We also introduced Madden Girl handbags
gay porn How to Draw Kissing Lips
they learn more
how to lose weight fastBest hair product for hair style like this
how to lose weight fastBest hair product for hair style like this
Wow, an experiment where one assesses the control group after 30 years and the experimental group after 3 days. What great science reporting!Report
Plus, I consider various crusades against the passive voice to be at least overblown, and some completely unfounded, but this here makes me want to follow the Pope Urban of Grammar.Report
Yeah, I was under the impression that history will look back on Obama and say that Obama is one of the most consequential and, yes, successful presidents in American history.Report
Yes. I am pretty sure that about 50 percent of my comments on the internet are attempts to get people to give subjects to their passive constructions and sources to their weasel words.Report
@kolohe; @j-r
A multitude of sins are covered by the passive voice.Report
Nice photo and message.Report
Why Dave hates partisan politics – example 3,212,654,100.00001Report
@dave
I’m working on a large piece on this but I think that ideology and partisanship (aka as tribalism) is innate to human nature. There are people who like to claim to be above the fray and really interested in good policy but they have their own ideologies that they don’t admit to. I find it too convenient that they happen to always believe in what is the best policy or what is the best policy happens to coincide with their beliefs and interests.
What is the alternative to partisanship?Report
“What is the alternative to partisanship?”
The preferred policies of the Beltway journalists.Report
@saul-degraw
I can’t give an alternative to partisanship for the reasons you mentioned. People are communal and opinionated and when you get like-minded people together that a hold a certain view, I would expect nothing less for them to defend it. I will defend my views as much as you should defend yours. When things go too far, I tend to get a little irritated.
Why does comparing President Obama’s response to Ebola to Reagan’s response to AIDS matter? We know how poorly the government responded to the AIDS crisis but it’s also important to note that 30 years ago, we were dealing with a society that was far less tolerant towards gays and to think that ANY politician would have gone out on a limb and addressed the AIDS crisis when it was only ravaging what many considered the fringes of our society (sad to say) is a big stretch.
If I recall from my younger years (I was 8 in 1981), people started paying more attention to AIDS when it was starting to affect larger numbers of heterosexuals, culminating with Magic Johnson’s press conference.
It’s too apples v oranges for my liking.
One last excerpt from the article:
When people are governed by fear, the most important thing a president can do is be calm, clear, and compassionate. This is why a hug matters. It was an intentional photo-op to demonstrate that people with Ebola and their contacts shouldn’t be shunned and stigmatized.
Given the partisan nature of politics, do you think that the President’s detractors are going to pay any attention to this? They’re not and I’m sure I am going to have to suffer through Sean Hannity complaining about it when I’m at the gym tonight. At least I’ll be able to throw weights at the TV. đŸ˜‰Report
Saul:
Partisanship is one thing, cheap shots like this are another. It is what I would expect of a Slate writer. I wonder if she was even alive at back in the Regan years. If Obama was hugging someone that actually had Ebola I would be more impressed.Report
@notme
You are hardly one to talk about cheap swipes considering everything that is wrong with society seems to boil down to “Liberals, liberals, liberals, liberals” for you.Report
Saul:
So instead of admitting that this is a in fact a cheap shot you want to make this about me? That is classy. As I said, partisanship is ok but cheap shots less so. Even if I was only liberals, liberals, liberals, that is partisanship not a cheap shot. Surely someone as educated as yourself can tell the difference.Report
I like pepsi.
the alternative to partisanship is intelligent thought, on every issue that comes up.
People are lazy and hate to think.
[Witness will truman complaining about the requirement of backup cameras in new cars, without bothering to ask how much they were going to cost, just being “concerned this would make it more expensive” and possibly unaffordable]Report
@kim
I’ve never pegged you as a deep thinker.Report
@saul-degraw
And here I got slapped down in this site and called a “race realist” (whatever the hell that means) when I said all human behavior is essentially tribal. Glad you’re coming around đŸ™‚Report
You know, @dave I don’t necessarily agree with this.
GWB was very comforting to the American People in the aftermath of 9/11. That is part of a president’s job. Always looking at any presidential action through the lens of partisan politics is not always a healthy habit.Report
@zic
Let’s just say I’m not as warm and fuzzy about certain things as a lot of other people. I’ll leave it at that. It’s just how I roll. Nothing more.Report
But that’s kinda the point of the original critique, no? GWB comforted people after both 9/11 and Katrina, but no one really says that his administration’s management of either crisis was really effective. And that administration was actually rather effective in the fight against AIDS in Africa, and Bush didn’t have to hug anyone (though I think he might of)
The original article has the implicit claim that image matters more than action, when it was really the Reagan administration’s (and larger society’s) *actions* that exacerbated (or at least did not ameliorate) the AIDS crisis at that time. The article went out of its way to make dubious comparisons between AIDS in the early 80s and Ebola now, and not, say, how the Wilson administration handled Spanish Flu (or how Bush handled either AIDS or so called Swine Flu, the latter of which is more analogous to the current level of the Ebola health concern)Report
When the government has to resort to blackmail to get anything done, that says something about throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
People who argue for a smaller government might want to think about enforcement, not just monitoring.Report
@kim There’s a whole lotta room in making gov’t smaller before we get even close to there….Report
Talk to me again when the CDC has anything to force Disney to do the right thing.
Well, other than blackmail…Report
Not seeing where Disney and the CDC would even overlap regulation wise…Report
The picture by itself doesn’t say much, which leads me to wonder what “1,000 words” I’m supposed to get from it. But when I skim the article, I find it to be the apples to oranges comparison Dave above says it is.
I’m no defender of Reagan’s cowardly and opportunistic refusal to do anything about AIDS until Rock Hudson died, but hugging a nurse who recovered from a disease that she acquired by helping someone and can no longer infect anyone with strikes me as something he and his press-corps–or a 2014 version of them–would do in a heartbeat. It’s a quick photo op. Probably the right and necessary thing to do, but not particularly courageous.Report
As vice-president, LBJ often acted as a goodwill ambassador, for instance during this trip to Senegal:
One morning at 4:30 he and Lady Bird traveled to a fishing village, where the American ambassador refused to leave his limousine. “It was too smelly a town for him,” a Johnson traveling companion recalls. The ambassador counseled Johnson against any contact with these people, whom he described as dirty and diseased. But the Vice President strolled among the villagers handing out pens and lighters, shaking hands with everyone, including a few fingerless lepers.Report
Now that takes some “stepping out of the comfort zone”Report
Though this is also the guy who had high level policy meetings while taking a dump.Report
@kolohe – And talked to his tailor about his “bunghole”. And liked to terrify guests by claiming his (amphibious) convertible’s brakes had failed and they were going to plunge into the lake and die. And referred to the Presidential todger as “Jumbo”, and literally waved it around at people, and peed where he liked. And woke a female guest in the middle of the night with a flashlight, saying, “Move over. This is your president.”
LBJ didn’t really understand the concept of “boundaries”, is what I’m saying.
http://www.cracked.com/article_18945_6-presidential-secrets-your-history-teacher-didnt-mention.htmlReport
Glyph,
and who was known to literally buttonhole people in the Congressional coat closet, stepping closer to them as he continued the argument, sometimes even kicking them with his steel-toed boots until they bled.Report
People who support LBJ are insufficiently opposed to peeing where one likes.Report
So what ya all are saying is he wasn’t so much out of his comfort zone as he was wallowing in it?Report
Yes, LBJ is the guy who both gratuitously humiliated his subordinates and went out of his way to demonstrate care for people in great need in substantive ways.
I recently chided Jesse E. a bit for idolizing LBJ, which he turned into a beef that I was suggesting nobody could admire LBJ. But his position was much too simplistic both times. LBJ is not a simple enough figure to either idolize or not admire at all.Report
Ebola today is a heck of a lot better understood today than AIDS was in Reagan’s era. Heck, Ebola was discovered before HIV. No one would think it’s brave to shake hands with someone infected with HIV today.Report