Print Story Obama a huge disappointment: as expected
Media
By gzt (Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 03:30:28 PM EST) gzt, liberal (all tags)
From an article:
Few progressives would take issue with the argument that, significant accomplishments notwithstanding, the Obama presidency has been a big disappointment. As Mario Cuomo famously observed, candidates campaign in poetry but govern in prose. Still, Obama supporters have been asked to swallow some painfully "prosaic" compromises.
http://www.thenation.com/article/37165/kabuki-democracy?page=full


Exactly as expected. Still, there is something worse than an ineffective president: an effective one. I think it within the realm of possibility that McCain could have been effective, and that would be far worse for us. I don't believe he was merely shilling liberalist views to get into office. I somewhat agree that progressives overplayed their hands and sparked an equal-and-opposite-reaction (see: Tea Party), but I also think they just didn't have the mandate to get all of this crap through even without the pressure of the Tea Party. I agree with the article that Obama is, mostly, a shrewd dealmaker, taking what he can get because he knows it may be all he can get. Unfortunately, "all he can get" is pretty depressing for progressives. I also like how the article points out the massive bind Obama was put in. Many of America's real problems don't get covered because they aren't sexy: budget shortfalls causing infrastructure to grow obsolete? Snooze. I am surprised that I am saying this now, given my extremely low opinion of Bush's presidency, but I continue to be shocked by how appallingly his administration performed even its most basic duties.

One quibble with this article:

When Senator DeMint introduced a GOP stimulus plan, authored by the Heritage Foundation, it consisted in its entirety of making the Bush tax cuts permanent and adding to them additional tax breaks for corporations and wealthy Americans. If enacted—never a serious possibility—it would have cost roughly three times what Obama's cost over the next ten years.
A tax cut is not a cost. Slightly misleading to label it as such.

More stuff: doctor today. Wife is seeing a doctor, too. Doctor said I should do "cardio" for heart health. Blah blah blah. I don't have any competitions on the schedule, so I may try to lose some fat while maintaining strength for a bit. That may include, ugh, "cardio". I'm not pushing enough weight to justify weighing 251# and I'm a little jiggly, so if I lose maybe 15-20 pounds and work back up a bit, I should be in a better place, healthwise. You can't go on one of those eternal "bulk" cycles and just end up sloppy, after all. It's just uncouth.

Wife is, quite rightly, now philosophically and religiously opposed to yoga. She'll finish out the classes, I think.

Some couple just got engaged, Wife and I should hang out with them sometime, haven't hung out since they first moved to town. I believe when I first mentioned this person, she was still married to somebody else, but that was 1.5 years ago.

Am quite used to moustache now. Shave approx. every other day.

Squatted last night. 365#x3x5. After the second set, my mid-back on the right felt a little cramped or something, I pondered throwing in the towel, but decided to go through with it. Worked out fine. Then did presses and deadlifts, I took a bit much on deadlifts and regretted it. 405#x4 instead of 405#x5. It's better to get all five.

I severely disliked Memento because I thought it was overhyped and overclever, but The Last Psychiatrist (yes, I know I'm coming off as one of his nutswingers) brought up a good point in its favor: like Nolan's other films, it points out that what you do is who you are, in contrast to films such as The Matrix which are for narcissists and imply that what you think is who you are. I don't really quite believe either, it's more complicated than that, but I lean much more toward "what you do is who you are" than the latter.

Rupert Murdoch as Sauron: perhaps. All news is marketing now. All of it. Politics is sports. Sports is on the front page (really? yes, it is). But he's nowhere near as pernicious as the banks. He deals with chump change in comparison.

I would probably be forced to classify myself as a progressive of some stripe if asked, as 95% of my political ideas would fit in that box despite my hatred of progressives and liberalists and my attitude of being a curmudgeonly reactionary. Perhaps because my social ideas are not in the slightest liberal, but I couldn't make laws to govern mores.

< Can I has vacation yet? | The backyard: A Shedyssey. >
Obama a huge disappointment: as expected | 83 comments (83 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
Tax cuts aren't a "cost"? by R343L (2.00 / 0) #1 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 03:54:03 PM EST
So, if a senator were to propose some bill that involved some new regulation which the OMB then estimated would impact tax receipts negatively, would you label that bill having a "cost"?

These tax cuts are scheduled to expire. Thus, the OMB has been using that fact to report on 2011 and beyond financing. In other words, extending them or making them permanent "costs" the government money it had estimated would be available in the future.

"There will be time, there will be time / To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet." -- Eliot

Costs by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #2 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 04:03:22 PM EST
If you take a 5% salary cut, does that go on your household budget as a cost or a reduction in income?
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
It's a reduction in revenue. by gzt (2.00 / 0) #3 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 04:09:14 PM EST
Not a cost. The effect is much the same, but it's not quite right to call them a cost.

[ Parent ]
the media doesn't distinguish by R343L (2.00 / 0) #4 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 04:12:31 PM EST
And frankly I don't think most Americans care. If a proposed bill creates $X deficit (or $X more deficit than existed before since apparently we are in the land of neverending deficits), then as far as most people are concerned it costs $X. It hardly matters if it's a tax cut or a new regulation that will result in $X*SomePercent less business profits resulting in $X less tax revenue.

"There will be time, there will be time / To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet." -- Eliot
[ Parent ]
The media by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #5 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 04:39:15 PM EST
...is well known for gross inaccuracy, misleading language, and the general spreading of bullshit.

In these contexts, "cost" is used by people who wish to avoid reducing tax revenue, as "cost" has a negative connotation.  It's not just an innocent term...it's a deliberate attempt to frame the debate.  (Like nearly any political speech.)

It's not a horrible instance...as gzt notes, it's just slightly misleading.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
And I feel slightly bad... by gzt (4.00 / 1) #6 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 04:47:38 PM EST
...about pointing out this slight liberal bias because, by contrast, it's like complaining about the effect of a butterfly's wings when you're right by a turbine. I hate FOX so much.

[ Parent ]
as opposed to JournoListers in every other media by nathan (2.00 / 0) #7 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 05:00:00 PM EST

outlet?

As a great troll wrote,

One easy reaction is to blame Fox News. It is true: for the first time in a long time, the peasants have an exclusively peasant-themed mass propaganda channel. However, the objective observer notes quickly that Fox News is not so much telling its audience what to think, as telling them they are allowed to think what they already think. Since they are peasants, lacking any semblance of an aristocratic culture that can accumulate and transmit collective wisdom across generations, what they think is generally nonsense.

Fox News aggregates and retransmits this nonsense, but does not really direct it much in Goebbels style. In some ways it even moderates it - for instance, Fox, and neocons in general, are not much less aggressive in purging racism than establishment journalists. (It is certainly interesting to imagine an alternate 21st-century America that was as aggressive in purging communism as it is in purging racism. I have seen people get quite hot under the collar at the mere mention of this horrible gedankenexperiment, but it fills a need....)
 

What we can say quite clearly is that this tribal subpopulation has, in no temporary way, lost confidence in progressivism as a philosophy of government. Fortunately or unfortunately, they do not know how to unelect a philosophy. Believe me, as a student of history, it can be done! But the means are two or three orders of magnitude more dire than anything even Glenn Beck has imagined. Fortunately or unfortunately, blue-state America is safer than it thinks. Much safer. Also, the demographic balance is shifting in its favor - as is widely known.



[ Parent ]
well, a few things by gzt (2.00 / 0) #8 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 05:11:47 PM EST
I certainly don't blame FOX news for the rage that the tea partiers have. This doesn't make FOX's journalistic standards or what they're doing to the other networks' journalistic standards any better (see the article for some examples). I think tea partiers would have the much the same thoughts about government with or without FOX, for the most part, so I'm not going to blame FOX for it. I do rather like this quote:
When gentlemen look at progressivism, they see a movement whose purpose is to help the underclass, those whose plight is no fault of their own. When peasants look at progressivism, they see a movement whose purpose is to employ gentlemen in the business of public policy, by using the peasants' money to buy votes from varlets. Who, in the peasants' perception, abuse the patience and generosity of both peasants and gentlemen in almost every imaginable way, and are constantly caressed by every imaginable authority for doing so.
It is quite true.

[ Parent ]
FOX reflects the problem, it doesn't create it by nathan (2.00 / 0) #21 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 06:36:29 PM EST
In Canada, there are similar problems* in the absence of FOX. Treating FOX (rather than, as a reactionary might, the incorporation of journalism into the Iron Polygon of universities, the State Dept., and big business,) as the source of the problem is to misunderstand why there is a FOX in the first place: it is the only media outlet catering to the peasants.

All that aside, one can't help but be happy that someone is bringing "varlet" back.

* At least, from my POV they're problems. If I were a progressive, I would probably be quite happy that CBC could be counted on to ignore the peasant class when not preaching to it.

[ Parent ]
more on Murdoch's pernicious influence. by gzt (2.00 / 0) #29 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 07:49:22 PM EST
  1. you can be a media outlet catering to peasants without encouraging people to report on whether or not Obama is enraged at BP.
  2. Murdoch is partly responsible for the apotheosis of sports coverage in newspapers and other media: http://moreintelligentlife.com/print/2756
  3. I don't mind the ideological nature of FOX. Only in America do we really have this fiction of "unbiased" journalism. What I do mind is quality, it encourages a type of reporting which is being pushed out to other networks which just sucks. What's wrong with it is not the bias of it - it sucks when it's done neutrally, if that were possible - but the blatant irresponsibility of it.


[ Parent ]
when political discourse dies, you get theater by nathan (2.00 / 0) #43 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 12:43:04 PM EST
You can also manage a media outlet catering to gentlemen without manufacturing sentiment about how the peasant class is going to turn into a lynch mob any day now. FOX has atrociously bad standards, but on the other hand, the Atlantic, the NYT, and Harper's - three organs representing various degrees of gentlemen ideology - have also been lowering their standards for ten years now.

As for Murdoch and sport coverage, he got one paragraph in your long link, and it was about print media. Since there isn't a FOX newspaper...

European countries typically have slanted journalism (though so does North America, where DC, New York, Chicago, Montreal, and Toronto and perhaps others all have dailies with conflicting slants.) But journalistic standards are in precipitous decline everywhere, not just in America. FOX is obviously not the primary driver in the decline of international journalism, so it just seems strange to me to single FOX out. What makes FOX unique is not that it is uniquely anti-intellectual or irresponsible, what makes it unique is that among our anti-intellectual, irresponsible media outlets, it caters to the peasant class.

[ Parent ]
Murdoch owns FOX by gzt (2.00 / 0) #45 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 12:58:34 PM EST
And much of the rest of the world's media. FOX is a sign and symptom of what he's doing, and the decline of non-Murdoch media is in part because of what they have to do to keep up.

[ Parent ]
no, he's in the Anglosphere only by nathan (2.00 / 0) #49 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 01:02:41 PM EST
Source

I refuse to believe that (1) the NYT is degrading itself solely in reaction to FOX's aggression (2) the non-English press even cares what FOX is doing.

[ Parent ]
Who cares? by gzt (2.00 / 0) #50 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 01:06:21 PM EST
Honestly, nobody cares about the French media, they've been practically a third world country since WWII. Nobody's spoken French since the League of Nations.

[ Parent ]
I mean... by gzt (2.00 / 0) #51 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 01:14:13 PM EST
...the last Tsar spoke ENGLISH with his wife. That's how out of fashion French was even in the Edwardian period.

[ Parent ]
"Old Europe," etc. = by nathan (2.00 / 0) #53 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 03:22:54 PM EST


[ Parent ]
Old Europe is dead. by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #56 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 07:55:50 PM EST
It's been dead since at least the Nineties and the draw-down of American forces from there.

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

[ Parent ]
Obama and yoga by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #9 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 05:22:11 PM EST
At the end of the day, I'm pretty disappointed in President Obama.

But:

I continue to be shocked by how appallingly [Bush's] administration performed even its most basic duties.

The Republican party seems to be run by people who refuse to acknowledge or admit that, don't understand what Bush did wrong, and are highly likely to repeat it if they're entrusted with public office.

So I can't vote for them, even if i'm disappointed in/irritated by President Obama.

------------------

Why is religious opposition to yoga 'quite right'?

If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

willful ignorance by gzt (4.00 / 2) #11 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 05:31:21 PM EST
As much as I disliked people like Bob Dole, I get the feeling that, if he were elected instead of Clinton, he would've, you know, run the country. I don't know what happened to Republicans in those four years. I keep getting new reports of Bush's almost complete abdication of responsibility during his administration. I honestly think he may be a worse president than US Grant and cannot comprehend the level of self-delusion or willful ignorance necessary to support the fiction that he was in any way competent as a leader of this country. Further, that the Republican Party wants to continue this sort of decay is completely mind-boggling. I don't know what happened to the Republicans. They've become nihilists. This is the decline of the Roman Empire.

[ Parent ]
yeah. by aphrael (4.00 / 1) #16 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 05:50:51 PM EST
The reason I voted for Clinton and not Dole is that Dole seemed to me to be living in a different world which time had passed by ... but he would have done the job.

My take on the last two years: Obama has moved the government from the center-right to the center-left. The left is outraged that he's not gone as far as they want him to; the right is apoplectic about the change; most Americans just want the economy to recover and are willing to listen to whoever shouts the loudest about the economy.

Meanwhile, the Republicans seem to be going off the deep end.

If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

[ Parent ]
gentlemen don't understand peasants, well I never! by nathan (2.00 / 0) #30 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 08:00:14 PM EST
I honestly think he may be a worse president than US Grant and cannot comprehend the level of self-delusion or willful ignorance necessary to support the fiction that he was in any way competent as a leader of this country.
Do you really think that anyone looks at concrete items of Bush's record, passes measured judgment, and says, "On the whole, I believe that Bush's actions were reasonable and pragmatic?"

Our society is a highly polarizaed administrative state. At a first approximation, it contains an administrative class (gentlemen,) a working class (peasants,) and a varlet class (varlets.) The varlet class and the administrative classes would back the Democratic Party if it ran Stalin's decaying corpse. The producing class would likewise back the Republicans if they ran a trousered ape.

If you don't believe that we have an administrative class and a working class, consider that lawyers skew heavily D while engineers and MD's skew R or, more generally, both PhD's and high-school dropouts (varlets, generally) skew D while guys with a BA from Directional State skew R. I don't mean to imply, by the way, that the 'working class' is somehow noble, superior, or potentially autonomous, merely that its members tend to work in production (manufacturing, agriculture, mining) rather than administration (distribution, policy, etc.)

The fantasy of the working class is that, if they cast off the other classes, which they imagine to be parasites, they will be much richer and safer. OK.

The fantasy of the administrative class is that, if they can finally get the working class to vote the right way, they can make the world a fairer and more decent place (moderates) or they can immanentize the eschaton (ideologues.) I am not exaggerating at all on the second count - a quick spin through the Progressive propaganda of 90 years ago should make it obvious that that's what they wanted. This also explains why Communism was so popular for so long among people who would never be so obtuse as to actually move to a Communist country. Fortunately for everyone, including themselves, ideologues are much rarer than working class mouthpieces think fantasize.

As far as I can tell, the varlet class has no fantasies. I grew up as a peasant in a varlet-heavy district, so I might be too close to the issue to see it fairly.

All this is necessary as prelude to saying that Bush's actual competence has nothing - nothing - to do with how agitated peasants see him. For a significant number of Americans, Bush's competence is not something real. Rather, it is a matter of tribal affiliation, a projection of one's issues onto a national canvas.

Of course, this cuts in the opposite partisan direction as well. Ted Kennedy as a "lion" rather than as a murdering alcoholic blowhard with bottomless contempt for his own voters, eg.

[ Parent ]
oh, I know. by gzt (2.00 / 0) #31 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 08:03:50 PM EST
It's saddening, though.

However, Bush's extremely low approval ratings toward the end of his tenure, even before economic collapse, show that everybody figured out the gig was up. The producing class, however, thought McCain would be different.

[ Parent ]
engineers? by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #32 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 08:17:39 PM EST
while engineers and MD's skew R

in my experience, most software engineers skew D, primarily because of social issues - they'd support the R economic platform but find social conservatism leaving them with hives.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

[ Parent ]
I don't have a good link by nathan (2.00 / 0) #46 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 12:58:44 PM EST
But consider where you are, and consider that lots of engineers live in red states. If even your local engineers are prospective R's put off by social policy, how might engineers in more socially conservative regions vote?

[ Parent ]
unsurprisingly by garlic (2.00 / 0) #81 Mon Jul 26, 2010 at 06:05:01 PM EST
most of my coworker engineers lean conservative.


[ Parent ]
tytyty = by nathan (2.00 / 0) #82 Mon Jul 26, 2010 at 06:06:17 PM EST


[ Parent ]
whereas here by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #83 Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 08:55:30 PM EST
the best way to describe them is probably 'libertarian' ... which is not the same thing as conservative. :)
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]
re: growing up by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #34 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 09:27:06 PM EST
As a varlet from initially peasant and then gentlemen districts, I agree that we have no fantasies, just cynicism.

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
i thought you were an educated professional by nathan (2.00 / 0) #48 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 01:00:14 PM EST
If you're educated or make over $35k,* you can't be a varlet.

* Source: my larger end

[ Parent ]
and yoga: by gzt (2.00 / 0) #12 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 05:32:05 PM EST
Intrinsically tied to Hindu religious practice.

[ Parent ]
and? by aphrael (4.00 / 1) #13 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 05:33:11 PM EST
people with different religious beliefs may have nonetheless found useful tools; condemnation of the use to which they put such tools shouldn't per se extend to the tools themselves.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]
You're perfectly free to do yoga. by gzt (4.00 / 1) #14 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 05:36:19 PM EST
Knock yourself out.

[ Parent ]
i'm not asking permission by aphrael (4.00 / 1) #17 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 05:54:36 PM EST
i'm trying to engage in a discussion about whether yoga technique can be reconciled with different religious beliefs.

apparently you wish not to have such a discussion; i'm fine with that.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

[ Parent ]
part of the question is... by gzt (4.00 / 1) #19 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 06:05:28 PM EST
...what does "technique" contain? What is it to "do yoga"? If "doing yoga" is "going to the yoga studio and doing yoga" or one of the more traditional methods of yoga, then for a lot of studios, the answer is that it may not really work out well. If it means doing some variation of the warrior pose when you for a little bit when you get up, I wasn't even aware that stuff like that was yoga until recently. And, further, it also has to do with your own personality. Two people with the same religious practice might have different responses to yoga - one may be unable to do yoga without thinking 'om shivaaya namah om shivaaya namah...' which would perhaps not be great if not Hindu, while the other just thinks, 'man, my legs are stiff today,' which is not problematic.

[ Parent ]
He's describing secular Buddhism. by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #36 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 10:47:08 PM EST
It's Buddhism-lite.

It's like why I'm circumcised, in spite of being a Gentile. I also practice secular Transubstantiation to get around cannibalism laws, secular Voudoo to smite my enemies and secular Santeria because I fucking love fresh fried chicken.

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

[ Parent ]
you're circumcised... by gzt (2.00 / 0) #39 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 11:26:34 AM EST
...because of Victorian medical notions which have long been forgotten by even the English. America, for some reason, remains a backwater in this respect.

[ Parent ]
Liar! by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #41 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 12:23:55 PM EST
My mother was, at best, Edwardian.

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

[ Parent ]
that explains a lot by gzt (4.00 / 1) #42 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 12:32:02 PM EST
long summer afternoons, garden parties at the country house, and mangled genitalia. a romantic era.

[ Parent ]
mangled? by georgeha (2.00 / 0) #44 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 12:44:43 PM EST
You mean more aesthetically pleasing, and it makes the fireman look bigger.


[ Parent ]
I have similar thoughts... by gzt (4.00 / 1) #47 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 12:59:21 PM EST
...about female circumcision, which is why I plan to circumcize my daughters but not my sons.

[ Parent ]
Except they tend to botch the idea. by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #55 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 07:05:24 PM EST
Instead of pleasing God by just trimming back the clitoral hood, they excise the entire pudenda. Bad form.

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

[ Parent ]
and a further elaboration... by gzt (4.00 / 1) #40 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 11:28:15 AM EST
...any practice of yoga which encourages you to say "OM" is not innocuous.

[ Parent ]
I think I mentioned this before by lm (2.00 / 0) #54 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 06:05:42 PM EST
... but check out Dechanet's Christian Yoga. He does an excellent job of deconstructing the religion from the asceticism and exercise and synthesizing a uniquely Christian take on the practice.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Yoga by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #58 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 09:56:37 PM EST
The story I was told was that the practice of yoga was invented to allow people to sit still for very long periods, as required for meditation in the Hindu context.  It is not, itself, a Hindu practice and more than kneeling with palms pressed together is a Christian practice.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
That begs the question by lm (2.00 / 0) #59 Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:44:53 AM EST
Some people would argue that the meditation is a necessary part of yoga, if you take the meditation out, what you have is stretching.

A think a better comparison would be to genuflections in the Catholic tradition. You can go through the motions all day long but if you're not praying when you do it is really a genuflection?


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Yes by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #62 Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 11:11:16 AM EST
But is meditation tied to a particular religion?

What I noticed is that the meditative component of Yoga was very similar to the meditative component of Tai Chi despite each being based on a very different religious tradition.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
Well, yeah, some of the doctrines are different by lm (2.00 / 0) #68 Sat Jul 24, 2010 at 09:09:53 AM EST
That the practices have similarities is neither here nor there. The question at hand is (a) whether those similarities are essential and (b) whether or not there are any differences that are essential.

Not to mention that religion is at least as much defined by practice as doctrine. Many religions, especially pre-monotheistic ones, don't really have any doctrines, only practices.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Hinduism though by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #71 Sat Jul 24, 2010 at 11:38:10 AM EST
Is pretty full-up on doctrines.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
well, sort of by lm (2.00 / 0) #72 Sat Jul 24, 2010 at 01:19:26 PM EST
From my understanding, quite a bit of the doctrine was only ever a concern to the priestly cast until relatively modern times.

And even then, I think a strong argument could be made that a good many doctrines evolved synthetically to explain various traditional practices.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Which... by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #74 Sat Jul 24, 2010 at 05:52:56 PM EST
...is different from catholicism how?
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
you'd have to make an argument by gzt (2.00 / 0) #77 Sat Jul 24, 2010 at 08:12:03 PM EST
this is too complicated to pull off in just one-liners on either side.

[ Parent ]
I don't know that it is different by lm (2.00 / 0) #80 Mon Jul 26, 2010 at 08:54:27 AM EST
There are certainly Christian traditions around which doctrines were later constructed to explain.

But I'm not really certain where you're going with on that. Are you arguing that being synthetic or being added after the fact somehow makes doctrines less authentic?


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
this is a complicated assertion by gzt (2.00 / 0) #73 Sat Jul 24, 2010 at 03:56:05 PM EST
Given that "Hinduism" is the name given to a wide variety of loosely-related religious practices practiced over the course of thousands of years in various levels of sophistication throughout the subcontinent.

[ Parent ]
Just like by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #75 Sat Jul 24, 2010 at 05:54:16 PM EST
...Christianity in Europe.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
grumble grumble by gzt (2.00 / 0) #76 Sat Jul 24, 2010 at 08:09:06 PM EST
from the beginning (or, if you believe some polemicists, from the mid-second century), there was a body defining this stuff and setting out the doctrine. they really are not quite comparable. for a detailed look at this, see wendy doniger's history of hinduism.

[ Parent ]
Well... by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #78 Sat Jul 24, 2010 at 10:02:59 PM EST
You mean, from the mid-second century to the mid eleventh century, ignoring the offshoots in Africa and the East, with a major later forking of the doctrine in the sixteenth century.

How much in common does Calvinism have with Coptic doctrine?
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
quite a lot, really. by gzt (2.00 / 0) #79 Sat Jul 24, 2010 at 10:46:55 PM EST
There's a lot to be said of the notion that "hinduism" as one religion is a post hoc post-colonial invention.

[ Parent ]
Yoga by ucblockhead (4.00 / 1) #57 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 09:52:20 PM EST
I took many different yoga classes over a seven year period and had  probably only two where anyone said "OM".

(Ignoring the fact that the point of saying "OM" isn't about prayer.)
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
well, it depends on the studio by gzt (4.00 / 1) #60 Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:19:55 AM EST
At this one, they encourage OM.

OM is not quite about prayer, but it isn't quite not about prayer, either. Either way, it's not a-religious, it's very Hindu (or other religion from the subcontinent). About like if you were to suggest people say the name "Jesus" as they stretch. A non-Christian ought to feel a little weird about that.

[ Parent ]
"Jesus" by ucblockhead (4.00 / 1) #61 Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 11:09:50 AM EST
That's not really the right analogy.  Closer would be the word "God".
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
well... by gzt (2.00 / 0) #70 Sat Jul 24, 2010 at 09:59:05 AM EST
I wanted something specifically religious rather than something that's on our money and that is actually used in Christian contemplation.

[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by xth (2.00 / 0) #10 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 05:30:10 PM EST

This comment has been deleted by xth



unfair. by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #15 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 05:46:55 PM EST
Barack Obama did not campaign as a progressive; he campaigned as a moderate.

Throughout the 2008 election, conservatives attacked him as being a progressive-in-moderate clothing, to try to scare people; meanwhile, progressives secretly hoped he really was a progressive-in-moderate clothing.

He was a moderate.

He remains a moderate.

Nobody should be surprised, and they have only themselves to blame for their delusions.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

[ Parent ]
He made a lot of promises. by gzt (2.00 / 0) #18 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 05:58:57 PM EST
Progressive promises. Progressive promises he seems to be unable to keep.

[ Parent ]
not as many as you might think. by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #20 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 06:12:09 PM EST
the big ones seem to be: end DADT, withdraw from Afghanistan/Iraq, close Guantanamo and end the security state.

but he has gotten: huge (poorly allocated) stimulus package; health care overhaul; financial reform; student loan reform; etc.

He seems to be having an incredible success rate getting his programs through the legislature. They're just not as liberal as the left wants, or the right claims, them to be.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

[ Parent ]
the security state has gotten larger by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #22 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 06:36:48 PM EST
Which is amazing and scary.

At least the UK's is getting pared down by parties that promised to do so.

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown

[ Parent ]
we lost that battle. by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #23 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 06:39:36 PM EST
the american public wants the security state.

hopefully we can arrest it before we turn into venice.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

[ Parent ]
hopefully we can arrest it... by gzt (2.00 / 0) #24 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 07:23:06 PM EST
...before it arrests us.

[ Parent ]
right. by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #26 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 07:24:43 PM EST
i voted for obama over clinton in the primaries in part because i thought he was more likely than her to wind it down; and i voted for obama over mccain partly for similar reasons.

the sad thing is, i still think that was true.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

[ Parent ]
in soviet russia... by gzt (4.00 / 2) #27 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 07:26:26 PM EST
...security state arrests you!

oh.

[ Parent ]
UKia by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #25 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 07:23:29 PM EST
The Coalition of Necessity is making the right noises.

Hasn't repealed any of the police state legislation as yet.


[ Parent ]
They did. by Tonatiuh (2.00 / 0) #67 Sat Jul 24, 2010 at 08:46:35 AM EST
ID cards are gone.

[ Parent ]
Weren't law though. by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #69 Sat Jul 24, 2010 at 09:40:38 AM EST
Just a pilot scheme.


[ Parent ]
That seems like a substantial amount of fail by LinDze (2.00 / 0) #37 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 03:29:32 AM EST
Bringing an end to Iraqistan, Gitmo, and the Secret Police all seem to be huge failures so far.

I really don't get how TARP, Health Care, & Financial Reform can be considered successful at this point. I suppose yes, I'm not paying in seashells or rmb. There was something passed that was labeled Health Care Overhaul. And CSPAN broadcast senators making rambling irrelevant angry noises at rich men. But success?


-Lin Dze
Arbeit Macht Frei

[ Parent ]
TARP happened under Bush. by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #52 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 02:56:24 PM EST
The others: we got mediocre compromises. But those mediocre compromises are better than nothing.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]
I agree with aph there by MillMan (2.00 / 0) #28 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 07:31:02 PM EST
He didn't make many promises, but the left leaning public convinced themselves he was a progressive.

"Just as there are no atheists in foxholes, there are no libertarians in financial crises." -Krugman

[ Parent ]
and are now mad at him by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #33 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 08:18:10 PM EST
That's exactly what I witnessed here in Seattle by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #35 Wed Jul 21, 2010 at 10:37:51 PM EST
right up through Inauguration and a bit beyond. Every Leftie in this town was convinced that Change was coming, so watch out! Very vocal about it and disappointed when the wishful thinking didn't manifest. Do I blame Obama? Well, I heard a lot of unfulfilled promises, but I think he should have been more forthcoming and quashed the Progressive label when it was bandied about in the press. He would've lost votes by doing it though and I don't think he wanted to take that risk.

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

[ Parent ]
Al Gore tried that in 2000 by lm (4.00 / 2) #38 Thu Jul 22, 2010 at 05:54:35 AM EST
And we all know how well that worked out.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
He bummed around for a while by Driusan (2.00 / 0) #63 Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 11:32:32 AM EST
Then made a movie and got a nobel prize?

--
Vive le Montréal libre.
[ Parent ]
and got accused... by gzt (2.00 / 0) #64 Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 11:42:05 AM EST
...of sexual assault.

[ Parent ]
Gore by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #65 Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 11:57:01 AM EST
I'm convinced that, given the slim margin of defeat, one can actually attribute Gore's loss to his wife's PMRC campaign a decade before.  I know that this is a big part of what drove my non-Gore vote.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
That's why I didn't vote for him. by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #66 Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 07:18:18 PM EST
I didn't want Nancy Reagan II: The Sequel in the White House Bully Pulpit. Bad enough that she was the Second Lady.

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

[ Parent ]
Obama a huge disappointment: as expected | 83 comments (83 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback