I noticed, in looking up where within AZ his district is, that it happens to include the Show Low area. And that rang a bell, because, in that ridiculous article about the so-called RAMs (Raging Angry Moderates, I think?) that ran recently, one of (if not the only) the author's folksy folks he quoted was from Show Low. Not that I think there's any significance to this, but it's an amusing coincidence.

Posted at February 22, 2008 7:35 PM in response to Breaking: GOP Rep Renzi Indicted

• Reminds me of an idea I had in the run-up to the 2004 elections, with first Gen. Clark and then Kerry in mind. I was thinking that, to help set himself apart from the current administration, with the yellowcake SOTU address a bit fresher in the public mind at the time, he ought to make a campaign promise that he would swear "to tell the truth, and nothing but the truth" before each SOTU address. I still think it might have been a good idea, but I guess we'll never know now. It still could be a good idea for the future, though.
• Also, I've long thought that we start teaching children that it's OK to lie the first time we tell them a present came from Santa Claus, or those eggs came from the Easter Bunny. What else are they going to think when they find out otherwise? Obviously, it's OK to lie in a good cause, like, umm, all the good that comes out of the children thinking there's some omniscient elf bringing presents to them if they've been good. Hmm, that might be it. Lying is justified if it can coerce your children into behaving well in expectation of getting presents come Christmas time, as opposed to the lump of coal. That seems like a pretty low bar. And the Easter Bunny? No point to it at all that I can see, other than having a chuckle at our children's naivete. "Suckers!"
• I also was thinking that at that point in the VP interview, Russert should've been going, "WTF? Hey, Dick, there's this thing called a 'government' that you might want to pay a bit of attention to, seeing as how you're running a big piece of it. Take a look. You might want to read the Constitution sometime, if you haven't yet, too." Well, I'm sure he wouldn't get that carried away on camera, but something to that effect.

Posted at September 11, 2006 1:20 PM in response to Why Are Elected Officials Allowed to Lie?

Minor nitpick: It's "Forrest", not "Forest", Gump.

Posted at August 14, 2006 10:58 PM in response to How Not to Degrade Hizbullah

"The Iranians attacked us, Saddam didn't"

Well no it wasn't the Iranians, by the usual count of 9-11 hijackers the people that attacked America were .. oh golly gee .. Saudis. Yeah. Saudis. By a big margin. Not Iranians. Nope. Saudis. Sunni Saudis.

I had a similar response to that line at first, but in context, I think it's referring to the embassy hostages in '79-'81. On the other hand, if you're going to go that far back, you might have to revisit the USS Starke "incident"....

Posted at September 24, 2005 3:10 PM in response to Endangering America

vmckimmey: I know in 2004, there was a Prof. Kennedy running against him (I met him at a Clark meetup), and he did fairly well against Sensenbrenner, considering the district. But what a district! I live less than a mile from it, and while the area around the University here is pretty liberal-leaning, and voted heavily against him, the more suburban areas are pretty well sewn up.

From what I hear, I think Kennedy's planning to run against him again in 2006. Maybe the current trend in sentiment will be enough to tip it over.

Posted at September 22, 2005 8:09 PM in response to Is This the Reason?