Transterrestrial Musings

Comments

Obama, Edwards, Dodd or Richardson would have absolutely no problem wining against any of the Republicans. Especially now that we know that Bush-Cheney, and by association the GOP, lied about what they knew not just about Iraq but about what they knew about Iran!

Clinton on the other hand is the least likely to win if she is the nominee, and in addition may significantly reduce what is being predicted by virtually all analysts to be a massive Democratic majority in Congress.

In addition, a Clinton victory would trap the nation for yet another four years at least in 51% politics. A very undesirable situation.

Posted by Offside at December 4, 2007 08:44 AM

Ahem. I meant "winning," not "wining." Though it might take some "whining." And even perhaps "wining and dining" the electorate to get there.

Posted by Offside at December 4, 2007 09:14 AM

It's an interesting statement that Clinton is the least likely to win if nominated, since Intrade says the opposite. The Intrade betting pool believes that if she were nominated, she would have a 60% chance of winning the election. It doesn't give any other nominee more than half odds, conditionally.

In any case you can see why Republicans and neolibertarians would want to replace Barack Obama with his dad in his campaign. It's hard to say whether Bruce Bawer has been fair to Obama's book, since he does not grant Obama the courtesy of a direct quote about either of his parents. But let's suppose that Obama were too starry-eyed about his womanizing father. Is Obama himself a womanizer? What about Fred Thompson?

It's a good time to repeat this question: What should you think of your dad if you're older than your stepmother?

Posted by Jim Harris at December 4, 2007 09:16 AM

Especially now that we know that Bush-Cheney, and by association the GOP, lied about what they knew not just about Iraq but about what they knew about Iran!

We don't "know" that. It remains a Bush-deranged fantasy.

Posted by Rand Simberg at December 4, 2007 09:22 AM

It's a good time to repeat this question: What should you think of your dad if you're older than your stepmother?

It was a dumb question the first time. It remains one now.

I give up. What should I think of my dad if I'm older than my stepmother?

I think it depends on how old I am. If I'm five years old, I should think he's a child molester. If I'm forty, I would think he's a lucky guy, but it would also depend on whether or not he left my mother for her, or if he married her later, after divorce or widowerhood. But if that's the case, her age really isn't the issue.

Again, a dumb question. But we'll consider the source.

Posted by Rand Simberg at December 4, 2007 09:28 AM

If I'm forty, I would think he's a lucky guy

Luck had nothing to do with it in Fred Thompson's case. Sex and a trophy were his priority and not having to work was hers.

Which from a strict Libertarian perspective, is just their business. But that leaves no reason to criticize Obama for any aspect of his personal life.

Posted by Jim Harris at December 4, 2007 09:39 AM

Sex and a trophy were his priority and not having to work was hers.

How in the hell do you know what either of their priorities were? Are you the great Kreskin?

No, I think that you're the not-so-great Jim Harris.

Which from a strict Libertarian perspective, is just their business. But that leaves no reason to criticize Obama for any aspect of his personal life.

I see. If I'm not willing to criticize Fred Thompson for marrying someone younger than himself (I had never realized what a venal sin this was, even though it's a time-honored tradition driven by human evolutionary pressures), I can't say anything about Obama's personal life?

Was this supposed to be a serious argument? Because I'm laughing.

Posted by Rand Simberg at December 4, 2007 09:54 AM

younger than himself

Younger than his children.

I can't say anything about Obama's personal life?

You can say anything you want, but the fact is that relatively speaking, there is nothing to criticize.

Posted by Jim Harris at December 4, 2007 10:12 AM

Younger than his children.

It remains laughable. I just can't get as upset about a man marrying a woman his children's age when she's in her thirties as you nuttily want me to.

Posted by Rand Simberg at December 4, 2007 10:16 AM

> not having to work was hers.

Harris is lying here. Thompson's new wife continued to work after their marriage.

Since being in the same political party as a supposed liar disqualifies folks in Harris' book, surely Harris' lying disqualifies him from any further comments. The only open question is whether Harris' lies also disqualify all Dem candidates.

Or, does Harris apply lesser standards to Dems?

Posted by Andy Freeman at December 4, 2007 10:34 AM

By the way, Offside, if we learned anything from the NIE, it's that Iran was lying about its program being for peaceful nuclear power. And that was a real lie.

Posted by Rand Simberg at December 4, 2007 11:11 AM

If one had visited Thailand several years ago, you would still find lots of very reactionary right wing ex-GIs in their sixties with 18 year old wives. Fantasy really happened over there and that didn't mess with their politics. Fred's younger wife isn't that big a deal; it hardly counts as a major sex fantasy, except in Puritania USA.

Posted by at December 4, 2007 11:11 AM

Check out the InTrade contract for "air strike on Iran"

That one has fallen through the floor, recently.

Posted by Bill White at December 4, 2007 01:17 PM

"Obama, Edwards, Dodd or Richardson would have absolutely no problem wining against any of the Republicans."

...he says as he walks past the graveyard whistling........

Offside, your BDS slip is showing again. 2005 just called and said it no longer gives a shit.

Posted by Mike Puckett at December 4, 2007 03:33 PM

Harris is lying here. Thompson's new wife continued to work after their marriage.

Currently she works for his campaign. Working part-time for your own spouse, in an ill-defined consultancy position, is completely different from having a real job. In fact, the day that she met Thompson, she was working at the Kroger checkout line. There is no question that she married a wallet, and a miracle man for her career.

After all, as Rand said, look at the Darwinian incentive. Sex with a fertile young beauty is his natural Darwinian incentive. Sex with a wealthy patrician is hers.

Posted by Jim Harris at December 4, 2007 10:43 PM

Since being in the same political party as a supposed liar disqualifies folks in Harris' book

I never said or believed any such thing.

Posted by Jim Harris at December 4, 2007 10:45 PM

I'm sure that it didn't mess with their politics, whether the brides were 18 or 15, and for that matter whether they were girls or boys, or whether the GI in question "married" just one of them, or three or four in one year.

Posted by Jim Harris at December 4, 2007 11:00 PM

"Obama, Edwards, Dodd or Richardson would have absolutely no problem wining against any of the Republicans. Especially now that we know that Bush-Cheney, and by association the GOP, lied about what they knew not just about Iraq but about what they knew about Iran!"

You mean about Iran having a nuclear program? No, they didn't. They found out that the plan to convert the enriched uranium to nuclear warheads was discontinued starting in 2003, but the rest of the program remains because it's almost the same as a civilian nuclear program. How long does it take to kick-start that last part back into motion?

Also notice the date: 2003. I wonder what else happened in 2003. Well, Libya stopped working with nukes...I wonder why...it starts with an I...

"After all, as Rand said, look at the Darwinian incentive. Sex with a fertile young beauty is his natural Darwinian incentive. Sex with a wealthy patrician is hers."

The cynicism is breathtaking.

Posted by Math_Mage at December 5, 2007 12:53 AM

How long does it take to kick-start that last part back into motion?

I don't know about the time involved, but having an "agreed framework" with a Dem U.S. administration sure helps.

Posted by McGehee at December 5, 2007 06:23 AM

Math_Mage, Iraq you mean? Sure that's possible, with Saddam removed, their main reason to want Nukes ceased to exist.

Coitus Interruptus. A sad day for Cheney, Lieberman, Kristol etc.

It is time to consider paying reparations for all the SHRIEKING from the right wing over the last few years about Mad Mullahs running riot. At the least an immediate reversal of all sanctions is required.

As the NIE says, diplomacy apparently works. That after all is what Petraeus is now doing in Iraq and which apparently is more effective than unbridled aggression at fever pitch.

So how do Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin etc now pacify their agitated minions who were brainwashed into the Mad Mullah theory? That's another bunch that needs a re-education camp. Of course, I have no doubt that the Spin will be forthcoming. Actually as Math_Mage demonstrates, it's already happening.

Posted by Offside at December 5, 2007 08:07 AM

The cynicism is breathtaking.

Let me be perfectly clear. The real issue with Fred Thompson is that he is a tired actor reading a tired Reaganite script. It doesn't really bother me that he dumped his wife of 26 years, slept with a lot of younger women, then finally married the youngest one, the pretty lady who worked at Kroger. Maybe it would bother me if I were related to Thompson, but I'm not. It's just his personal business.

But it leaves absolutely room to criticize Barack Obama for his personal situation. So what if he glosses over his dad's polygamy? Again, I don't know whether that is a fair reading of his book, but even if it is, so what? He himself is monogamous, and his relationship with Michelle Obama is based on equal status. She has her own life; she isn't just a servant of his court.

Posted by Jim Harris at December 5, 2007 08:45 AM

I don't know whether there should be an immediate end to sanctions against Iran. But certainly they should replace their knife-and-stick diplomacy to Iran with real carrot-and-stick diplomacy. That is what Hillary Clinton said in the debate yesterday and she is right. Although the carrots might well matter more than the sticks given that Iraq is now a shotgun marriage between Iran and the United States.

If they are to pay reparations, they should pay them to the American people for undermining their safety in these past four years. The one incident with Iran that clearly does merit reparations and an apologize is the time that they shot down Iran Flight 655 in Iranian airspace. They did pay the families of the victims on that flight, but they did not pay for the plane and they did not apologize.

Posted by Jim Harris at December 5, 2007 08:56 AM

An even better view of the reaction from the right; NPod is spectacular:

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/dec/04/neocons_go_ballistic_on_iran_nie

Jim, You should drop the references to FT's wife. I don't think it is relevant or fair. And also, Dennis Kucinich is in his third marriage, he's 61, she's 30 and she is a VERY hot number. Check out today's WaPo for more details.

Posted by Offside at December 5, 2007 10:03 AM

> In fact, the day that she met Thompson, she was working at the Kroger checkout line.

You've derided her a couple of times in this thread for working at a Kroger, but I think you misread the TNR article. They met -in- a checkout line, both as shoppers. From an article in People, "Fred carried her groceries to her car, and she invited him to a friend's party that night." I'm not sure, but I think she was working for a PR firm at the time.

http://blogs.trb.com/news/politics/blog/PeopleJeriThompsonarticle.jpg

Posted by Neil H. at December 5, 2007 12:58 PM

I think you misread the TNR article.

You're right, I did misread the TNR article. I should have been more careful. The best article on Jeri Kehn Thompson is in The Washington Post. When she met Fred Thompson in July, 1996, she had had various nondescript desk and web jobs in Naperville and Nashville. She also had unpaid bills. After they started dating in 1997, she suddenly found very good jobs in Washington and paid off her debts.

Now it may be true that Fred and Jeri Thompson geniunely love each other and also that she's adequately competent at these consulting jobs. Or at least, not glaringly incompetent. But still, unlike for Fred Thompson's first wife, or for that matter Fred Thompson himself, she is a case where good looks is good luck.

I guess I half-agree with Offside. Although this raises valid questions about nepotism and old boy networks, it's probably something that the voters could and should set aside. But again, by the same measure, everything that Bruce Bawer said about Obama is completely irrelevant to Obama's campaign.

Posted by Jim Harris at December 5, 2007 03:10 PM

"It is time to consider paying reparations for all the SHRIEKING from the right wing over the last few years about Mad Mullahs running riot. At the least an immediate reversal of all sanctions is required."

They are still arming Hamas, Hizbollah and their supporters in Iraq. They still execute gays, snatch improperly dressed women off the street, stone women to death AND they are STILL enriching uranium. Now, Imanutjob wants to establish an Islamic Court.
Not to mention that NIE was headed up by someone with a case of BDS almost as bad as yours and they have done so well in the past. But hey, give them some money but subtract money for families of soldiers killed by their EFPs and some jewish families in Argentina and Israel. I think a swift kick in their collective pants is a better idea.

Posted by Bill Maron at December 5, 2007 08:46 PM

Um, the sanctions were on the uranium enrichment, not on the weapons program. We certainly won't get anywhere with Iran by backing off...and they're still causing a heckuva lot of trouble throughout the Middle-East, AND fulfilling a lot of the prerequisites for making nukes without a continuance of weapon-specific programs, such that it'd be pretty darn quick from restarting the program to attaining the bomb.

When there have been offers to supply various pieces of a peaceful nuclear program abroad and Iran has rejected them, where is the lack of carrot? Seems like Iran's just ignoring the carrot, so a healthy dose of the stick has been applied.

Posted by Math_Mage at December 6, 2007 07:51 AM

Post a comment