Date: 2008-10-29 09:44 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the-nita.livejournal.com
[livejournal.com profile] woodardp keeps telling me he sincerely hopes after McCain/Palin crashes and burns as badly as it is going to be that the fiscal conservatives get a chance to take back the party from the hands of the neo-cons & the radical Christians and gets "the Republican party of my youth" back.

I continue to be quietly amazed how badly the GOP is handling this entire race, post DNC convention.

Date: 2008-10-29 09:56 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] james-nicoll.livejournal.com
the fiscal conservatives get a chance to take back the party from the hands of the neo-cons & the radical Christians and gets "the Republican party of my youth" back.

[Thinks about people's ages]

What, the party of Richard M. Nixon? Because I am pretty sure he wouldn't remember Eisenhower or Goldwater....

Date: 2008-10-29 10:19 pm (UTC)
ext_6388: Avon from Blake's 7 fails to show an emotion (GurrenBrigade)
From: [identity profile] fridgepunk.livejournal.com
I think he's speaking 'Murkin, so the "republican party of his youth" was in fact a mythical version of the republican party who had all the same policies as JFK's democratic party, and this republican version of JFK invaded even more communist countries for no real reason and totally would have sent people to mars, on a rocket powered by laissez faire economics, if Jimmy Carter hadn't shot him.

Date: 2008-10-29 10:24 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] james-nicoll.livejournal.com
He could mean a state Republican party. There's 50 of those, lots of room for variation.

Date: 2008-10-30 04:40 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] roseembolism.livejournal.com
Not the California Republican party. The CA Republican party is the equivalent of that particular aunt you NEVER ask to speak at weddings.

Date: 2008-10-30 12:01 am (UTC)
avram: (Default)
From: [personal profile] avram
He could be thinking of the Rockefeller Republicans, who were basically the Clinton Democrats of the 1960s and early '70s.

Date: 2008-10-30 02:27 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the-nita.livejournal.com
Darlin', you're going to have to discuss it with him, as I sure as hell don't remember much of the 1960-70's US politics.

Date: 2008-10-30 02:36 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] james-nicoll.livejournal.com
I will never forgive Nixon for pre-empting TV shows in the early 1970s.

Date: 2008-10-29 10:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] cantkeepsilent.livejournal.com
I'm not particularly surprised. Dole/Kemp was just about this inept, and Ford/Dole wasn't much better. The Republicans have plan that can win for them, but it only seems to work if there is a George Bush to deliver it.

Hard to say what happens next for the GOP. If the circular firing squad winds up embracing Sarah Palin, I wouldn't be filled with surprise if the "elite" conservative wing took off and formed their own party. They wouldn't have the churches locked up, but I bet they'd be taking a lot of old money with them, and they could wind up being important for a coalition Senate majority through thick and thin.

Date: 2008-10-29 10:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tekalynn.livejournal.com
Well, I guess that's another batch of voters that just swung to Obama. Nice work, guys.

Date: 2008-10-29 10:05 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] james-nicoll.livejournal.com
Some of them had already voted for McCain.

Date: 2008-10-29 10:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] burger-eater.livejournal.com
Well, one of the people who were tossed out (who said she hadn't started protesting at that time) said there was a crying Republican. I'll believe it when that girl steps forward for an interview.

This isn't as bad as four years ago, when Bush campaign staffers were telling potential campaign protestors that they had snipers nearby if they tried anything.

Date: 2008-10-30 02:46 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] austin-dern.livejournal.com

Well, the campaign didn't really have any choice. It looked like those kids were on McCain's lawn.

Date: 2008-10-29 10:23 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] grimjim.livejournal.com
McCain is being Presidential. Echoes of 2005:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,153720,00.html
Even without a guaranteed audience of backers, the administration does have the right to try and prevent threats and disruptions from protesters, which is why people are often barred from Bush events, according to White House officials. The removal of individuals can occur before and after a disruption.

Date: 2008-10-29 10:35 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] montoya.livejournal.com
I have zero sympathy for at least the person who's telling this story. She never denies that she was going to disrupt the thing (saying that there was nothing planned amongst the various people who were there who also got thrown out) and that she wasn't doing anything disruptive "at the time I was asked to leave."

Date: 2008-10-29 10:42 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ffutures.livejournal.com
In other words you have zero evidence that she was planning disruption, and you are basing your opinion on your prejudices.

Date: 2008-10-30 12:13 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] montoya.livejournal.com
When people are accused of planning something and they don't deny it, they were planning it.

Date: 2008-10-30 12:19 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ffutures.livejournal.com
Says the secret police.

Date: 2008-10-30 12:29 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] wdstarr.livejournal.com
Can you point at an accusation anywhere in that news story?

Date: 2008-10-30 12:38 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] montoya.livejournal.com
"it kind of became clear that they were kind of just telling people to leave that they thought maybe would be disruptive"

Date: 2008-10-30 01:32 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] grimjim.livejournal.com
Paranoia can feed a self-fulfilling prophecy. Preemptively ejecting non-disruptive people in a manner upsetting to them, regardless of innocence or guilt, can result in the very type of disruption and negative media coverage they're seeking to avoid.

Date: 2008-10-30 04:41 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] roseembolism.livejournal.com
People with hair that's too long, people of the wrong color, women wearing blue jeans...you know, people like that.

Date: 2008-10-30 07:38 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] wdstarr.livejournal.com
If you want to hold that failure to make an explicit denial of the substance of somebody else's paranoia == "When people are accused of planning something and they don't deny it, they were planning it," go right ahead. I won't think well of you for it though.

Date: 2008-10-30 12:57 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] arielstarshadow.livejournal.com
I thought in this country, we were supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Date: 2008-10-31 02:22 am (UTC)
ext_12272: Rainbow over Cleveland, from Edgewater Park overlooking the beach. (Perverted times)
From: [identity profile] summers-place.livejournal.com
Where have you been for the past eight years?

Date: 2008-10-31 03:12 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] arielstarshadow.livejournal.com
That was rather the point I was trying to make...

Date: 2008-10-30 03:49 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ross-teneyck.livejournal.com
Bull. That's right up there with, "Nobody would object to surveillance unless they had something to hide."

Date: 2008-10-30 03:56 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] montoya.livejournal.com
No. It's up there with someone from the FBI saying "We had no plans to coordinate with the CIA to put surveillance on you, and there was no surveillance on you at that particular time," and expecting you to believe that you're not being surveilled.

When someone very specifically and carefully fails to deny doing something, while at the same time denying something closely related, that's because they've done the thing they won't deny.

Date: 2008-10-29 10:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] grimjim.livejournal.com
Isn't it also disruptive to cry after being ejected?

Date: 2008-10-29 11:03 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] anton-p-nym.livejournal.com
Of course there's no such thing as young Republicans, so target aquisition for antiprotester sweeps is pretty simple. [/sardonicism]

No, I think the burden of proof is upon those who called for these people to be ejected. If they had specific grounds for suspicion, they'd be well-advised to disclose them fast or this'll be yet another toe shot off the elephant's foot.

-- Steve'd desperately trying to quash a "premature ejection" pun, but as you can see he's failed. Still, the goon squad would have had better grounds if the ejected folks been, say, carrying banners or placards or something.

Date: 2008-10-30 12:16 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] montoya.livejournal.com
I have no idea how they targeted the people to eject, and they certainly could have gotten it badly wrong, but it sounds like they got at least one person correct.

Date: 2008-10-30 01:28 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] neonchameleon.livejournal.com
She never denies that she was going to disrupt the thing

Elborno said while she has protested at events before, no plans were discussed beforehand for a protest and she shouldn’t have been taken out because she was not causing a disturbance.


It's not 100% cast-iron, but close. The only other option is that she was going to disrupt it solo (which is why 20 people were thrown out...)

Date: 2008-10-30 01:29 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] montoya.livejournal.com
That's precisely the quote I meant. She's claiming that a) there was no broadly orchestrated plan to protest, and b) she wasn't protesting at that point.

Nobody phrases things that carefully unless they're speaking around something.

Date: 2008-10-30 05:31 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] roseembolism.livejournal.com
And well, if she wasn't guilty of this, she was bound to be guilty of something else! "Orf wiff er ead!"

Date: 2008-10-29 11:55 pm (UTC)
ext_85396: (Default)
From: [identity profile] unixronin.livejournal.com
To quote a friend, "These aren't the crazy years, these are the utterly barking insane years."

Date: 2008-10-31 02:23 am (UTC)

Date: 2008-10-30 06:34 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] roseembolism.livejournal.com
Well, it's not like the McCain campaign is running seriously behind in the polls, and couldn't afford any more bad publicity. I mean, they can afford to have a bit of publicity showing them as not quite having it all together, right? Right?

Profile

james_davis_nicoll: (Default)
james_davis_nicoll

May 2025

S M T W T F S
     1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 910
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 192021222324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 20th, 2025 11:40 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios