morning (late last night): "[Daschle] was a savvy political operator playing according to well-established rules. His mistake was not realizing that the rules had changed. But then, it's not clear that anyone realized the rules had changed. Not even the man who changed them."


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:21 AM
horizontal rule
93

I didn't realize that Presidents had to redecorate the White House; I thought that it was already decorated.

I think that task generally falls to the First Lady, at least nominally.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:24 AM
horizontal rule
94

And the credit-card industry and incorporation business is so critical to Delaware's economy that I think its Senators are representing their State when they take the big bucks from those companies.

Just as a thought experiment, what would happen if a Senator advanced the economic interests of their state without taking bribes from corporations in the affected sectors?


Posted by: OneFatEnglishman | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:25 AM
horizontal rule
95

94: A Frank Capra movie.


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:29 AM
horizontal rule
96

20: I take the opposite message away from this situation. Namely that trying to ferret out any potentially embarrassing behaviour ahead of time was wise. And did you really think it was such a ridiculous request before Daschle's withdrawal? A large part of a cabinet official's job is not embarrassing the government. Facebook pages and blog posts can obviously embarrass the government.


Posted by: Ginger Yellow | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
97

JE: My guess is that every single one of the small-states Senators (Alaska, ND, SD, MT, WY, VT, RI, DL) is the political point man for some major interest group that has nothing in particular to do with their state.

BG: I really doubt that Bernie Sanders does.

I thought he was the point man for International Socialism.


Posted by: Tom Scudder | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:31 AM
horizontal rule
98

79: the road to Hell requires very frequent repaving.

Infrastructure! Stimulus!

(But just wait for the Republican complaints, "This Stimulus Bill combines pork *and* paving the road to Hell".)


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:32 AM
horizontal rule
99

85: Ah, but Pottery Barn is the J. Crew of interior decorating. (As folks in well-funded grad programs already know.)


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:35 AM
horizontal rule
100

If I'd worked harder, my desk chair would have the right labels.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:47 AM
horizontal rule
101

Delaware is a whole state organized around fishy deals with special interests. So yes, there's no real daylight between Delaware's voters and the big-money interests, whereas Daschle carried water for a lot of people with no particular Dakota connection.

"Every single one" was a bit exaggerated. Whitehouse is new, though. We'll see.

In recent months, Barney Frank (who I usually like) hasn't shown too well because of his ties with finance. Not a small-state example, but it's always a mistake to expect politicians to be good guys all the way down the line.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 8:52 AM
horizontal rule
102

Hold on; isn't Goldberg, well, Jewish?

(Or is he like Nick Cohen, a noisy pro-Israeli pundit with a Jewish-sounding name who isn't but likes to give the impression he might be?)


Posted by: Alex | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 10:05 AM
horizontal rule
103

102: I think he's Jewish, but not in the 'no bacon' sense of the word.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 10:18 AM
horizontal rule
104

Not enough to keep him from the Giant Sammich. (Remember that?) He really is a fine exhibit of Orwell's contention about a man having the face he deserves by 50.


Posted by: Alex | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 10:22 AM
horizontal rule
105

95: That movie with Warren Beatty and Halle Berry.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 10:34 AM
horizontal rule
106

@oudemia
Bulworth.


Posted by: Tiny Hermaphrodite | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 10:37 AM
horizontal rule
107

Yes! Thanks!


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 10:39 AM
horizontal rule
108

You may be interested to know that Instapundit has gone bacon-crazy in just the past day or so:

Link 1

Link 2

Link 3

Link 4

Link 5


Posted by: Gaijin Biker | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 5:57 PM
horizontal rule
109

At least the Dem scandals are about money. (Not that that's any excuse, since these guys and gals all use hired tax preparers.) The Brits are like the Repubs: pathetic sex scandals all the way, uh, down.


Posted by: Bitchphd | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 6:20 PM
horizontal rule
110

re: 109

That's not true. There are some scandals about money, and sex scandals are pretty rare these days. In general, our political system has a different set of faults. Naked financial corruption doesn't really seem to be one of them.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 6:26 PM
horizontal rule
111

99: Ah, but Pottery Barn is the J. Crew of interior decorating.

Now, I thought that would be Ikea. Maybe Ikea is the Gap. Something, something.


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 6:34 PM
horizontal rule
112

Hey parsimon, how are you hanging in there?


Posted by: Bostoniangirl | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 6:42 PM
horizontal rule
113

#109: Yeah, really! I mean, when has a Democrat ever been involved in a sex scandal? No, really, when?


Posted by: Gaijin Biker | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 6:57 PM
horizontal rule
114

112: Oh, I'm okay. Thanks. Really tired all the time, it seems. Turns out there's a lot of paperwork and phone calling and emailing to do when someone passes away. This place is a diversion in between all that.


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 7:07 PM
horizontal rule
115

114: I've also been wondering how you're doing. In terms of the paperwork and practical details and etc, I take it you're the one with primary responsibility?


Posted by: Mary Catherine | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 7:13 PM
horizontal rule
116

115: Yes. Well, me and my brother, but I'm executor of the estate. My brother and I have divided up tasks, though. Slowly slogging through it all. We're unfortunately missing some information (investments, chiefly) and are trying to figure out how to figure those out.


Posted by: parsimon | Link to this comment | 02- 4-09 7:26 PM
horizontal rule
117

hang in there parsimon. all best.


Posted by: alameida | Link to this comment | 02- 5-09 5:37 AM
horizontal rule
118

The Brits are like the Repubs: pathetic sex scandals all the way, uh, down

Which is weird, because traditionally it's been the Democrats (as GB says) who've been caught having affairs, while the more moral Republicans have restricted themselves to mass murder and monumental corruption.
Also, as ttaM said, it's been some time since the last serious sex scandal in the UK. The Wave of Lib Dem Gayness, wasn't it?


Posted by: ajay | Link to this comment | 02- 5-09 6:05 AM
horizontal rule
119

re: 118

Yeah, I think so. Which wasn't anything specific to the gayness, but rather the rent-boys + alleged coprophilia.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 02- 5-09 6:10 AM
horizontal rule
120

The Wave of Lib Dem Gayness, wasn't it?

I must have been down the shops when that happened. Or are you thinking of Jeremy Thorpe? I think there's actually a discernible lessening of interest in such things. I mean, I know they were both out of Parliament by the time it got out, but the news that John Major, as PM, had been knobbing his Minister of Food got almost no traction. Time was, the tabloids would still be talking about it.


Posted by: OneFatEnglishman | Link to this comment | 02- 5-09 6:24 AM
horizontal rule
121

traditionally it's been the Democrats

Mmm, if we're talking about bog-standard marital affairs, it's pretty even on that score. Republicans definitely have the market cornered in anonymous bathroom sex scandals, though.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 02- 5-09 6:25 AM
horizontal rule
122

re: 120

I think he's referring to Mark Oaten and thingie, Simon Hughes. Hughes wasn't really a scandal scandal, though.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 02- 5-09 6:33 AM
horizontal rule
123

122. Yeah, I'd forgotten about them. Which kind of supports my point about people caring less.


Posted by: OneFatEnglishman | Link to this comment | 02- 5-09 6:46 AM
horizontal rule
124

re: 123

Yeah. The UK is a very different place from the late 80s.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 02- 5-09 6:49 AM
horizontal rule