Patterico's Pontifications

3/2/2008

A Blog Post That Made Me Tear Up a Little Just Writing It

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 11:49 pm

In light of this and this, I just want to reveal that the most common e-mail I receive asks me: “Patterico, how do you do it? How do you keep it together? How do you manage?”

It’s not easy, readers — and yet, I have a shocking pronouncement for you. There are those out there who have it even rougher than I do. No, it’s true.

It’s just a constant sense of guilt, all the time. I just hope the American people will be OK. I just tell people: don’t cry for me, Argentina.

Political Strategy According to Gloria Steinem

Filed under: 2008 Election — DRJ @ 6:31 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

Feminist Gloria Steinem campaigned for Hillary Clinton in Texas today. Here are a few excerpts from the New York Observer:

[Note: All excerpts are quotes from The Observer summarizing Steinem’s speech. Items in quotation marks are quotes from Gloria Steinem.]

> Barack Obama benefits — and Clinton suffers — because Americans view racism more seriously than sexism.

> … one reason to back Clinton was because “she actually enjoys conflict.”

> … if Clinton’s experience as First Lady were taken seriously in relation to her White House bid, people might “finally admit that, say, being a secretary is the best way to learn your boss’s job and take it over.”

> Steinem raised McCain’s Vietnam imprisonment as she sought to highlight an alleged gender-based media bias against Clinton.

“Suppose John McCain had been Joan McCain and Joan McCain had got captured, shot down and been a POW for eight years. [The media would ask], ‘What did you do wrong to get captured? What terrible things did you do while you were there as a captive for eight years?’” Steinem said, to laughter from the audience.

McCain was, in fact, a prisoner of war for around five-and-a-half years, during which time he was tortured repeatedly. Referring to his time in captivity, Steinem said with bewilderment, “I mean, hello? This is supposed to be a qualification to be president? I don’t think so.”

> Steinem’s broader argument was that the media and the political world are too admiring of militarism in all its guises.

“I am so grateful that she [Clinton] hasn’t been trained to kill anybody. And she probably didn’t even play war games as a kid. It’s a great relief from Bush in his jump suit and from Kerry saluting.”

Steinem also sullied JFK, stating “from George Washington to Jack Kennedy and PT-109 we have behaved as if killing people is a qualification for ruling people.”

It sounds like Steinem managed to offend just about everybody. What’s that old saying? ‘Hell hath no fury like a woman …’ Well, you know.

— DRJ

Happy Texas Independence Day

Filed under: Current Events — DRJ @ 5:47 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

The Republic of Texas got off to a rough start but fortunately the first Texians persevered:

“The Republic of Texas was born on March 2, 1836 when a delegation at Washington-on-the-Brazos adopted the Texas Declaration of Independence. Four days later, the Alamo fell to Santa Ana. On March 27, over 300 unarmed Texans were massacred at Goliad. But on April 21 at the Battle of San Jacinto, Santa Ana met defeat and for almost 10 years Texas was an independent nation.”

I can’t believe no one has mentioned this yet. It’s one of my favorite holidays.

— DRJ

Sweet, Sweet Irony

Filed under: 2008 Election — Patterico @ 1:01 pm

Allah highlights this clip, dripping with irony in the wake of Hillary’s “3 a.m.” commercial:

Oh, man.

Allah is sympathetic:

Reap the whirlwind, chump.

Heh.

Also don’t miss Allah’s clips of the Saturday Night Live featuring Hillary and Giuliani.

From the “Upsetting My Readers” File: How to Analyze Global Warming

Filed under: Environment,General — Patterico @ 12:30 pm

Global temperatures have dropped precipitiously in the past year, and global-warming skeptics have cited this data as evidence that global warming is a myth.

Regardless of what you think of global warming and its causes, that makes about as much sense as saying that this stock is going down in value because of the downward trend indicated by the oval in the center-right portion of this chart:

stock-chart.jpg

I tend to go with the analysis of this fellow, quoted in a New York Times article spotted by Allahpundit:

“When I get called by CNN to comment on a big summer storm or a drought or something, I give the same answer I give a guy who asks about a blizzard,” Dr. Schmidt said. “It’s all in the long-term trends. Weather isn’t going to go away because of climate change. There is this desire to explain everything that we see in terms of something you think you understand, whether that’s the next ice age coming or global warming.”

That makes a lot more sense than saying: “Sure is cold out today . . . take that, you global warming idiots!”

[Ducks]


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2161 secs.