EFFin’ Unsound

– posted by thehim

Our good friend Jon DeVore ridicules the incredibly ridiculous Elizabeth Hovde as she embarks on a new journey that will inevitably symbolize the decline of traditional media.

From FW Con’s New Year’s post:

Religiously, I don’t know that 2009 will be much different from 2008. I am going to do what I can to see that the message of peace and love and repentance spreads, and perhaps economic hard times will soften people’s hearts some. I don’t have any reason to expect 2009 to be better than 2008, though.

Aah, yes. Peace and love. Like when he pontificates on Islam:

we’re supposed to treat Islam as if it were the religion of peace, when in fact it most certainly is not based on its history from its very beginnings and practice in the modern era. Sure, there may be a few sects that are peaceful, but until such time as they separated themselves wholly from the more militant factions, how are we supposed to distinguish the two?

Peace and love. Like when he attacks gay people for tehgay.

I think we are seeing the homosexual, anti-religious, anti-morality crowd “jump the shark” here. You can’t separate righteousness and justice from religion. You can’t take God out of America. You can’t do evil and pretend it is good. These aren’t philosophies I wish were true, they are true. As the anti-morality crowd continues to grow in their hatred of all that is righteous, those in American and the world who understand basic human morality will see them for who they really are.

Peace and love. Like his support of Iraq: why look at the love he feels for those working for peace.

anti-war leftist pinko communist anti-American demonstrators took the fight to their own side. Let me tell you, these people are disgusting, in a very disgusting way. They stink. They are rude. They are combative. They are unkind. You can’t talk with them. They are oblivious to reason. Even if you are trying to help them, they will slap you down and good. And so, individual democrats are wondering why they are in bed with these people and their sweaty, hairy armpits, and what the rest of America thinks of them for being in bed with them.

- posted by demo kid

Why should Christians be bigoted against Mormons when together we can be bigots against other people?

Or internal rhyme. Or writing off topic. Or a rhyme scheme more advanced than AABBCC. Or an editor. Jesus, is it any wonder that Crosscut is having a tough time staying afloat?

– posted by thehim

It looks like we’ve got a rising star in the northwest wingnuttia scene. Set your bookmarks for Oregon’s own News With Views “Where Reality Shatters Illusion”.

In this illusion-shattering post, Lynn Stuter explains the myriad justifications for which she still clings to the belief that Barack Obama will be magically declared ineligible to be President through a number of absurd and contradictory theories about his citizenship status.

- Posted by Carl Ballard

Eric Earling on how to rebuild the Republican party.

Rebuilding the Party Right

Mostly, it seems, this has to do with technology and the fact that the economy was bad, so no issues. Ron Paul next time, I would think is the logical conclusion.

Let me second Patrick Ruffini’s admonition that Erick Erickson’s post on how technology has to play a role in the future of the GOP is indeed a must read, particularly for serious activists and leaders in the Republican party and/or the conservative movement.

This is a very strange use of “and/or.” Just say “and” next time.

The core point of both gentlemen is that the infusion of technology itself into party and campaign apparatuses needs to be done by people with technology backgrounds, not the usual political hacks (and no, bloggers by no means qualify was technology gurus, as Erickson & Ruffini point out).

Well technology is a piece of the puzzle. But so is the fact that bush vetoed even a modest increase in S-Chip and the fact that there is still a war or two going on. I think that had more to do with your party’s failed policy than the fact that Obama used the Internet effectively. Vetoing embryonic stem cell research probably didn’t help the party either. Nor did, you know, making America an instrument of torture.

Moreover, this point by Erickson requires special mention:

Duplicating Obama’s technology effort is not the solution for the right and those who say it is are the first people not to hire.

Right, because who would want a Republican version of MyBO? It would be like Goldy’s comment threads without the sanity. If anything, Obama’s web campaign forced him to keep in contact with the activist community even when we seriously disagreed with him. I suspect most Republican candidates would find this a waste of their time.

The post goes on at some length explaining why Obama’s core online activists don’t align with the equivalent, potential GOP match.

Serious. As thehim reminded us the other day, this is what the core Republican activists look like. So yeah, it is tougher to build something up around that.

I would also argue that even many Democrats would not be able to duplicate Obama’s technological machine. It was in some respects a totally unique phenomenon, coupled with exceptionally atypical exterior events (economic meltdown, fumbling McCain candidacy, etc.). Thus, GOP reformers should not presume that technological organizing was the linchpin of the Obama victory.

I don’t disagree with this, but much of the reason that McCain was so fumbly was that his party’s brand was shit. And the economy is in the tank because of Republican policies, not just magically.

What it did do was dramatically run-up the score when the economy become THE issue of the campaign at the same time John McCain demonstrated his total inability to display Presidential steadiness and articulate a clear message on the most pressing issue on voters minds. Had the election itself been closer, Obama’s technology-based advantage (the rough equivalent of the GOP’s voter turnout edge in 2004) would clearly have been put him over the top.

So. Maybe get some ideas that aren’t complete shit, and then work on the Interwebz.

Local twist: the work of RNC tech guru Cyrus Krohn helped shape the web-based ads of Dave Reichert’s successful re-election campaign.

Well, I think the trick in that case was to have the Mercer Island Mutt Murderer make false accusations about Darcy than it was about web ads.

– posted by thehim

I’m not sure I’ll ever know why Mark Gardner still thinks having Lou Guzzo write with him is a good idea for promoting conservative politics. There are dead Civil War veterans who are more in-tune with the internet age than Lou. Here he is discussing the decade’s most important news event - when Janet Jackson’s nipple was exposed for a split second during halftime of Super Bowl XXXVIII:

Four years have gone by, but the Super Bowl 38 melody (make that “malady”) lingers on, and will last a long time, unfortunately.

Funny story about this. I was at a Super Bowl Party in Lynnwood for this game. There were like 30 people at this party, but theher was the only person who saw what happened. She told me (and others) what happened during the second half, but we were all convinced she was seeing things. I still don’t know why it happened, but if it was newsworthy in any way, it was the perfect storm of America’s propensities for idiotic self-promotion and sexual repression.

Read the rest of this entry »

I’ve read this paragraph in a generally not horrible article in Crosscut about building the conservative brand in the Northwest several times now. I still don’t know what it means. Bold mine.

One reason that Washington Republicans have not been successful at building a long-term governing majority is that Northwesterners are independent. It’s difficult for any society, much less one that abhors establishments, to get together the sorts of broad coalitions that make it possible to elect candidates. Democrats can pull it off because they tend to organize around interest groups (unions, public employees, feminists, seniors) instead of shared principles. As for Republicans, Tim Eyman’s signature gatherers don’t deal much with Dan Evans’ disciples, who don’t want much to do with Ellen Craswell’s crowd. Dino Rossi was the closest Republicans came in generations to having a statewide leader who could unite the party from east to west and from middle to right.

Since public employees are generally a subset of unions, I’m not sure why they are part of the list. But even those of us not in unions still want, get this on principal, for working folks to succeed; we find that unions are an important piece of how we go about that. Feminists apparently have no principals. So, essentially seniors vote for Democrats but apparently for no reason, or at least with no principal.

Of course we could just as easily say that Zieger’s Republicans describe interest groups. The anti-tax zealots, the people who are Republicans simply because they are assholes and the Bible thumpers. So I’m really not sure what the whole point was.

– posted by thehim

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you a quick highlight reel of the most mentally disturbed commenter in the history of HorsesAss, Troll:

Only a fool trusts Gregoire and her promise. You don’t understand the woman like I do. Taxes will be raised.

A piece of garbage who ran away from his responsibilities like the majority of other black men.

It is odd that they are renaming streets in Kenya after him, even though “he wasn’t born there.”

If it were up to me, that ornament-making, hate-filled, intolerant leftist nut would do 25 years in prison.

If it were up to me, the person who created the sign, and the person who allowed it would be put in prison for 20 years for a hate crime.

Anyway, I don’t get this whole foster care Christmas present charity drive. We’re in a recession.

As long as there are African Americans, there will be suburbs.

And I hold ALL liberals directly responsible for the bomb in Oregon.

As someone who thinks graffiti vandals should be executed

Um, I actually admire Jews. I don’t admire blacks. But I do admire Jews. Blacks could learn a lot from them.

I, too, condemn the bigots, hypocrites, and intolerant on this blog.

Question. If people are born gay, which I know is a lie, then let me ask you this: If tomorrow all the women on earth disappeared, would there be a higher incidence of homosexuality one year from now? If the answer is yes, that proves my belief that homosexuality is a choice.

Lee, one thing Goldy and I want to do with this blog is talk about the issues, and refrain from personal attacks.

Suck on this, you liberal, global warming cultists … some headlines from Drudge

I am pleased with myself. I am, inherently, a teacher.

I want to thank myself for my contributions to this blog in 2008.

Today, I want you to go down to Rainier Avenue and ask a group of people waiting for the bus what 14:59 GMT minus 8 hours is. You have until 7 PM to complete this assignment I’ve given you.

There IS something obscene about a nursing mother in public, because what if a man had the ability to nurse with his penis?

Am I hero? I suppose that’s for history to decide.

And that was just December…

- posted by demo kid

The holiday is done for me, the turkey is eaten, and the presents are opened! Again, I’ve slipped off from the festivities, just to get something off my mind.

Bryan Myrick, aka “thesenator2012″, is not quite rabid as the usual folks hanging out on the Sound Politics web pages. There is definitely a difference of opinion between what he thinks and what I think, and I’m quite willing to chalk it up to simple, respectable ideological differences. I can even say that I have far more respect for him than for an ideological nutcase like FWC or a tool like Don Ward (which is not saying very much, but still). I’m more keen on targeting people that are scary or crazy or both on this website, so I’ve never raised his blog entries before.

His recent post about homelessness, though, is one that truly illuminates the flaws in the conservative viewpoint when it comes to many, many social problems, and I can’t help but bring it up. No one can say that there are easy ways out of these social problems, by any means. They are, by any definition, “wicked problems” without a clear solution, or even a clear definition of the nature of the problem itself.

Many of the problems with even addressing the issue, however, stem from the conservative definition of homelessness as purely a “mental disorder” or a “personal choice”, equating it with personal responsibility and personal failure. From Bryan’s post:

Even those of us who see homelessness, in the big picture, as a social ill that inhabits the individual, not an individual for whom an ill society has failed, even our hearts thaw paradoxically when the temperatures drop below freezing.

Poetic.

He goes on to say that homelessness is the manifestation of mental illness, and that the independence that the folks in Nickelsville is a sham. He also states that “many of us” would not be able to get on board with homeless programs because there are no effective treatment programs associated with these initiatives.

I’m quite tempted here to draw parallels with the type of smug attitude that says that you need to “hate the sin, love the sinner” or that homosexuality is a “personal choice” when dealing with gays and lesbians. Nevertheless, the gauntlet is thrown down: homeless folks make a choice to stay outside, and it is a moral failing on their part. They do it to themselves, and if they don’t accept the help that they’re given, they’re really to blame and should be reprogrammed. They should thank us from the bottom of their hearts for everything that we do for them.

As with most things, though, it’s not quite as simple as that.

Can I defend the moral fiber of every single person that is homeless? Absolutely not. There are good folks and bad folks that are thrown out on the street. There are some that wallow in feelings of entitlement, and others that are absolutely, positively at the end of their rope but are determined to survive on their own. There are drug addicts, and alcoholics. Some homeless folks are quite keen on exploiting people, others are often taken advantage of by people. Many have mental disorders, others have criminal records, still others have fallen on very, very hard times. Some are vets who have had experience with hard living in the field, others are from local tribes, still others are abused runaways. This is not a homogenous population. They have different issues, different problems, and they need different solutions.

Being morally condescending cannot be a part of the policies to address homelessness. I’m not a judge myself, and I can’t be expected to determine who is worthy of a space and who is not, who is worthy of help and who is not. In my experiences volunteering, I have had to tell single mothers with children that I can’t find a place for them to stay the night, and that is bad enough. To try to tell people that they don’t deserve to survive because they don’t show enough reverence to the better-off? That’s not generosity, that’s the exploitation of power. The baby Jesus really would cry at that, since the adult Jesus spent most of his time around the outcasts in society.

As far as his point of promoting treatment programs goes, I’d certainly agree. Does this really find favor with conservatives, though? Take a real world example. The DESC in Seattle has sponsored the 1811 Eastlake Project, where 75 formerly homeless folks struggling with alcohol addiction are currently living. This facility provides mental health and chemical dependency treatment, support services, and monitoring by trained staff. The catch? The residents are allowed to drink alcohol on the premises, unlike most other facilities in the city. This makes sense from a practical and even a fiscal perspective. Many of these residents, when out on the street, were drinking and would get injured or arrested and the costs of dealing with emergency room visits, police calls, and so forth, were astronomical. (“Million-Dollar Murrays”, as it were.) Given their addiction, they weren’t willing to give up alcohol just to stay in a shelter, and as a result, they were putting themselves more at risk.

I would be very amused to see if very many conservatives would take up their mantle and advocate for more programs like this. More often than not, if some program like this is raised the only thing a hardcore, rabid SP type would see is the “free housing”, and would think an adequate solution would be to go down and tell all 75 residents to get a job. Likewise, is there a great clamoring from conservatives for increased mental health services in the state? Housing support for felons leaving incarceration? Improved and realistic drug treatment and risk minimization programs? I’d be very interested in seeing proof that conservatives are keen on treating the homeless like anything but criminals at this point, simply for being homeless. For all of the claims that conservatives are rational, I haven’t seen that their policies are driven by anything but a blind partisan hatred of government social programs.

This boils down to some of the fundamental differences in modern progressivism versus conservatism. While people like Bryan are more than willing to point out the flaws in strategies to deal with problems like these, it is rare that you find them public champions of alternatives that would do any better (aside from the all-powerful “invisible hand” and networks of religious institutions, of course). Most liberals are not advocates for unlimited spending for quixotic goals, and will not object to the idea of spending money wisely and effectively. Heck, I’m not even suggesting that extreme interventions should be pursued, just that these people should be allowed to live. But it seems that according to most conservatives, they may not even deserve that in the face of pure social Darwinism.

Anyway, off for a few days to enjoy the interregnum. I’ll catch you all in 2009!