But anyone who’s thought about this for more than a few minutes knows a very specific answer to the question of why there are no Republican scientists: it’s because contemporary science is an empirical, reality-based intellectual enterprise and all such enterprises are inherently non-conservative, unless they involve making a lot of money (there are probably some forms of business that fit the above description and I would not be surprised if some of the people who do them are conservative). If contemporary science was based on reasoning from principles (like the sort of “science” Aristotle liked to do), it might be of interest to conservatives. But it’s not.
[Warbloggers] were scared, ignorant, angry, and psychologically imbalanced people who dangerously hurt this country and its future. Many lived in the New York City area, utilizing personal knowledge of victims of 9/11 to cast utter righteousness of their desire to incinerate as many brown people as possible. Oh what a time is was for them. I think of that now when I read how almost no prominent Republican is outraged that the GOP blocked the bill to give aid to 9/11 workers and victims. Not Giuliani, not Chris Christie, no one. Yesterday Bloomberg said it's "everyone's fault." They don't care. They never did. Like the non-crazy of us all knew all along, Republicans gave a shit about 9/11 vicims solely when it let them hate on Democrats.
[Warbloggers] were scared, ignorant, angry, and psychologically imbalanced people who dangerously hurt this country and its future. Many lived in the New York City area, utilizing personal knowledge of victims of 9/11 to cast utter righteousness of their desire to incinerate as many brown people as possible. Oh what a time is was for them.
I think of that now when I read how almost no prominent Republican is outraged that the GOP blocked the bill to give aid to 9/11 workers and victims. Not Giuliani, not Chris Christie, no one. Yesterday Bloomberg said it's "everyone's fault." They don't care. They never did. Like the non-crazy of us all knew all along, Republicans gave a shit about 9/11 vicims solely when it let them hate on Democrats.
Bai is one of those guys -- there are hundreds of them in this business -- who poses as a wonky, Democrat-leaning "centrist" pundit and then makes a career out of drubbing "unrealistic" liberals and progressives with cartoonish Jane Fonda and Hugo Chavez caricatures. This career path is so well-worn in our business, it's like a Great Silk Road of pseudoleft punditry. First step: graduate Harvard or Columbia, buy some clothes at Urban Outfitters, shore up your socially liberal cred by marching in a gay rights rally or something, then get a job at some place like the American Prospect. Then once you're in, spend a few years writing wonky editorials gently chiding Jane Fonda liberals for failing to grasp the obvious wisdom of the WTC or whatever Bob Rubin/Pete Peterson Foundation deficit-reduction horseshit the Democratic Party chiefs happen to be pimping at the time. Once you've got that down, you just sit tight and wait for the New York Times or the Washington Post to call. It won't be long.
I'd say when I started blogging 8+ years ago (please kill me) the democratic coalition was not nearly as united on issues like gay rights as they are now. I'm pretty sure back then if a fucknozzle like Manchin had voted against DADT repeal there would have been a lot of people explaining that it was necessary to maintain support in WVA, blah blah blah. Now I think we're all united on the fact that he's a fucknozzle.
Incensed over President Obama’s tax compromise, House Democratic leaders are showing signs of abandoning the administration and going their own way on critical issues such as national security. In a striking move, the appropriations committee late Wednesday attached a provision to a $1.1 trillion resolution to keep the government funded next year that would prevent Obama from spending any funds to try terrorism suspects in civilian court instead of military commissions.
Incensed over President Obama’s tax compromise, House Democratic leaders are showing signs of abandoning the administration and going their own way on critical issues such as national security.
In a striking move, the appropriations committee late Wednesday attached a provision to a $1.1 trillion resolution to keep the government funded next year that would prevent Obama from spending any funds to try terrorism suspects in civilian court instead of military commissions.
I'm not convinced one follows the other -- in other words, that the Guantanamo provision is a reaction to the tax cut debacle. But assuming it is ... this is Congress' way to get back at the president? Pushing to the RIGHT of one of the few issue areas in which this administration is trying to do the right thing from the left?