Patterico's Pontifications

9/17/2008

I Offer No Apologies or Regrets for Persistence (If You’re Squeamish, You Pretty Much Don’t Want to Click on Any Link in This Post)

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 11:37 pm

“I offer no apologies or regrets for persistence” — Andrew Sullivan (link is not work-safe).

I don’t know if Google-bombing works any more. But it would be interesting if, when people search for Andrew Sullivan (link is not work-safe), the first link to pop up would be this link about Andrew Sullivan (link is not work-safe).

The quote comes from this post. Bonding with me in determination to consistently remind readers about this is Ace, and God bless him for it.

The relevance and authenticity of the link is discussed at this link. We’re talking hypocrisy on several levels.

You want self-righteousness, Andrew Sullivan (link is not work-safe)? I got your self-righteousness.

I once said: “If he is going to make constant disparaging references to the people surrounding Sarah Palin, I am going to keep linking the personal ad where he hypocritically seeks out men for promiscuous sex. I’ll do my best to make sure nobody ever forgets it.”

The guy I was talking about was Andrew Sullivan (link is not work-safe).

Because I offer no apologies or regrets for persistence.

UPDATE: A reader writes to make two points: 1) my anger in this post is palpable, in contrast to my normally calm demeanor, and 2) he worries that linking to Sullivan’s ads soliciting sex from strangers “has the effect of subtly reinforcing, to your largely anti-gay audience, that gay people are immoral/disgusting/hypocrites/etc.”

I appreciate the e-mail. Let me take the second point first, for the benefit of any new readers who don’t know my position on homosexuality or gay marriage. I support gay marriage. When propositions have come up in California to restrict marriage to heterosexuals, I have voted no — and I will again this fall. I am more liberal on this issue than Barack Obama.

Also, I would be linking to Sullivan’s ad even if he had written to denounce promiscuous heterosexual sex, and had placed an ad seeking promiscuous heterosexual sex. This has nothing to do with homosexuality, and everything to do with his being an absolutely hypocritical cretin on privacy. (I would like to say, however, that when I post this link (and I have before) I tend to see a certain set of anti-homosexual commenters pop up in the comments. In fact, this happens to some degree whenever I discuss Sullivan. I think most of you know I disapprove of these comments, but it never hurts to say it again.)

As to my anger being palpable, you bet. When Andrew Sullivan posted ads soliciting risky unprotected sex on the Internet, and someone blew the whistle on his hypocrisy, he bleated about privacy. But now, there is no outrage visited on Sarah Palin that is too private or personal that he won’t splash it on his web site.

Dumb comments on Levi Johnston’s MySpace page? Tell the world! Quote it and mock it!

Someone hacks Sarah Palin’s e-mail? Tell the world! Link approvingly to a site that publishes the results!

Some moron publishes a stupid rumor saying Sarah Palin is the grandmother of her own son? Tell the world! Amplify it and give it mainstream credibility!

Let’s talk about whether she should have had an amnio. Let’s talk about her sister’s sex life. Let’s link to court sites that might discuss a possible affair. He has discussed all these things and more, each time with the lame excuse: I’m just airing it! I’m doing the vetting McCain didn’t do!

Well, I’m doing the vetting the Atlantic didn’t do. I think someone ought to tell the world just exactly what kind of a lowlife hypocritical cretin this man is.

Anger? Yeah.

Cue Tom Petty’s “I Won’t Back Down,” go to commercial.

Thanks for the e-mail.

E-Mail Hacking Throws the Spotlight on the Jerks in the Room

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 9:54 pm

UPDATE x3 [BUMPED TO TOP]: John Cole and his band of boobs pretend that he was obviously being sarcastic with the phrase “lovable scamps.” Well, that phrase is very similar to the phrase “fun-loving Internet trouble-makers” that Gawker used to describe 4chan — in the same post where Gawker posted private stuff from the e-mails.

“Lovable scamps” is the kind of phrase you use when you feel the obligation to condemn, but your heart really isn’t in it. As such, it’s a phrase I’ll be using regularly in the future, with a link back to this post. For example: “I heard some lovable scamps did a DDoS attack on Cole’s site today. There is no love for that sort of thing here and I certainly do condemn it.”

Original post follows.

The hacking of Sarah Palin’s e-mail has the vermin crawling out of the woodwork.

John Cole calls the people who hacked Sarah Palin’s e-mail “lovable scamps.” In Cole’s world, surveilling murderous terrorists is evil; hacking Republicans’ e-mail is lovable.

Would it be OK for Track Palin to react to Cole’s post by stomping on Cole’s testicles? Your thoughts are welcome!

Meanwhile, the cretins at Gawker defend their actions in posting Palin’s e-mails and private family pictures, disclosing Bristol Palin’s cell phone number, calling that number and taping her outgoing cell phone message and broadcasting it on the Internet, and so forth. Apparently this is all OK and can’t be criticized by Michelle Malkin, because Malkin once reprinted a press release. That’s pretty much the same thing, according to Alex Pareene, who adds that his mother approves of his disgusting actions. (In other words, Pareene didn’t become a scumsucking lowlife by accident; he comes by it honestly, having been raised by someone with no more respect for privacy than he has.)

And I already addressed how RAWMUSLGLUTES handled the hacking — with an approving link calling it “vetting.”

UPDATE: John Cole has added some updates to make it clearer that, in addition to disapproving of Michelle Malkin for supporting the surveillance of terrorists, he also disapproves of people hacking people’s private e-mail accounts. I don’t quite sense the same outrage towards the hackers that he obviously feels for Malkin — but, lest he accuse me of distorting his post, why don’t you read it yourself and come to your own conclusion.

UPDATE x2: Michelle Malkin has a pretty convincing account of the way this went down. Sounds like a) the jerk read all the e-mails and found nothing, and b) the guy should be easy to find and prosecute.

Equal Justice for All, But More Equal for Some Than Others

Filed under: Buffoons,Crime,Morons — Patterico @ 9:17 pm

People accused of crimes should be treated the same whether or not they are famous.

Someone tell Las Vegas Detective Andy Caldwell, who was dispatched to investigate the O.J. Simpson robbery.

“If it was anybody else, we would have arrested him that night,” Caldwell said. “Because of who he was, we wanted to make sure we had everything right.”

Moron.

Shorter Andrew Sullivan

Filed under: 2008 Election,Scum — Patterico @ 9:08 pm

Shorter Andrew Sullivan:

The truth is: no-one’s legal, consensual, adult private life should be plundered and exposed for political purposes. Now, here’s an approving link to a hack of Sarah Palin’s private e-mail.

Leftists Hack Into Palin’s E-Mail, Jerks Publish Results (UPDATED)

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 5:01 pm

Details at Hot Air.

UPDATE: A reader writes to protest that this group is not a bunch of leftists. I based my judgment on the information and links in the Hot Air post — e.g. their protest at the Republican convention and their targeting of Palin. But I’ll concede that I don’t really know anything about this group, other than that they deserve to be prosecuted for what they did to Palin, and generally seem like the kind of losers one generally associates with anonymity on the Internet.

UPDATE x2: I agree with Michelle Malkin: an appropriate level of outrage should be directed at the jerks who gleefully republished this stuff.

My Initial Two Cents on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the Spreading Financial Crisis on Wall Street

Filed under: General — WLS @ 4:24 pm

[Posted by WLS]

Several weeks ago I had the itch to post on this subject after reading this article at SFGate — the San Fran. Chronicle website.  It’s the final installment in a series on families that had gotten themselves caught up in the subprime mortgage meltdown.

There are certainly many facets to the causes of the subprime disaster that is currently infecting all sectors of the financial services industry.  IMO the main culprit is Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac and the removal by Congress of any restrictions on its growth.  The movers behind that effort, and the stalward defenders of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, though they certainly needed GOP support to make it happen.   But Dems far and away dominate the receipt of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the millions of dollars Fannie and Freddie spent on lobbying and campaign contributions wasn’t for nothing.    They bought off any interest in Congress for tighter regulation of their growth in purchasing securities in the secondary market.  This willingness created a “black hole” of secondary market purchasing, where Fannie and Freddie sucked up every kind of mortgage debt instrument the financial services industry could create.  No paper was too risky for Fannie and Freddie to buy, and when they resold those instruments to investors, no instrument was too risky for Fannie and Freddie to insure with a repurchase guarantee.

But, lets get back to the underreported aspect of the meltdown – the complicity of unqualified borrowers.

(more…)

Another Sign That the Apocalypse Is Upon Us — $18.7 Million Grant To Teach “Recess” To Children

Filed under: General — WLS @ 4:05 pm

[Posted by WLS]

As my 7 year old would say “Seriously, it’s true.”

This from today’s WaPo:

Brearn Wright Jr. remembers recess during his first year as principal of Clark Elementary School in Petworth as “like a MASH unit.”

“Recess time was the time the school nurse dreaded, because she knew she’d have so many kids waiting in the lobby” to be treated for injuries from fighting or falling, Wright said.

Traditionally the one period of the school day when children are free of adult-imposed structure, recess is increasingly regarded by educators as a trouble spot. They say that in the Xbox- and Internet-dominated world of many students, the culture of healthy group play has eroded, turning recess into a chaotic and sometimes violent period where strife from the schoolyard can spill over into afternoon classes.

So last year Wright decided to outsource recess. He hired Sports4Kids, an Oakland, Calif.-based nonprofit organization that introduces students to a regimen of traditional playground games, along with a more closely supervised version of such team sports as basketball. The program also stresses conflict resolution, with disagreements mediated by, of all things, rock-paper-scissors.

If you read the whole article, it’s hard not to have some sympathy for the teachers and administrators.

But a nice big paddle mounted on the wall of the principal’s office would be a lot cheaper.

Obama and his media pals mislead on Wall Street turmoil

Filed under: General — Karl @ 12:09 pm

[Posted by Karl]

The Washington Post claims:

A decade ago, Sen. John McCain embraced legislation to broadly deregulate the banking and insurance industries, helping to sweep aside a thicket of rules established over decades in favor of a less restricted financial marketplace that proponents said would result in greater economic growth.

Now, as the Bush administration scrambles to prevent the collapse of the American International Group (AIG), the nation’s largest insurance company, and stabilize a tumultuous Wall Street, the Republican presidential nominee is scrambling to recast himself as a champion of regulation to end “reckless conduct, corruption and unbridled greed” on Wall Street.

That is a selective rendering of history, to say the least.  McCain did not even vote on the final version of the Financial Services Modernization Act in 1999.  He did vote for the original Senate bill, which Pres. Bill Clinton threatened to veto in no small part because the original Senate Bill “would dilute requirements that banks make loans to minorities, farmers and others who have had little access to credit.”  In contrast, Sen. Joe Biden voted against the original Senate bill but voted for the final version — presumably in part because it kept open the pipeline for those riskier loans. 

Moreover, in 2005, McCain was pushing the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act to rein in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and require more stringent regulation by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, by which time Barack Obama — who did nothing — was on his way to becoming a top recipient of of donations from Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Wall Street firms enmeshed in the sub-prime mortgage mess. (Indeed, the biggest chunk of industry donations to Camp Obama comes from the Finance, Insurance & Real Estate (FIRE) sector — just edging out Lawyers & Lobbyists.)  So McCain did not suddenly embrace this issue; if anyone has, it is Obama, who is grasping for an issue to regain the lead in the public opinion polls with less than 50 days until the election.

The disingenuous WaPo hit piece furthers Obama’s attempt to make the current Wall Street turmoil a partisan issue, though as Megan McArdle points out, the Democratic talking points in this regard are “supertwaddle.”  She also delivers a gentle smackdown to both her deranged colleague Andrew Sullivan and Obama over the notion that either Clinton or Bush could have done much to head off the current situation.  Both of those McCardle posts should be must-reads, as they also largely debunk the notion that the Financial Services Modernization Act is a major factor.   

I would be both more charitable and less charitable to the Clinton and Bush Administrations than McArdle in certain respects.  As the Village Voice recently noted:

Andrew Cuomo, the youngest Housing and Urban Development secretary in history, made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country’s current crisis. He took actions that—in combination with many other factors—helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments. He turned the Federal Housing Administration mortgage program into a sweetheart lender with sky-high loan ceilings and no money down, and he legalized what a federal judge has branded “kickbacks” to brokers that have fueled the sale of overpriced and unsupportable loans. Three to four million families are now facing foreclosure, and Cuomo is one of the reasons why.

Moreover, the Voice piece points out that Fannie and Freddie fueled the private market for these practices as well (as did cheap money, from here and abroad).  To be fair, many of the Cuomo impulses were amplified by HUD during the Bush years, though only after the Bush Administration proposed what the New York Times called “the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis,” only to see it fail in the face of bipartisan opposition.

Those who attempt to make the current troubles on Wall Street a GOP scandal or comment on Bush Administration policy have to contend with the reality that the FSMA passed the Senate by a 90-8 vote and passed the House by a vote of 362-57, with support from Harry Reid, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, etc.  Conversely, efforts to reform Fannie and Freddie withered in the face of bipartisan opposition.

Nor are Barack Obama’s hands clean on the issue.  In addition to the tens of millions in donations taken from the FIRE sector, Obama’s national finance chair was an owner and board chair of Superior Bank of Chicago, which pioneered sub-prime lending, developing the financial instruments that helped set the stage for the current sub-prime meltdown.  His campaign fundraising bundlers include: Louis Susman, Michael Froman and J. Michael Schell of Citigroup; Steve Koch of Credit Suisse; Bruce Hayman, David Heller, Eric Schwartz, and Todd Williams of Goldman Sachs; Mark Gilbert, Christine Forester, John Rhea, Nadja Fidelia, and Theodore Janulis of Lehman; and Robert Wolf of UBS Americas.  Such bundlers help make up a more loosely defined “national finance committee,” whose members are are made to feel part of its inner workings through weekly conference calls and quarterly meetings, advance copies of his speeches, access to his top advisers, opportunities to influence the campaign’s message, and so on.  During the primaries, Obama’s proposals were more industry friendly than either Hillary Clinton or John Edwards.  And Camp Obama has been seeking advice on mortgage and housing policy from no less than disgraced former Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Delano Raines.

Thus, Obama’s desperate attempt to make a bipartisan problem into a partisan issue goes beyond dishonest into the hypocritical, as is the WaPo’s bizarre attempt to portray McCain as the opportunist — though neither is as bizarre as Biden trying to blame it on the Bush tax cuts.

(h/t Memeorandum.)

– Karl

Early Quote of the Day

Filed under: 2008 Election — DRJ @ 8:40 am

[Guest post by DRJ]

From a former Clinton supporter who now supports McCain:

“Lynn Forester de Rothschild has said she thinks Democratic nominee Barack Obama is arrogant and has a problem connecting with average Americans.”

De Rothschild is described as a member of the DNC’s Democrats Abroad chapter who “built a multimillion-dollar telecommunications company before marrying international banker Sir Evelyn de Rothschild” and now “splits her time living in London and New York.”

Obama has a problem when the de Rothschilds think he’s out of touch.

UPDATE: Here’s background on de Rothschild’s attitudes toward Obama and his Presidential aspirations.

– DRJ

Andrew Sullivan: Hey Everyone! Let’s Second-Guess Sarah Palin’s Decision to Have an Amniocentesis!

Filed under: 2008 Election — Patterico @ 7:10 am

Andrew Sullivan: “The truth is: no-one’s legal, consensual, adult private life should be plundered and exposed for political purposes.”

Of course, that’s Andrew Sullivan circa 2001 — when the private life being exposed was his own. Namely, his own hypocritical search for the kind of risky unprotected sex that he has spent his career denouncing.

By contrast, Andrew Sullivan circa 2008 has written, by my count, seven posts in recent days about whether Sarah Palin should have had an amniocentesis.

That seems at least as private as an ad placed on the Internet telling the world what “loads” you’ll give and take, and precisely where you’ll give and take them. Doesn’t it?


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2394 secs.