Okay, this is completely inappropriate, but my limited vocabulary restricts my response: Our President ROCKS!!!!!! That speech was incredible - a tightrope walk between crisis and opportunity, right and left, war and peace. If the squiggly lines at the bottom of MSNBC's screen were any indication, folks that voted for Obama and the ones the voted for McCain agreed - top of the chart for the entire speech.
Energy. Health Care. Education. You know what my pet cause is (to refresh your memories: I think education is good). I actually started crying when he said "And dropping out of high school is no longer an option. It's not just quitting on yourself, it's quitting on your country — and this country needs and values the talents of every American." From preschool to college, a commitment to educate our youth, the recognition that the only path to the return to greatness that this nation has experienced is through education. It is my personal belief that there can be no greater investment, no more worthy use of our tax dollars than the goal of preparing our children and grandchildren for the world at large, and the world to come. (Especially if we expect them to pay for this pork-filled spending bill. This message brought to you by Right-Wing Talking Points Generator.)
BTW - I'm watching MSNBC, and after the Republican response by Gov. Jindal of LA, Chris Mathews was talking about how they had to go outside of Congress to find someone who could talk about wasteful spending, etc. since the Republicans in Congress were all part of that past. Given Gov. Jindal's ethnicity, was it just my immaturity that thought that it was poor wording by Chris to say that the Republicans had "outsourced the response"?
I could go on, and on - I've never felt so good about the potential onset of a depression.
(xootie - our new President is a touchy-feely. I can relate.)
And now, because that's how things work around here, it's your turn... (In case you didn't catch it all: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/obama_text)
270 comments:
1 – 200 of 270 Newer› Newest»'Especially if we expect them to pay for this pork-filled spending bill.'
Now you know one reason why the noble works of msg do not impress me in the least. All of you intelligent, smarter than-everyone -else liberals w/o children have left a heavy burden for my children--all because your own interests were more important than contributing to the future shoulders that will carry the weight. I mean--what nerve--expecting my children to do what your children should have done.When I think of what I did to do my part why all of you were taking fun trips and playing guitars and reading books and writing stupid books that no one will read 50 years from now,I wanna puke.
And I'm not supposed to be bitter and angry about it. Like I said, I hope my children show you more compassion and mercy than you were willing to show them.
Jane D'oh - good pony, performing your one trick for us. I'd give you a carrot, but I don't believe in encouraging your behavior.
Have a clue, Ms. D'oh, Liberals didn't cause this deficit. Obviously, you don't pay attention to the world outside of your 'ranch' (funny farm?), but the President has already said that he has a plan to halve the deficit by the end of his first term.
What a surprise, you picked up on the right-wing talking point. (If I were the type of person who resorted to name-calling - and we all know I'm not - I'd call you a 'tool'.)
Some of us did all those things and still had kids, Sunny. The world they're facing doesn't look so great sometimes. Reagan and the two Bushes did us in.
Remember Prop. 13, back in '78? I didn't have kids then, but I think I felt the same way you do FH -- I wanted the kids around me to have free educational opportunities. Who wouldn't? Seemed obvious to me that educated people would create a better society.
Also obvious to me and everyone else was the fact that if Prop. 13 passed the Calif. public schools outside of rich enclaves would slowly deteriorate. And now here we are. The lucky few move to towns with high school taxes and decent public schools or send their kids to private schools. (Yeah, that includes me.)
Meanwhile, kids grow up in East Oakland and Richmond and Vallejo and go to shamefully deficient schools, and, thus, end up with absolutely no chance to succeed. The only justification for that neglect is selfishness -- conservatives really do want to have a huge underclass that can't compete. Conservatives want a competitive advantage. It's that stark.
Did the Republicans, knowing they had limited time, simply loot the country while they could, before they got booted out? Are they just going to bide their time and come roaring back to loot again? Or did they fail spectacularly, irrevocably, and thus create a chance for Democrats to offer an alternative to a country ready for one?
My children attend private school because I don't want liberalism shoved down their innocent throats. And the reason public schooling fails in states like California despite the state giving over half of the state budget to it, is because of the power of unions and their thuggery and the greed and arrogance of the administration.
And if you don't believe me, just look at what the Hearse Corpse is about to go through.
Why don't you put your money and love towards adopting a child, ferret, instead of a cat? Make my children's load a little lighter.I might have more respect for you and your lame opinions. Which, in the grand scheme of things, are meaningless.
Jane D'oh - the day I gain your respect for my opinions is the day I shut down this blog. I do not care if I have the respect of people whom I do not respect. You don't have opinions or thoughts; you have a cause and talking points. It is only because I have set for myself the goal of being democratic and supporting free speech that I have not blocked you from this blog. Given the dearth of quality posts by you, I would be doing the brushfires family a service if I were to do so...
FH, I'm reminded of the Faber College motto.
msg? When were food additives brought onto this blog? :)
Gina, I'm not trying to impress you with what I do, I bring it up simply to show you that people don't have to have children to do good works. So much of the Y's work is focused on helping children acquire good values (the inculcation of the four core values of caring, honesty, respect and responsibility are ingrained into every youth program), I believe I make a significant difference in the lives of kids through my work with the Y, and the Y also helps support parents with their responsibilities.
dsg - I should probably put a disclaimer on the front page advising people that the blog does in fact use msg.
Are you going to make me google the Faber College motto? I haven't seen "Animal House" all the way through in years...
Since you claim to be a fan of public education, consider the following:
It is somewhere between unfortunate and criminal that the brief history of republican government is not taught in our public schools. Public education does a great disservice to our children by not teaching how difficult and how historically rare it is for them to live in a republican democracy.--John Adams
Our war, the people’s war, is not with Democrats, and neither is it between Democrats and Republicans. We the people are at war for our liberty with today’s patricians who buy ghetto votes with public money and do whatever they have to make the middle class poor and stupid.
As a self-proclaimed bleeding heart liberal, whose emotion (our President ROCKS!!!!!) trumps their logic, I hope that makes sense to you.
"Knowledge is good."
They also like to make sure there are a lot of workers, which is why they make birth control and abortion so difficult to acquire. Thanks for playing right into their hands, Breeder J.
So, because I had an emotional reaction to an inspirational speech, I am bereft of logic? Ms. D'oh, your 'logic' escapes me. I 'claim' to be a fan? Have I said or written anything that would make someone question the sincerity of my 'fandom'? I'm a product of a first class public education, in CA no less. I graduated in 1981, so I was not victimized by Prop 13, unlike the youth of today.
(Sigh) I guess every blogger has their cross to bear - you appear to be mine...
'buy ghetto votes'. A curious turn of phrase. Is this the self-imposed gated ghetto you speak of, where vote$ are bought? Or is this just another crank wop racial slur?
Hey! Did anyone watch the speech last night? Wanna talk about it?
TooSense, you're a penny and a half short.
Despite your feeble attempt to project your own racism onto me, the ghetto is a state of mind. It knows no racial bounds.
"Breeder J"? what's that supposed to mean?
"but the President has already said that he has a plan to halve the deficit by the end of his first term."
Care to expand on that?
I do not understand how he can justify going into debt for almost another trillion dollars, and then turn around and immediately promise to balance the budget soon. It's kind of like cutting your nose off in front of the hospital.
I posted a link to the text of the speech - he mentions it in there. I don't know the details, he hasn't submitted his first budget yet.
Hey, does anybody else want to talk about the speech last night???
Whatever you say proboni.
I missed the speech, I only saw little clips. I was busy taking my SO to the airport, working on some recording edits, and duelling Hartal about unemployment benefits for illegal immgrants. The clips I saw and the commentary I heard were hopeful, however. I also heard the usual right-wing tools making their usual sorry-ass excuses.
I did not listen to the speech. I am of the opinion that action speak louder than words. I have read it though. He has a good speech writer.
You don't know the details of his plan to cut the deficit because neither does he.
DO yourself a favor and read this piece written many moons ago by Col. David Crockett. I believe it illustrates rather nicely what The Framers thought the role of government spending should be.
Not yours to give
BTW maybe you should consider changing the text on the heading of your blog.
At a glance it doesn't seem like a very polite place; passionate--yes it is; people who share a different opinion seem to get called weird names like "breeder J"; not exactly enlightening; and if you wish to "save the Republic one post at a time, perhaps you should start by taking an objective look at Mr. Obama.
No offense, but it seems more like a High School clique to me.
I posted a link to the text, dsg. I thought it was a really good speech, it's worth reading...if you've got the time and interest.
Jindal's response was pathetic. They totally missed the boat on predicting the tone of the President's speech, so that the response sounded like it was for something else entirely. I've heard he's good on the Sunday morning talk shows, but his speaking style was AWFUL! Patronizing, illogical, and untrue - typical of the Republicans. They're going to have to step up their game if they're gonna go up against "The Even Better Communicator". (That needs work...)
J - sorry, I thought you were a poster here who goes by many names, "Jane" being one of them. I apologize for the mistake.
I will read your links later - when I get home tonight. I feel that the government is the purchaser & employer of last resort. It seems to me we have reached that point...
Believe it or not, it took a while for Barack Obama to win me over. But, given the state of our nation, I really, really want to believe that he can do what he says. A healthy dose of skepticism is a good idea, I'm still enjoying the honeymoon.
If you are what I call a true "Republican", small government/fiscal conservative, with whom I can have a reasonable conversation, I couldn't be happier to welcome you to Brushfires. And I do desire polite conversation - I have fallen into the bad habit of engaging the blog troll. Welcome!
Oh no, fraternization between bloggers. That doesn't fit the right wing isolate-and-conquer model of modern social networking.
J - I have heard that Obama writes his own speeches, but that may have changed since he's a little busier now that he's supposed to be running the country.
I preferred this speech to the inaugural address. That speech had to reflect the importance of the event - time enough for celebrating later, we're changin' power over here. Last night, he got to show his charm and humor, drive and ambitions - for the country.
J - are you willing to give the President the benefit of the doubt, while we are awaiting the actions that (hopefully) reflect his words? Personally, I think it's been a pretty productive 35 days.
Jindal's a real piece of work. He's been working that "pre-existing condition" joke for quite a while. Quite convenient that his mother was exactly "4 1/2 months pregnant" when she and his father got to the U.S. Puts him smack in the middle of Roe v. Wade's trimesters.
I saw the start of Obama's speech at work, the remainder later, at home (tape delay, I guess). I was impressed. Style is important. He's demonstrating to the hostile repubs that he can keep his cool and project leadership qualities that in the end well may make their partisan positions look petty and self-serving. Substantively, I can't find much to fault, but there are only so many concrete details he could offer in such a speech.
Overall, I thought he did a great job last night, and I'll bet he achieved his main goal -- gaining more public confidence.
FH -- way back when the nomination was still up for grabs there was an interesting article in the Sunday NYT Style section on Obama's speech writers. It focused on the youngest guy in the group. If I recall correctly, he freely admitted that they carefully study the rhetoric and deliveries of JFK and MLK, among others.
I saw a few more pieces on the speech-writing team after that.
xoot - thanks! Apparently, you can't believe everything you hear. I forget who told me that - should've believed them.
Americans can do anything! Now, I do believe I can get them to knock a hunnert bucks off that TruCoat for ya...
Yes, ferret, you're a first-class martyr and a lying one at that. I was born in late '63...and just made the deadline for the kindergarten class that year. You couldn't have graduated in 81'. Unless, of course, you're a genius Nand skipped a grade--which I doubt 'cause you can't even figure out I'm not that J person.
And, by the way, I'm not even reading LaSalle's blog--Lenten sacrifice.
I will be sorry, though, if he loses his job.
Why don't you and the pious Suza go get some ashes?
And, TooSense...that's proboner to you...which is just another name for Gina, in case you didn't know.
Oh, there I go, being crude and gropey again.
Gropey. That's funny. I'll bet that was the 8th dwarf.
Wait a minute... probono is Gina?!?
Yes.I'm multi-faceted. Like a prism.
If probono is gina, then who's The Oracle?
;)
You're coming in a little blurry there, probone, er... probono.
What the oracle sees is never too clear, you know. Especially when it's raining and cloudy all the time. I'm really getting sick of this crappy weather.
wv:aquatio--and yet another dimension. heh.
Actually, Ms. D'oh, I did in fact skip a grade. I was in a mixed class of 2nd & 3rd graders - started the year in 2nd, ended in 3rd, went to 4th. I'll leave it for the others to judge, but I was one wicked smart 7 year-old!!!
You may apologize any time you see fit, Ms. D'oh......(crickets)
Do we look fuzzy, Oracle?
The best cure for crappy weather is to slip into a nice sheepskin.
In honor of my new found redemption on this sacred day, I apologize sincerely, ferret.
Mr. Sense. you are appearing fuzzy in certain places--which doesn't bother me at all. Not in the least.
You're gonna get me in trouble.There seems to be a double-standard here. And I'm always the victim of it. Why is that?
The oracle is the inner Gina. Can't you see that?
Gina, I believe you are admiring my horsehair sporran, no?
oracle - thank you for your gracious apology. It is accepted, sincerely. (How did I know you would pick up on that and question it?)
Ya, that too.
Thank you ferret. I appreciate it.
Even though I get everything bassackwards, I do know about post-Camelot babies.
Your self portraits depict you looking somewhat sad and vaguely stunned, Sunny. I think you need a vacation. Hawaii, maybe.
That's funny, Zoot. Baking on a beach for about a week does sound good. I can get kinda sad, considering everything I've been through lately, but I'm always laughing.
It's hard to take a picture and smile at the same time. It'll look phony. Not only that, I have to take it looking in a mirror. What you're seeing is a reflection.
I know I got real religious today, but it didn't last too long. This is for Yogi: http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.petterik.nl/bonobo.jpg
What diverse opinions. Please remember that is what makes our country so GREAT. The republicians had eight years. Now the democrats have at least four. As scary as it is we have to wait and see. I missed the speech last night but I heard it was well done. I hope Obama's plan works for all our sakes (children and cats included).
Hey, Ferret, por vous: http://ineedashotofredemption.blogspot.com/
Obama's speech really stirred me. I think I nailed it, don't you?
Just thought you would like to know. LaSalle went ahead and had my IP address blocked, so I can't respond at his blog or anywhere at SF Gate.
So, Hartal. I'm glad you're over here. I need to ask you something. Are you for real? I'm convinced you're a made-up person.
Yeah, I'm real. Why would you think I am not real. I am one person, but perhaps I have the multitudes in me, to paraphrase Whitman.
Because I'm convinced, I kid you not, that LaSalle invented you just to get clicks.
I mean, desperate times call for desperate measures, you know?
Well obviously not as he just had been banned from SF Gate altogether. I don't think LaSalle could see his politics which seeps into his cultural criticism as honestly as I see them. I can't see why he would be so desperate as to close off debate.
If he brought you into this world, he can just as easily take you out, right?
He's got a big,fat ego described as something else, I don't know what, but he won't admit it. Really, what I think is that he craves and desires constant hero-worshiping. He wants his Mommy and hates his Daddy. If you remind him of his father, he gets all nasty on ya. Can't take criticism of any sort.And, if you don't give him what he wants, he has little Mussolini-like Rages or fits. Indeed, it is just my ironic opinion.
hartal - welcome! While we have different perspective, and express ourselves differently, I am glad you are here.
We don't always play nice, but we do try. Hopefully, things can be a little more civilized here between you and some of the regulars.
Jane - you are the only one here, besides Yogi, who has posted under more than one name. Please stop accusing people of things of which you are guilty. Glass houses, stones, yada, yada, yada...
But, but, but ferret--I'm just being multi-dimensional. I'm trying to find my true identity and it's very difficult considering I'm really Sybillesque. That's a word, right? Sybillesque?
Could this really be hartal? I mean, this poster seems so... succint. ; )
Just quickly. LaSalle did not bring me into the world. He has had me banned from all of SF Gate, including the politics blog where I spend most of time. Don't worry about tussles here, ferrethead. I won't be able to spend much time here. I just wanted you to know why I can't reply at SF Gate.
Gina, are you saying you contain multitudes? :)
wv: ithor
Lisper seeing something ugly.
How do you know it was LaSalle?
Uh-oh. Pithy thnark time.
I think this is a very descriptive word: platitudes. Whaddya think, dsg?
And if the critics remind him of his father, the worshippers remind him of his mother, right?
That's why he seems a little confused in the shower.
TS, I'm not sure how much I like "pithy" in that context. :)
Hartal, I sure hope this isn't true. If so I won't be posting there anymore. Doesn't your IP address change from day to day? Try registering another name on another computer.
Maybe the Oracle is really romanbabe...
LaSalle's probably pissed off at the Hearst threat to shut down the Chron. (I mean, he just got back from being lionized in Berlin for his writing gig, right? And his book sales aren't going to pay many bills.) Funny situation -- he probably loathes the damn MSM blog now, but has no choice but to keep it running, per company policy.
FH -- looks like Obama's budget packs a pretty good punch for education.
Maybe they need to publish a virtual newspaper.
He's a very fascinating character---spills his guts in the most innocent way. It's very charming, I must admit. My observations are only from the things he's posted. I've been reading for two years now. He's mentioned on more than one occasion what an asshole his father was, with Romanbabe backing him up. Do you remember how he used to love Eminem? Have you ever heard Eminem--that is one pissed-off dude. And early on he mentioned how he used to drive and drive, aimlessly, like he was looking for something and it was driving him crazy. He came across as a man with some inner demons.
You know what would be funny--if they all walked out at once. Started their own online paper.
Yogi and others may have noticed that I posted a comment and it kept on getting deleted this morning every time I reposted it. Finally my IP address was blocked. Who is Joe Remi? Lasalle sent me private email threatening me with expulsion. I tried to respond but he blocked my email. Well perhaps as Hearst tries to sell the paper and extract concessions from the union, it agreed with Lasalle that I am a nuisance. But I assure you that I am banned. After a full day of work on Wednesday, I started to post again this morning. I got in one post at the politics blog and a few comments at the LaSalle blog. Then my IP address was blocked. Also, it seems that some of my comments made earlier have been deleted from Lasalle's blog.
FH, what are your thoughts on this whole LaSalle-Hartal imbroglio? It certainly seems to have quieted the conversation over there.
wv: potter
The blog monitors have blocked several posters from the Splash. Two got reinstated when people complained. One probably deserved to be prosecuted for his cyber assaults. No one cares about his rights.
So?
WV: "interse." Few days ago, it was "estop." blogger.com's telling me to get back to work, I guess.
hartal. Let it go. He banned ya, so what? It's better over here anyway--more freedom and leniency.
I'm really beginning to feel sorry for him, much to my dismay. If it makes you feel any better, I got the infamous LaSallian treatment, too. I think I got a front page dialogue about trolls written about me. I think. It certainly seemed implied that it was about me. It's awful to do so, I know, but I still snicker every time I think about it.
He can't handle what he considers abuse. I can't handle what seems to be a threat to my children. He was attacking Bush and the war effort.I don't he could fathom a mother going to lengths that I did to protect my young. I don't know what his father did to him, but I would have never allowed my husband to mistreat my children in anyway, shape or form.
Gotta get back to work, but I do want to participate at the politics blog in particular. And I can't access it. I have made some interesting contributions to the discussion of politics and would like to continue to discuss the issues of the day.
What on earth would one have to say to get banned from The Splash? That's a veritable whirlpool of abuse and disruptiveness. And I'm not criticizing, I like to read The Splash. But what could possible get one banned???
And curious as well. hartal posted on one of the SFGate blogs that he/she read Brushfires. So why was the day of being banned from SFGate the first time hartal posted here?
I suppose I should have known that people could get banned, I just never imagined what you would have to do for someone to ban you.
wv: unbanqu
Honestly, I didn't make it up.
Yes, I posted here for the first time a little bit after getting banned from SF Gate altogether. I had read through some of the conversation here before, though. OK gotta go.
It seems that xootsuit may be able to confirm that I have been banned. I'm not sure whether LaSalle or Joe Remi (whoever he is) or someone else did it. I did get a threat of expulsion from LaSalle on Wednesday. Phylloflix seems to be doubting my story that I have been banned. At least someone must have seen my morning posts getting deleted every time I reposted them. I think Yogi saw that. I am not making this up.
How would I know? They never would tell me, even though I apologized to Mr. LaSalle and even Evel Battey, Girl Wonder.
JoeRemi. His father's name is Joseph, I believe. Jo-RE-Mi. Think that could be it?
Phylloflix seems to be doubting my story that I have been banned
**
Actually, hartal, if you read her post, she is curious how Yogi read your post when you were banned from posting at SFGate. I don't think it dawned on her that he read the post here.
That's 'cause she's a bit of a drunk--haven't you noticed?
I mean, I can smell the alcohol on her breath all clear across the coast.
Gotta keep it short, but it just dawned on me that what may have actually gotten me banned was my statement in the comments to the Oscar night article that no one was going to pay for LaSalle's snark when it came time to pay for content on SF Gate. That can't be the kind of comment that Hearst wants to appear on the message boards as they try to find someone to buy the Chronicle a prime asset of which is probably--next to the food section--LaSalle's movie reviews. I've been pretty incensed at Pender lately but she is a real asset. The business reporters in general are excellent. The sports section is unbelievably good. Tyche Hendricks has a great sense of what the issues are.
Personally, I like Jon Carroll. Ok, I love him. He's great. Nevius used to be one of my favorites until last April 25th, when he closed up shop in protest. I love the Dish. It's really funny. Iusually hate sports, but I just read the Splash--that's really funny, too.
They'll never tell you, so why bother?
Maybe the employees should buy out the Chronicle name and run SFGate, or in lieu of some salary, be given stocks in the company? Or maybe a gradual buy-out?
You won't believe this.wv: ouste
Well I liked Ruth Rosen and Edward Gomez, but they were let go. But they gave the paper gravitas. And a lot of people in the Bay Area want gravitas, given how some of their successful college roommates tell them that San Francisco, compared to New York, is an intellectual backwater (this in spite of our having better universities). It also hurts (ha, ha) to have SF described as a retirement home for the young, compared to NYC. I liked Jon Carrol's comments on the recent Oakland protests.
Do people really pay that crap any mind? 'Sophisticates' crack me up.
I've always found the Milky Way to be a backwater of all kinds.
But pithy snark is priceless.
But my side of my street is clearly superior to the other. At least for 3/4 of the block. But then, I typically consider a region in two-block units. Today I'm basing my logic upon a southerly reckoning of the landspew.
Gina, it's hard to believe that a unrepentant conservative like you would love Jon Carroll, one of the last full-blown lefties.
(cue Brady Bunch incidental mute-wah trombone music)
I was disappointed by Bobby Jindal's response. I think I expressed that in MSM's blog, but it was overrun by angst.
I liked Obama's speech. I liked Nancy Pelosi's suit. I found it amusing the number of times she jumped up and the reactions on the faces of the people who were like "FER CRYIN' OUT LOUD SIT DOWN NANCY."
Of course, I'm sure this post will also be lost amongst the angst...alas alas.
wv: nesessit - what this post was.
Suza, Jindal's response was uniformly panned. David Brooks called it "insane." From what little I saw of it, I'd agree with them.
I watched him on Meet the Press this last weekend. He was a better speaker. I still didn't agree with what he said (wtf with not accepting the stimulus money for one of the poorest states in the union), but he did seem less "insane."
I can't believe that David Brooks said that!
I don't think Jindal came across as insane, just patronizing and out of touch. The Republicans certainly get a lot of air time on CNN, MSNBC, etc. these days, don't they? Hopefully, this over-exposure will reveal their lack of concern to their constituencies, which could in turn seal their fate...
Insincere, mechanical and manipulative were the adjectives that came to my mind.
Hearst doesn't care about you, Hartal. It's indicative of your naivite (or perhaps ego), that you could possibly think that. But Yogi is right, it's easy enough to get back on. If calling LaSalle a liar and harassing him on his blog is that important to you, you can do it, by jove. A proxy might be the trick, or get a new router and try a different E-Mail address, change your screen name, if you're diligent enough you can get right back in and flame away. You can do it.
Nancy in her suit looked like a frumpy bag of baby poop.
Jindal has big, funny ears.
Jon Carroll, unlike Sack of Bitter Morford, knows how to express his opinion without being offensive or insulting. Mr. LaSalle could take a few pointers from him, too.
Man, I still have residue on my forehead from that Mr. Yuk sticker I wore all day yesterday.
Just reading the last blog, I see that probono really hates me. And so does Michael. My IP address is blocked, so I can't sign in under another name. And I'm not buying another router, and even that would not fix the problem. I can't comment any more at SF Gate. My criticisms of his anti Obama politics and reviews of Che and SM were not flames but fully justified. My saying that Hearst may have banned me was my attempt to give LaSalle the benefit of the doubt that he would not act vindicatively to those who responded to his Obama hatred, factually inaccurate screeds and snarky reviews.
It's easy to get back in, Hartal. I was bannned for the "F" word once. And LaSalle sent me this E-Mail on another occasion:
"Hello Michael --
Your posts are getting insulting, and today's was close to the edge. Just thought you should know.
MICK LASALLE"
On the other hand, he helped get me back on after another moderator had banned me for the F-Bomb.
It really isn't a good idea to insult the guy whose blog you're on, you know? And calling him a cowardly liar just might qualify as a significant insult. Try sending him an E-Mail from a different account and beg a little ;-)
He sent me a warning. I tried to respond. He blocked my mail. He writes pointed stuff meant to get a strong reaction. Did you see the comment from the anonymous blogger that he made one of his blog entries. The blogger said that Cuba is a despotism, pure and simple, that people sacrifice their lives to escape. Che killed innocents. It was straight Cold War propaganda that is behind an embargo that inflicts terrible punishment on a people. I could not believe that a journalist would make accusations against someone our government murdered on the basis of an anonymous blogger. I challenged him. He never intervened to say that he had supporting evidence. The deranged twinfan than tried to support LaSalle's claim, but he handled evidence dishonestly, claiming it said things it did not say.
LaSalle deserved a much sharper reply than I gave him. He is unprofessional when it comes to politics. His anti Obama screeds were an embarrassment.
If SFGate had an ombudsmen, he would be in huge trouble. I would not have been suspended.
I am not going to beg. If anyone here thinks he treated me unfairly, then please write a letter on my behalf. the point is that it was Obama critics such as himself that made Obama the overwhelming choice of the Bay Area. People were turned off to Obama by Obama supporters; they were turned to him by the Obama critics of Obama's supporters. That is why he won so decisively.
I am the deranged twinfan, Hartal. My real name is Michael, which is what I post under here. Your lovely hostess J.M. Ferretti, is my virtual wife. I am trying to tell you, quite cordially, that whatever your issues with LaSalle, a pragmatic approach might be in order. It doesn't matter whether you felt justifed. It's his blog, you don't insult him. This is a common sense issue, OK? And if SFGate really applied their rules and regulations, you (and I) would have had the boot long ago...
But he can insult anyone he wants? His writing is meant to get under the skin of liberal leftists of whom he is contemptous for their putative naivety. He can dish it out, but he can't take it. Maximum strength? Cmon the guy is a cry baby. What is a virtual wife?
Michael, can you post as "The Deranged Twinfan" from now on, to avoid confusion? thanks... ;-)
http://tinyurl.com/cl236x
A virtual wife is everything you would want in a wife. She is beautiful, witty, wise, a terrific cook, a wonderful friend and lover, and a fine dancer. She's just, like, not real...
I've posted a request for your reinstaement, BTW. If it works, i ask just that you begin all your posts with " as twinfan pointed out..."
this is confusing me. Is ferrethead real?
WT: done
Hartal: I'm sorry, Ferret is real, she is just not a "real" wife, to me. I had 5 real ones, a 6th virtual one seemed a nice change of pace.
Ta, TF. "InsanityNow": it don't get any pithier than that right now...
You're such an ass, Hartal. I don't hate you. You're just kinda wordy, that's all. To be honest, Inever read because I don't think you're real. Much the way I not so sure ferret is real. Do you understand , now? Besides, life has a way of teaching us the things we need to learn. Maybe, it LaSalle's turn now.
And don't listen to them. Begging is unbecoming, even if you really want back on. No one should ever stoop to begging.They should just find ferret's blog, and yak there. Or, start your own blog--that's always a good option for revenge, er, commentary.
Good Lord. Number five is scary looking. Is that a mop on her head and a bird claw for a hand?
You're kinda cute, by the way.
And I never got ANY warning e-mail. All I got was a front page diatribe in green ink!
Don't listen to "The Oracle". Begging well can be a handy tool if ever before a firing squad. Practice wouldn't hurt, with no weapons at your head.
hartal, why do you want to spend so much energy on sfgate blogs?
Ok virtual in the pre-cyberspace sense. Got it. Five wives. Wow. Now I see why we say half the marriages end in divorce. Between us there are six marriages, and five of them ended in divorce. So let's say that you added four more guys like me. So now we have ten marriages, and half of them ended in divorce. But of the six guys, five out of the six have not been divorced. The idea that half the marriages ended in divorce never made sense to me. Now I understand how we get that stat.
Not true. They're being racist. Let them shoot before it's too late and you really become addicted.
Maybe he's gathering information for a book idea.
wv:paperapi
xoot, I like the idea of talking politics with my regional neighbors.
That's not a wife. We were both drunk, as you might surmise from the pic. There was some dialog added to the photo, something about me being in big big trouble. The woman in the photo was, uh, someone's wife. She was actually pretty hot, the claw is partly in my shirt, probably looking for money. She had lost a very expensive engagement ring, I went to help her find it, the search took us to a few bars... well, I got in trouble, like I said, big trouble. It's basically a pisser when you wish you could get in trouble like that again...
Now if we change the blog name to "Brushfires Of Insanity", we'll have a lil theme going... ;-)
I think the people on this blog blow those divorce/marriage stats out of the water. Someone should do a poll and figure it out. That would be funny.
Well, I didn't want to mention the money thing. She kinda looks like she's losing her hair. I suppose that could be hot.
Hartal, I also sent Mick an E-Mail. He might E-Mail you and ask if it's true what I said. Just say yes, don't ask any questions ;-)
WT - "Brushfires of Inanity" would be more appropriate!
Hartal, don't listen to anybody but your gut. If you really like posting on SFGate, and want to be allowed back in, do what needs to be done. It's only quitting if you don't try!
Hartal, this is Joe Remi. I have been reading, and corresponding with, Mick Lasalle for several years. I participated in his blog last year, but have been spending the last few months battling lunatic righties at InsideCableNews.Wordpress.Com. I came back to MSM to participate in the discussions and discovered this Hartal fellow all over the comments section. I did not intend to become Blog Police, but one of your last contributions sounded vaguely threatening to me. You reported that Mick had warned you and you would "not be silenced." I e-mailed Mick about it and he told me your comments would be deleted. Right after the comments disappeared, you reported you were banned. I don't know if something else happened or if he just got fed up.
I generally disagree with Mick's politics, but respect his writing and his right to run a blog without harassment. I think - if you are reinstated - you need to find a way to disagree without being so vitriolic. Your persistence in just knowing you're right and anyone who disagrees with you has some deep seated issues comes off as kind of creepily obsessive, which is what I think got you banned. People who write opinions for newspapers are always in danger of pissing off the wrong person and then having to worry about the consequences. If Mick's actions seemed a little extreme to you, consider that a little paranoia in his position is probably earned.
nice picture, twinfan. personally, I liked the title "the deranged twinfan." It just goes to show you that Hartal is so clueless to anyone else's feelings he doesn't even realize when he's insulting the person to whom he is speaking.
I don't care if he gets back on or not - it is not anyone's inalienable right to insult the host on their blog. He even got a warning for god's sake! How thick can ye be?
Folks, please let's not move the Hartal 'fan club' over here, now. I'm glad for the new attention, but I don't want to continue arguments here that started there...
ok, FH - understood. :)
And that, Suza, is why you're one of my favorites. Just don't tell anybody else, they might get jealous...okay?
I was busy last night picking my SO up at SFO returning from a business trip, and I was so tired when we got home, I just went to bed without checking out the commentary here. Oh, my goodness! This is some of the funniest stuff I've ever read! My dear hostess, I want to thank you for this blog and for being secure enough to give folks the leeway to take the discussion wherever it might go. For the record, I am probably not going to watch Obama's speech, because I think the brief clips I've seen and the public reaction I've been reading and hearing is enough for me to know that he's up to the challenges. I have enough other stuff to do right now, and it's too hard for me to multitask while listening to a speech.
.
And TF, that was mighty big of you to do what you did. Would you mind terribly if I occasionally referred to you as "the deranged twinfan" as long as you knew that I meant it with nothing but respect and cameraderie?
My arguments against LaSalle were fully justified. LaSalle's hits against Slumdog Millionaire were creepy, not my informed insight into the movie. Ask your host.
LaSalle's use of history in the Che review and his anti Obama politics --remember vomit, hazma suit, and the utter lack of understanding of the history of the black Church in spite of people like Martin Marty begging commentators to take a more nuanced view of Wright: all this-- was unprofessional. I called him on it. There was nothing creepy or obsessive about it.
I'm part black (and my kids half so), and the ass creeps me out. I am sure that my reaction is not unique. at least among non white people and non Hispanic people.
When he made the vomit and hazma comments, it was clear to me that that we were dealing with a creep.
LaSalle sent me a message saying that if I spoke my mind he would get me kicked off SF Gate. I told him that he was not going to intimidate me into silence. If he was going to say again that no one could genuinely appreciate SM as a work of art, he was going to be told that only one who has no concern about understanding new cultural references could say something so stupid.
And I don't apologize for writing the things I did on behalf of undocumented immigrants and against indiscriminate attempts to encourage their self-deportation. Why should I apologize for that? We are talking about 3 million kids being involved. Not to care would be creepy.
Speaking of the speech - in an attempt be known as something other than Blog Police - did Bobby Jindal actually use FEMA's (non)response to Katrina as an example of why we shouldn't except government help? If the Righties keep this lunacy up, Obama won't even have to campaign in '12. He can just sit there and grin.
It's your house, FH - I'm just trying to be a good guest. I appreciate your blog!
Where did your SO get back from DSG? I'm off-site myself right now. Looking forward to the weekend.
wv: mobillyg
I did E-Mail Mick asking about Hartal being reinstated. This was LaSalle's reply:
"The terms of use say that anyone who is abusive OR disruptive will have their emails deleted, and if they keep it up, they'll be banned.
He used my blog to disrupt and take it over. I warned him, and he didn't take it seriously. When I deleted his emails, he re-posted them. So he is banned. "
I presume MLS meant "posts", not E-mails when he talked about Hartal "re-posting".
What is amusing about this is Hartal's delusion that the Hearst corporation sees him as a voice THAT MUST BE SILENCED!!!!, that it is his politics that earned him his banishment, not his abusive behavior toward MLS.
LaSalle did not tell him that speaking his mind would get him banished, he told him that his disruption and abusiveness would acomplish that.
Hartal does not seem to comprehend that he is is not the only person with the right to speak his/her mind. Whether he agreees with LaSalle or not: it is LaSalle's blog and therefore, virtually by definition, his "bully pulpit". He has every right to decide what behavior he will tolerate, it's his space; we are guests. If, as the guest in another's home, you insult their cooking skills, tie up their telephone, and abuse the other guests, they just may ask you to leave. Trying to climb back in through the AC ducting might not be appreciated...
I was trying to give LaSalle the benefit of the doubt that he would silence criticism of his obnoxious opinions. But I guess he is the loser that he seems to be.
Did you see what I got kicked off for? I literally wrote that it's good to have vigorous debate about whether critics are missing new cultural references, have the facts wrong and what the status of undocumented immigrants should be.
That was the message that he kicked me off for.
And he has had me kicked off of SF Gate.
And not far behind LaSalle in racial insensitivity is deranged twinfan Michael.
So I like how the lines are getting drawn.
And look no actual engagement with what I am saying.
This thing about it being his space is wrong. It's SF Gate's space, first. Second, he was looking for the fight over Obama, Che, Slumdog Millionaire. Then when Maximum Strength man got replies that showed him to be silly and stupid, he moved to censor. You people are not the ones to fight with him because you agree with him on too much. I, Yogi, perhaps too sense were his opposition.
Hartal, for the record, I asked Mick to relent, too, and got the same response. Also for the record, you and I are both new here and the host asked us to drop it. I'm not going to address this again.
If it's OK with J.M., I would like to participate in political discussions in the future. I didn't know about this blog 'til a couple of days ago, but I like it and would like to contribute from time time.
hartal, I fully agree with you about the situation. But what, really, is won by fighting this out until the end. It's a fact that many Americans truly do not value what are known as "American values". You either believe in free speech or you don't. There aren't qualifiers. You're fully within your rights to respond to the speech of another, assuming we're talking about a speech for speech exchange. I loathe Rush Limbaugh, and thought Don Imus knew exactly what he was doing, and think LaSalle more closely fits your perspective of him than many would care to admit. How someone turns 'I won't be silenced', as "American" a statement as that supposedly is, into a threat, I have no idea. I think people who can't tolerate the rantings of others have no business ranting themselves. Some people prefer to win by unfair advantage, rather than a match of faculties. As a person part black, you know this well. Mick's a film critic, for chrissakes. It's not like everyone reading him follows along blindly to his every opinion. Consider the scenario in which you call in to Rush Limbaugh's show and are cut off before you can defend or even make your point. Never mind that, he'd never put you on the air. Consider Mick's censure of you, note the similarity in the long, bitter finish, let the sour grapes fester in your gut, and then feel better in about 24 hours. Here you are on another blog, one with far more significance than the corporate click generator over there.
Soooooo, how bout this weather, huh?
Beautiful day. No more commenting, time to ride my bike. If you see a good looking guy on a red recumbent in Novato - wave!
thanks much too sense. off to work. wish i could get on that bike.
I take a vacation and come back to find this?
That film critic who has caused all this trouble is not worth reading very often. He is a reactionary with some hip habits (feminism among them, apparently).
On the speech -- Jindal the Jingo is a soft-spoken monster. (Sorry. That is my view.) Obama's impressive for a pragmatic moderate. Maybe, just maybe, before Obama's done some poor people in this country will get the health care they need and the education they deserve.
Haretal is lying about what LaSalle told him and sorry, it's not a free speech issue. It is one of abuse and Haranguetal was repeatedly warned, yet chose to ignore the warning. It is total bullshit to suggest that this was an attempt to silence his opinions, he violated the terms of usage and persisted in doing so. No one gives a rat's ass about whether Hartal is half black, half purple, or half day-glo, he is an insufferable twit.
I forgot to finish my point that, as much as I disagree with Rush, Imus, Mick or even hartal sometimes, I fully support their opportunity to be heard, to be rebutted, and even (gasp!) to be ignored. Sometimes a nice, bright spotlight works better than a hook, for all involved. I've had many comments disappear. And a few that I wished would. :)
Hartal, dear. Give it up. If you don't worship him, praise him and give him glory, you're unwelcome. It's that simple. If you wanna be a little rambunctious, this is the place. Trust me, it's better over here. Just try to add a little more color to your speeches and keep them kinda brief--some of us have only so much patience.
And, why as an oppressed black person, would you want to support Waspy corporatism--and a nasty corporation at that? They're ruthless bastards. I can't believe I'm actually saying this, but I feel sorry for liberal idiots that were stupid enough to sell their soul to the Hearse Corpse.
WV:harink
Lol, Oracle, gina, probono, Jane, amandapants, whatever your name is.
(that was at the deleted post)
Please, I am not Amandapants. Good Lord. I'm not nearly that foul...and far better looking.
Suza, this time it was a short trip, 2 days in NYC for a meeting with her company's biggest customer; it wasn't known to her when she went, but the customer was holding a meeting of its top 200 suppliers (out of about 1500).
I think you should rename this blog, ferret.
I did some analysis. There is one common denominator here.
Can you figure it out?
I think it would be one of the grand understatements of the 21st century that Mr. Hartal has had an opportnity to be heard. I'll presume that TS must have a reason for ignoring the fact that Hartal was banned for his abusiveness, not his views, perhaps he'll elaborate.
I'd add that dialogue between two commenters is rather different than that of a commenter and Mr. LaSalle: there are actually laws that protect MLS against slanderous and false assertions. Just a word to the wise. Mr. Hartal; you tread a very thin line on that, I'd be extremely careful with your characterizations when you are dealing with a "real" person.
I'll take a swing: the common denominator is Italian Spaniards with German names! Am I right? What do I win? ;-)
WV: canicat. and I am at that.
Too Sense seems to take a consistently radical approach to things. Perhaps Too Sense thinks that abusive posting can have good, disruptive effect. I sympathize. But, of course, I like graffiti, too.
Well, I think Hartal might be safe. Seeing how LaSalle is public and famous,I'm not so sure he can be slandered,or is it libeled, can he? Ultimately, ferret might be responsible, anyway. Besides, I would think Hartal, being a private citizen, would have a better case against defamation of character.
I'd love to Know Twinnie, what is it that Hartal did that you think is so slanderous, anyway?
Common denominator: No, not worshiping the same god. Being unmarriageable. Maybe Zoot is the exception.
"Did you see what I got kicked off for? I literally wrote that it's good to have vigorous debate about whether critics are missing new cultural references, have the facts wrong and what the status of undocumented immigrants should be.
That was the message that he kicked me off for.
And he has had me kicked off of SF Gate. "
hartal
.
Let me second the deranged twinfan here and say that I am 100% certain that you were not deleted for one particular comment or view, but rather for a pattern of being verbally abusive in your assertions. Some limits must be imposed if there is to be any sort of discussion that is not derailed by those who are uncivil in their manner. Unfortunately, Hartal - and this is my final attempt to reach you regarding this particular habit of yours - you have proven that you are not able to have a civil discussion in which you respond to other's opinions and to civilly agree to disagree. You persist in your absolutes in a really negative manner. Not everyone who disagrees with you is absolutely wrong and mentally defective. Maybe some are, but that argument is MUCH more effective if you are able to use it when it makes sense rather than every time you are trying to make your point.
I have said my peace about this issue. I'm done.
wv: achied
I am quite marriageable.
I wonder. Am I the only working-class person here?
Suza - gesundheit (sp?)
Gee, Suz, I don't read his stuff. It's that simple. Why are you offended by what you have control over. Block him--or don't you know how?
twin, while I don't necessarily disagree with you on any point, really, I'd have more respect for Mick if he a) defended himself against the accusations, and/or recognizing the futility of that, b) simply ignored hartal and let the rest of the posters a) pick up where Mick left off, and/or recognizing the futility of that, b) simply ignore hartal.
I say 'necessarily' because I think 'abusive' is a bit of a stretch, particularly as, from my own pov, I think hartal's barking up the right tree with regard to Mick's underlying motivations, and it's quite possible that Mick isn't even conscious of them (again, my own personal perspective). 'Disruptive'... I don't know. This is where the whole model of blogging differs from traditional, controlled delivery of a message *to* an audience. Sometimes topics prompt insightful affirmation, discussion or debate. Sometimes from post one, it's a random sampling of free associative interplay. Sometimes the two mingle with ease, sometimes uncomfortably so. Sometimes there's heat, and things typically cool off when there is... and (again, in my opinion) anonymity provides a buffer from escalation to the absurd when some posters seem to have only a '10' setting. The bottom line for me is that both Mick and hartal are opinionated and vocal imperfect human beings. I show Rush Limbaugh respect by calling him an asshole and refraining from physical violence against him. This makes me a Liberal to some, I suppose, although I know plenty of Conservatives who are similarly human. Do I think hartal stretches patience at times? Sure. I know I have the same effect on people. It's all just coffee talk, really. I'm sure Mick, in his local celebrity, has the occasional kook to be concerned with, no doubt. Words on a blog are a far cry from ticking packages and rustling bushes, though.
Are you married, lefty?
Lefty - I come from a pretty working-class/blue collar background. My dad was a warehouseman in the ILWU, part of where I get my commie union-loving traits. However, after consulting with my co-worker, given what I make and that I have no children, I am part of an endangered species - the middle class.
Ms. D'oh - just because I never said 'yes' doesn't mean I'm unmarriagable. I like to think that I just haven't met that right man yet. I'd rather wait than settle...
Uh-huh. Whatever you say.
I was just trying to see what we all had in common. What it is that draws us together at this point in time.
Don't you wonder why we keep coming back to this ongoing conversation (not this one about LaSalle)?
FH - Middle Class here too! My grands were very working class (cabinet maker, shoe maker, and cafeteria cook) but my dad made sure that we all went to college and my mom stayed at home and took care of us. Sometimes I wished that she would get a job, especially when I was a teen. lol.
I don't work with my hands, I work with my head. But I still have those roots. A beautiful pair of shoes can move me to spend ridiculous amounts of money. But they have to be really beautiful. Those are rare.
Lefty, you hit the nail on the head with regard to my posts. Of course it's not the only approach, and I'm sure many people find it trite, but I have had some success at persuasion by posing an absurd juxtaposition, or taking a devil's advocate stance, or combining extremities in a single thought. Frankly, I'm not much concerned with whether people like it... it's who I am; the way my own brain works ('That explains everything,' someone is no doubt saying, he added with parenthetical narcissism-- see what I mean?). That said, I do have some stake in a lot of the things I say. It's not like it's all for objective consideration. Case in point: many people assume I'm a poster of color, because of things I say about the 'white power structure'. Those who know I'm white (at least that's what I tell them... heh) say I'm 'self-loathing'. Perhaps it's white hubris that makes me set a higher standard for my own race. But that's another conversation...
Friends often tell me I am not working class because I went to college and continue to read, visit museums, and so forth. Of course, they are all liberal pin heads. Nice ones, however.
I think the dividing line is at the professional or managerial level. Nurses are working class, doctors are not. Laborers or clerks are, owners are not. That sort thing.
Sometimes the distinction is important. Most of my friends, however, are not working class.
The ILWU did some great things. Small wonder the shipping industry worked overtime to figure out how to mechanize ports and replace those troublesome dockworkers.
I used to know some old timers who worked with Harry Bridges, men and women. The women, of course, all had the same story.
Gina -- I am not presently married. You appear to be a lovely young woman. Too young for me, alas.
Lefty: EXTREMELY working class.
WV: blogr
Gina, I've been married before, I thought I mentioned that here. Perhaps you might explain what you mean by "unmarriageable."
TS, surely you must recognize that responding to Mr. Hartal is an exercise in futility, there is no time at which he is ever willing to simply "agree to disagree". And LaSalle has tried, rather valiantly I would add, to ignore Hartal, we've all seen H badger incessantly with no response from LaSalle.
Really, nothing works and I'll repeat: calling the host a cowardly liar is more than sufficient grounds for banishment...
Gina: you have it bassackwards: an anonymous commenter on a blog has no protection from slanderous or libelous remarks, one cannot show damage to a non-entity. "Hartal" is not a private citizen, Mr. LaSalle is. And as one, he is protected as we all are, in our "real" lives...
I enjoy companionship, but never felt much urge to marry or have children, probably due to doubt on my part that I could honor either responsibility with full commitment. It's a childless life of sin, for me.
lefty - I would disagree with you, ever so slightly, that all owners are not working class. People who own small businesses often work more than their employees for greater risk and less reward (at least, hopefully, only at first).
That's just my opinion - my dad owned a small grocery store that he expanded into several stores only to see them fail during the recession in the early 80's. It's the ultimate smack down, but I know he poured his heart and soul into those places. They place prominently in my childhood (it's where I learned to butcher meat)!
:)
You'd have to prove damages. And the Chron, being the sinking ship that it is, would have a very difficult time, don't you think? It's all in the proof, dear.
I simply meant by unmarriageable that we are all in various states of unmarriage.
Geez, little touchy about it? Act as if we're all lepers or something. Maybe we're just all really picky brats.
twin, I'm called a cowardly liar almost daily. It's how I maintain perspective in life. Mick's a big boy. I'm not worried about him. You're right about the futility, but when I go to the newsstand, I don't pick out the magazines I want to buy and then set the remainder on fire. Someone gets enjoyment out of 'Italian Cooking Quarterly', know what I mean?
From Wikipedia:
"A series of court rulings led by New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964) established that for a public official (or other legitimate public figure) to win a libel case, the statement must have been published knowing it to be false or with reckless disregard to its truth (also known as actual malice).
"Under United States law, libel generally requires five key elements. The plaintiff must prove that the information was published, the plaintiff was directly or indirectly identified, the remarks were defamatory towards the plaintiff's reputation, the published information is false, and that the defendant is at fault."
The above is is consistent with my general understanding of libel law in this country.
There is also a difference between stating something as an opinion and stating something as a fact (a distinction lost on certain individuals, as I've previously pointed out).
wv: polotere (the actress?)
And, that's the problem with the internet. You've got an anonymous person you're dealing with. For instance. My name is not really Jane Kaiser.
Many small business owners have a lot in common with working people. I was being quite reductive.
I am somewhat pleasantly surprised at the diversity here.
Not many people seem to remember the recession of the early 80s. The Reagan Recession, I have always heard it called. Most people talk about the Reagan years as if they were some sort of rebirth of the nation. I had to take a second job (in a food processing factory) to make ends meet in 82, 83.
Jon Lee Anderson said that after five years of research he found no evidence that Che killed innocents. By quoting an anonymous blogger, LaSalle said that Che killed innocents. He was just saying what he had to say to justify our govt's murder of him. So I called him cowardly for relying on an anonymous blogger to make a point he would not say himself. And I called it a lie that we know that Che killed innocents. And cowardly liar is abusive? My goodness. And it's true that I slipped into the expression cowardly liar because I had been watching The Wizard of Oz. So the whole thing is just harmless. And it was the image of that pathetic lion I had in mind when thinking of LaSalle
*
Why did LaSalle keep on deleting a message in which I said it's good to have debates about whether hostile criticism comes from critics who don't care to learn new cultural criticism and debates about the historical record and debates about the position of undocumented workers.
Because it's never a debate with you, it's always an attempted character assassination.
wv: sandrean (a feline reference?)
The point is not that LaSalle would pursue such a case, he surely would not. And the point is not that he would prevail. The point is that he does have some measure of protection, a person behind a "mask" does not.
Yes, Lasalle is a big boy, so is Hartal. I find his sniveling about his banishment far more childish than what got him the boot.
Which brings up another issue. Ferret deletes comments regularly. Why no outrage? Don't misunderstand, I know it's her right to do so, but some here don't seem to get that...
Please dsgonzale6 you have used many more abusive terms against me than I have against you. All one has to do is look at the exchange on undocumented immigrants at the Reagan thread. You think you are some sort of innocent? What does LaSalle want protection from? People telling him that he should not talk about vomit or caricature Jeremiah Wright or say that no one could seriously like SM? Maximum Strength--give me a break.
TF, you make a valid point, which is one reason why I post using a name that can easily identify me. Also, because of that lack of anonymity, I try not to post anything that I would be embarrassed to read quoted in a newspaper (I don't use brief-writing as a standard, that is too limiting), and usually do a decent job of self-editing.
Mr. hartal, your comments about Che seem a bit unworldly. Do you really know anything about the wars of national liberation that launched what people in the U.S. like to call "the 60s."
hartal. I'm going to tend to you, dear. Pretend I'm your mother. Now listen. The bad man at the Chron hasn't any patience for your arguments any longer. Neither does anyone else. So let it go. There are rules in this world that seem unfair, and maybe in your mind, it's true. But there is no reversing this issue. Now go find your coloring book and your crayons and go color some nice pictures, ok? You'll get over it sooner or later. This is a better sandbox to play in. The cats haven't filled it up with toxoplasmosis, fleas and mange yet.
Not talking about guerilla warfare, lefty. The comment was about the executions that he ordered. And I am not justifying them. But he does not seem to have killed innocents. They were all guilty of crimes which in a military situation are often met with death. Some were too young, even in a military situation, to face such punishment. And my point was that it makes no sense to condemn his quick trigger without understanding what effect the Arbenz overthrow had on him, so it's wrong causally and morally to be up in arms over Che and not up in arms over our crimes during the Cold War.
I'm on record as having expressed my "disapproval" of deleted posts on this blog, except by the author. It's not something I have any control over, and I'm not outraged over it, either here or on Mick's blog. But I do have much respect for those who, with the power and control, exercise mercy. It's not an argument I'd apply to *every* situation in life (gina), but this is not sticks or stones.
twin, like I say, I don't have much to disagree with you about this case, except for the final outcome, which, while not outside of Mick's power to achieve, represents to me the lesser of two acts of power.
There's a great scene in Pulp Fiction when Jules and Vincent are cleaning up the brain-spattered vehicle, where Vincent is talking about being like a race car in the red, and is ready to blow, and Jules gets tired of being hassled and says that if Vincent is a race car in the red, he (Jules) is a mushroom cloud-laying motherf***er. To put it another way, I'm not going to start a fight, but I sure as hell am going to finish it.
Excuse me, I just slipped into that expression while watching that guy get stuffed in the leaf shredder...
But you have called me that repeatedly, deranged twinfan Michael. You weren't told to stop the abuse. And you and dsgonzale6 have used much more abusive terms against me than cowardly lion--how pathetic. But you survived at SF Gate. And who gives a damn about LaSalle. Most of my posting is at the politcs blog. But I can't debate there. And that's bs.
Twin fan is such a sniveler. What's his big interest in protecting LaSalle--and over what? You mean to tell me that that big crybaby can dish stuff out and can't take it? Wah.
You know what I'd say? Bring it on...so sue me.
Idle threats wouldn't intimidate me. I'd love to know the truth about LaSalle, wouldn't you?
"what effect the Arbenz overthrow had on him"
United Fruit's takeover of Guatemala completely explains war time decisions sometime later, somewhere else? That is slightly bizzare. In any event, I actually prefer to avoid discussions about Che.
I've said this before, and I'll say it again: Hartal, you always start the personal attacks, so your whining about being abused rings hollow and false. Here's the genesis of the illegal immigration discussion. Note who is the first person to insult another person--twice!
"In today's WSJ Amar Bhidé argues against the need for the stimulus on the false grounds that unemployment benefits have been modernized to catch the indigent. That claim is in itself absurd. But the census here matters. If we don't count the people who have worked here without papers for years we will miss how much unemployment has really been created and how many people won't be able to access benefits of any kind.
Posted By: hartal | February 17 2009 at 05:52 PM
Let me get this right, my dear hartal. We need to count the unemployed amongst those who are here...shall we say...for lack of a better term...illegally? And you're stating they, too, should get unemployment benefits?
Not arguing with you.
Just wondering if that is what you're saying.
And please, don't cite articles from obscure or even mainstream blogs or articles.
Please, speak to me from your heart, soul and with original thoughts.
How do you, honestly, feel about this?
Posted By: TedSpe | February 17 2009 at 10:44 PM
I would say that you should first offer an original thought but I would be happy for you to just to maintain coherence over a paragraph.
Posted By: hartal | February 18 2009 at 12:13 AM
So, you respond to a question with an insult? Typical.
Posted By: dsgonzale6 | February 18 2009 at 12:26 AM
Ideally, everyone should be counted.
Posted By: Nberkeley | February 18 2009 at 04:41 AM
TedSpe, you need to think about it from a big picture economic standpoint. Illegal workers are still workers. They still produce products which are sold to other people. They still go out and spend the money they earn on food, clothing, housing, et cetera. Thus, when they are not counted as 'lost jobs', the full impact of the economic downturn is understated.
While illegal immigrants do not make up a major portion of the economy their impact is also not insignificant. Particularly given that they pay taxes on goods (sales, property, et cetera) and in many, not all, cases earnings (payroll and income) while generally NOT receiving most government benefits.
As to whether it would therefor be worthwhile (to the rest of us) to give them unemployment benefits to help keep them around to resume working after the downturn passes... on a strictly mercenary level no. Once the economy rebounds there will always be more people willing to come in and take those jobs.
Posted By: CBDunkerson | February 18 2009 at 05:28 AM
I see no problem with requiring legal residency status for unemployment benefits, or any other sort of safety-net benefits beyond public health protection.
Posted By: dsgonzale6 | February 18 2009 at 10:26 AM
Even if the workers without papers have paid unemployment insurance for many years? I can see that that there is a strong political argument againt paying out the benefit to those not here legally, but it seems quite harsh to say that one has *no* problem with leaving people hungry and cold after they have worked for years and possibly paid even payroll taxes.
We are many years away from a system of rights that belong to people as workers, not just citizens. But I do think we have to begin the dialogue.
Posted By: hartal | February 18 2009 at 01:06 PM
Technically, unemployment taxes are paid by the employer. Until the immigration laws are overhauled, there's no rational approach to the whole situation, but it seems to me that unemployment benefits aren't the kind of benefit that illegal immigrants should be able to access, unlike emergency health care.
Posted By: dsgonzale6 | February 18 2009 at 01:22 PM
Technically yes or rather for the purposes of accounting the insurance is coming out of the revenue of the business rather than wages. But the point is that many workers without papers created the income with which unemployment insurance has been and now that they are out of job have nothing to cushion them. So they go hungry and cold. So, dsgonzale6, I remain taken aback that you see no problem at all with requiring legal residency for unemployment benefits or no reason at all for why they should be able to access benefits. Pretty cold-hearted, I would have to say.
Posted By: hartal | February 18 2009 at 05:16 PM
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=35924#comments
hartal, it is a double standard. It's like when that tourist recently wrestled the knife away from one of his assailants and stabbed and killed him, the comments were all 'Yeah! He had it coming!' And I said, 'Yeah, if someone tries to rob you with a knife, they shouldn't be surprised if you stick them with it.' And they all said 'Right on!' And I said, 'And if anyone invades this country with guns, you better believe I'm going to take a gun to them!' And they all said 'Right on!' And I said, 'They deserve to die, the invading bastards!' And they all said 'Right on!' And I said, 'And if we invade another country like Iraq with our guns and our guys are killed, they deserve to die, the bastards!' And they all said, 'WTF?'
With apologies to our dear hostess, I just felt a need to set the record straight.
So, you should be used to it... Anyway, I did attempt to get you reinstated. BTW, as I found out myself, and Eve Batey explained to me, SFGate does not have software that would enable selective banishment. You're out, pal.
Ted Spe's comments about my being subhuman started in last year; then he went on attacks about my total lack of originality. There was carry over from the other blogs that you don't quote. I quoted Ted Spe's tirades (subhuman, moron, vermin, etc) against me that came months before my sharp and nasty replies.
And you were routed in the debate on undocumented workers.
Post a Comment