Let’s see…relative unknown but reliable conservative energizes base to propel moderate conservative to victory over liberal ideologue. Yeah, sounds like Dan Quayle to me.
I wouldn’t call the drubbing of Dukakis a “disastrous” VP pick (though “joke” is still open to interpretation).
Is it a joke because you’re scared of what her presence in the election might mean to Obama’s bid for the presidency? If so, just say so. Leave the polemics to the politician.
“I think that the Second Amendment means something. I think that if the government were to confiscate everybody’s guns unilaterally, then I think that would be subject to constitutional challenge”
This is not what I call strong support, or strong analysis from someone (have you heard?) who taught constitutional law. Also, he stated his support for Heller, but voted against or has stated his opposition to 80% of the justices in the majority.
Capital punishment - Agreed, from all appearances he supports the death penalty in some situations. I’m not sure that this disproves his status as an ideologue, but fine.
Tim, the link to Obama’s CAFTA article proves my point. There’s more than one way to favor globalization, and Obama’s stance in favor of agreements that guarantee basic human and environmental rights is one of them. A true left wing idealogue would oppose free trade on more abstract principles–something to do with defending American low-skill manufacturing jobs. Obama explicitly recognizes that America is moving forward into an era where you need skills to have a good job. The difference between Obama and a right-winger is that he thinks we should help people train for these new jobs.
I don’t contend that Obama is opposed to the abstract notion of free trade, in that he is not literally a Marxist. I don’t know of any mainstream politician who is categorically opposed to “free trade.” However, as currently formulated as an issue, Obama does not consistently support free trade, in that he voted against the only major free trade agreement he’s faced and had a measuring contest in the primary with Clinton to determine who hates NAFTA more.
For the record, I’m restraining myself here, but suffice to say that it would be a boon to the reputation of the law school if you could attempt to formulate a slightly better argument than, “Approximately half the country is stupid because Sarah Palin sounded bad in a clip I found.”
I now think that Sarah Palin is an even more embarrassing pick than Dan Quayle by a long shot. It is incredibly difficult to watch her speak about anything, as everything she says is painfully sophomoric. It may be a boost to John McCain if she announced she was dropping out.
(said completely tongue in cheek) Steve, I’m glad that feminists have strong men like yourself to protect them against female politicians slash anti-feminists.
Fine, your comments only reflect on you. Since you have no response to what I’m actually saying, I’ll assume that you agree that reasonable, intelligent people should be able to recognize that other people can reach different conclusions about the issues without being stupid or evil, and argue accordingly.
The First Floor is an open student-run blog. Our authors are all different people with different outlooks, so their posts represent only their own personal views.
None of our blog posts are anonymous. We do allow anonymous commenting, but reserve the right to remove clearly abusive or offensive comments.
The University of Iowa does not endorse us in any way. Please visit our about page for more information.
Steve Wieland
fsford
timhilton
smahieu
Morgan N. Engling
maryiowa
jaimiesuzi
jarens
kevinjames
brieanne
lcm
Andrew
enwinfield
But did you see the size of that fish that she caught?
Let’s see…relative unknown but reliable conservative energizes base to propel moderate conservative to victory over liberal ideologue. Yeah, sounds like Dan Quayle to me.
I was thinking more along the lines of disastrous joke of a VP pick than an exact parallel to D.Q.’s existence.
I wouldn’t call the drubbing of Dukakis a “disastrous” VP pick (though “joke” is still open to interpretation).
Is it a joke because you’re scared of what her presence in the election might mean to Obama’s bid for the presidency? If so, just say so. Leave the polemics to the politician.
I’m scared of her presence, given her ironically anti-feminist ideology and the likelihood that McCain–god bless him–might keel over any day.
Also, Obama is not an “idealogue.” See his positions on the Second Amendment, free trade, capital punishment, etc.
Free Trade - http://obama.senate.gov/news/050630-why_i_oppose_cafta/index.php - http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Government-IT/Gustav-Blows-Obama-Off-NAFTA-Message/
Second Amendment - http://cbs4denver.com/campaign08/obama.second.amendment.2.759121.html
“I think that the Second Amendment means something. I think that if the government were to confiscate everybody’s guns unilaterally, then I think that would be subject to constitutional challenge”
This is not what I call strong support, or strong analysis from someone (have you heard?) who taught constitutional law. Also, he stated his support for Heller, but voted against or has stated his opposition to 80% of the justices in the majority.
Capital punishment - Agreed, from all appearances he supports the death penalty in some situations. I’m not sure that this disproves his status as an ideologue, but fine.
Tim, the link to Obama’s CAFTA article proves my point. There’s more than one way to favor globalization, and Obama’s stance in favor of agreements that guarantee basic human and environmental rights is one of them. A true left wing idealogue would oppose free trade on more abstract principles–something to do with defending American low-skill manufacturing jobs. Obama explicitly recognizes that America is moving forward into an era where you need skills to have a good job. The difference between Obama and a right-winger is that he thinks we should help people train for these new jobs.
Steve,
I don’t contend that Obama is opposed to the abstract notion of free trade, in that he is not literally a Marxist. I don’t know of any mainstream politician who is categorically opposed to “free trade.” However, as currently formulated as an issue, Obama does not consistently support free trade, in that he voted against the only major free trade agreement he’s faced and had a measuring contest in the primary with Clinton to determine who hates NAFTA more.
America is full of Morons:
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4478156n
For the record, I’m restraining myself here, but suffice to say that it would be a boon to the reputation of the law school if you could attempt to formulate a slightly better argument than, “Approximately half the country is stupid because Sarah Palin sounded bad in a clip I found.”
I now think that Sarah Palin is an even more embarrassing pick than Dan Quayle by a long shot. It is incredibly difficult to watch her speak about anything, as everything she says is painfully sophomoric. It may be a boost to John McCain if she announced she was dropping out.
(said completely tongue in cheek) Steve, I’m glad that feminists have strong men like yourself to protect them against female politicians slash anti-feminists.
Tim, I thought we already went over the fact that this blog or its comments do not reflect on the law school - - only their authors.
I’m also glad you restrained yourself, because going off on a sure fire exaggeration doesn’t reflect very well on your or the law school.
Fine, your comments only reflect on you. Since you have no response to what I’m actually saying, I’ll assume that you agree that reasonable, intelligent people should be able to recognize that other people can reach different conclusions about the issues without being stupid or evil, and argue accordingly.
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/report_60_million_people_youd
“Can’t we all just get along??”
–Rodney King (R.I.P.)