« And I'm Spent | Main | Parting is Such Sweet Sorrow »

July 25, 2005

Standing Proud

Seems that Sir Roberts was for the Federalist society before he was against it. Fun. I think I'm with Singer's reaction:

Why are they lying? Why is the first response always to lie? Every Administration in history lies, but with this one, the assumption needs to be that it is lie until verified.

It's a funny thing, conservatives, quick as they are to crow about their ideology's ascendance, are terrified to admit membership in its organizations. So right-wingers aren't Republicans, they're "libertarians"; Roberts isn't part of the Federalist Society, but he actually was; Bush is a "conservationist" who passes bills with environmentally friendly names and promises that Social Security privatization should be enacted because it'll result in a bigger entitlement for quick-dyin' black people. It's all a bit ridiculous.

There's plenty of talk about how weak the Democratic party is, how embarrassing it is to be affiliated with it, and all the many methods unlucky liberals can choose from in their eventual ritualistic suicides. But the reality is that Democrats rarely, if ever, run from their affiliation, while Republicans are in constant mid-dash from theirs.

July 25, 2005 in Electoral Politics | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c572d53ef00d834589e7569e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Standing Proud:

» Summer Teeth in W. Virginia, Roberts, Anonymity from Now That's Progress
Ezra Klein wonders why, as Supreme Court nominee John Roberts' history becomes known, that conservatives try to pretend they aren't part of conservative organizations. Even when being a Democrat isn't cool, we at least don't run from it. * Think P... [Read More]

Tracked on Jul 25, 2005 1:38:37 PM

Comments

Could there be some cognitive dissonance being exhibited by these righties?

I'd sure be embarrassed to admit I was a Republican with Bush, Delay, Hassert, Frist, Rove, Cheney, Rice, as major officeholders, and Iraq, the deficit, the long term debt, the trade imbalance, N. Korea, etc. being the product of Republican efforts.

I'm with Matt Singer: the assumption needs to be that it is lie until verified.

While the Democratic party is often an embarrassing facsimle of a political party, I'm not hesitant to support it, and proclaim myself as a Liberal, Liberal, Liberal.

Posted by: JimPortlandOR | Jul 25, 2005 1:13:19 PM

Isn't this defining lying down? All evidence points to the fact that he was not a member, which is what was being floated, but may have served on some sort of committee almost 8 years ago.

Posted by: Chris | Jul 25, 2005 1:55:12 PM

All generalizations are false.

Posted by: A-ro | Jul 25, 2005 2:17:30 PM

in his defense ive been incorrectly indentified with groups before, when some jackass just up and puts my and others names on things with some fancy title.

i, for one, believe roberts that he wasn't a member.

Posted by: Ben | Jul 25, 2005 2:20:49 PM

"All generalizations are false."

Including that one?

Posted by: Matt | Jul 25, 2005 3:04:39 PM

It's a funny thing, conservatives, quick as they are to crow about their ideology's ascendance, are terrified to admit membership in its organizations.

This really sounds more wild-eyed...more like Something Jesse Taylor would post. I always expected Ezra to go by evidence.

Posted by: Robert Zimmerman | Jul 25, 2005 5:05:48 PM

Hey, good call, Matt-who-is-not-me. That statement that "All generalizations are false" is pretty funny.

Another good rule of thumb could simply be that "All generalizations should be considered generalities."

Regardless, language is a construct of the human mind that shapes the human mind. Is it a generality if we're talking about a mass noun?

Posted by: Matt Singer | Jul 25, 2005 5:59:34 PM

Ezra, sure, overall, the rethugs are the first ones to distance themselves from their core constituencies (and groups with, how shall we say it, ah, perhaps less than admirable qualities). But the dem do it to. Perhaps they shade it a bit more, but I was really disappointed in more than a few dems public positions during the last election.

But yes, overall, and in general, I think it's a good observation.

Posted by: ice weasel | Jul 25, 2005 7:28:24 PM

Generally I agree with all generalizations unless I specifically disagree in general with what was specifically said.

I cannot recall what was a generally said is a specific clue that someone is generally lying about something they specifically don't want to be reminded of.

Language deformed deforms the mind. If Roberts can not recall something as specific as to whether he was on the steering committee of the Federalist Society and discussion now is delimited to whether or not he was a dues paying member of said society, I really don't want to see what he can do "faithfully interpreting the constitution of the United States. This is possibly Roberts waxiest moment yet.

Posted by: The Heretik | Jul 25, 2005 8:53:45 PM

Believe it or not, libertarians are actually different from conservatives.

Posted by: Tim | Jul 25, 2005 10:15:05 PM

If he wasn't a Federalist, why would he deny it? That is, why would it reflect badly on him? I mean, I just assumed he was with the Federalists from the outset.

Posted by: Grumpy | Jul 25, 2005 10:39:58 PM

But the reality is that Democrats rarely, if ever, run from their affiliation, while Republicans are in constant mid-dash from theirs.
Interesting. I recall your candidate being given the opportunity to stand by his affiliation in the debates last year. His answer? "I don't like labels".

Smart answer, since any prominent person standing by the affiliation of "liberal" or the newly-found "progressive" tag is an electoral loser.

Sorry, that dog ain't huntin'.

Posted by: RW | Jul 26, 2005 10:18:06 AM

托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
钢托盘
木托盘
钢制托盘
托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
南京托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
南京托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
杭州托盘
成都托盘
武汉托盘
长沙托盘
合肥托盘
苏州托盘
无锡托盘
昆山托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
南京托盘
南京钢制托盘
南京钢托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘

托盘
托盘
托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
塑料托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘
托盘
托盘
托盘
钢托盘
铁托盘
钢制托盘
塑料托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
木托盘
塑料托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘

托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
木制托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘
托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
铁托盘
塑料托盘
木托盘
纸托盘
木塑托盘
柱式托盘
波纹板托盘
镀锌托盘
南京托盘
上海托盘
北京托盘
广州托盘


托盘
钢托盘
钢制托盘
托盘
塑料托盘

Posted by: peter.w | Sep 17, 2007 2:34:11 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.