Powell's seems to have miscataloged it. It's not in the children's section.
From the Powell's publisher comments:
But perhaps most of all, we are fed up because deep down we know how great America has always been.
What do you mean "we", kemosabe?
" What kind of nation are we becoming? I fear it's the very kind the Colonists fought against."
anticolonialism comes to teh GOP?
Those Who Think Rick Perry Does Not Have a Chance to Win Are Unfortunately Very Mistaken ...FDL diary
1. Perry has a well-seasoned group of campaign volunteers who work their butts off for him. Perry's campaign is a people campaign where people contact people in person, like neighbors.2. Perry has billions of dollars behind him.
3. Perry has appeal as a "man of the people"
4. Perry has the creative ability and adaptability to create his own circus and adjust his message as he goes. He knows better than to be at the mercy of mainstream media pundits and he will not put himself in the position to be their victim. He will work outside them and skate by with his tremendous talent to build strong coalitions. That's part of what his prayer meeting on Aug 6 is all about.
5. Perry knows that you build your coalitions, establish your base, and then with that wind behind your sails, you announce your candidacy.
you build your coalitions
The Texas governor is reaching out to his Latino supporters with a new CD of crooner hits titled Perry: ¿Cómo?
From the above link at #4
Here is my prediction: If Perry does decide to run as a Republican candidate, he will win the nomination. If Obama is the Democratic Candidate for president and he treats Perry in a dismissive Harvard-educated superior manner, Obama will lose. The American people are just fed up enough with the Washington snobs to elect someone like Rick Perry.
But this will happen anyway. Perry will say something heartfelt and modest, like "Jesus is my favorite philosopher," and the left blogosphere will ROTFL, giving Perry a ten point bounce. Obama will fire two irreplaceable people, a woman and a black, on his staff who snickered, and will be seen as weak and pandering. Ten point drop.
My last prediction, that Obama would switch parties, has not yet happened. My new one is that Obama, after the next financial crash and GDx10 in spring 2012, will withdraw his candidacy somewhere around July, leaving Russ a clear path to the nomination, and annihilation in November. Romney/Perry or Perry/Bachman is our future
Not that I think Obama will withdraw or face a real primary fight. On Perry, I have no idea what will happen.
7:Yes. He might run for Governor against Walker after a successful recall petition, I suppose. Is there anyone else out there. Cuomo? God I'm depressed.
After GFC II and Lesser Depression part deux kicks in the spring, Obama will extend the Obama tax cuts for two more years, with some argument about growth and not wanting to hamstring the next gov't; and go full bore on some version on Catfood Commisson, cutting everything, including the home mortgage exemption. And another new war.
And then announce his non-candidacy, saying 20 years of serfdom is balanced with selling our children to Wellpoint.
You read it here first.
Is there anyone else out there.
Anthony Weiner has a lot of free time these days.
You read it here first.
And last. Not only will this not happen -- you will not predict it again.
11: I messed up! Because I know I'm not supposed to comment on weekends!
6.2 But this will happen anyway. Perry will say something heartfelt and modest, like "Jesus is my favorite philosopher," and the left blogosphere will ROTFL, giving Perry a ten point bounce. Obama will fire two irreplaceable people, a woman and a black, on his staff who snickered, and will be seen as weak and pandering. Ten point drop.
Firedoglake finds and publishes the Whitey tape! Game over!
Eh, I don't think this is going to be a very surprising election. Obama and Biden will easily win renomination. Romney or Huckabee will get the Republican nod, with Bachmann or Pawlenty or someone of that ilk as Veep. The election will be fairly close, but Obama will win. The Dems will take back a chunk of House seats, but not enough for a majority, and the Senate will stay pretty evenly split.
I think the status quo is very appealing to the Eastern Bankers, and Eastern Bankers make the presidency.
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/rick-perry-2012-presidential-bid-5937058
Is this the thread for irresponsible speculation?
Mr. Perry said, urging activists not to separate economic and social priorities
This is pointing to the seeming division in the Republican party between those 'serious' leaders/candidates who focus on the economy, on the running of the country (like a business, perhaps Chipotle!), and those more fringe-y values-oriented candidates and the voters they appeal to. There's crossover between these groups, but it seems like a real distinction.
If Perry were to try to take on Romney, it wouldn't be enough to be just another Bachmann, focusing chiefly on values: he'd want to be *both* the economy guy and the Christian values guy. Maybe he could win the nomination that way.
But isn't it the conventional wisdom that it's independents who must be won over in the national election? And aren't independents notoriously skittish about too much Christian social values talk? Perry's Day of Prayer thing -- in a football stadium or something? -- is creepy.
Perry would, if he joined the race, be frankly the only thing close to a serious candidate in the Republican field, for the reasons noted in 4. And he would be a serious challenger to Obama.
16.4: He would presumably just talk about the Christian values stuff with some audiences and the economics stuff with others, as the Republicans have traditionally done.
I take issue with item (4) in comment 4. The mainstream media pundits won't leave him alone; he'll have to address them. Now, I don't know how good he is or would be in parrying their questions, or whether they'd soft-pedal such questions.
As I said, he might be able to muster a strong showing in the Republican primaries, but in the end it's all about how well people think he'd do in the national against Obama, and there his hypothetical self-created circus of support wouldn't suffice.
I do think it remains a question whether the Republican power structure thinks this really is a winnable election, so that they'll seek to put forward their strongest national candidate, or whether they'd prefer to wait for 2016, in which case they'd put up a show figure to be thrown under the bus.
2012 Feb 7, drinking games with clinging bitters. Mark it on your calendar now.
Oh, further: it may well be that the Republican goal for 2012 is to retain control of the House and try to take the Senate, so that they're looking for a strong enough Presidential candidate to pull people to the polls in order to garner votes for the downticket races, whether or not the Presidential candidate can actually win against Obama.
That would argue for a convincing, charismatic demagogue as Republican nominee, not some weak-tea candidate who might not pull people to the polls.
That would argue for a convincing, charismatic demagogue as Republican nominee,
I doubt anybody who has ever run for the nomination didn't think of themselves as a convincing, charismatic demagogue with the possible exception of Kucinich who seems to have decided that winning the babe was about as good as he could do.
MONCHEECHEE MONCHEECHEE
I'M SO SOFT AND CUDDLY!
drinking games with clinging bitters
I assume that clinging bitters are best mixed with gin?
||
A new favorite philosophy and pop-culture blog, "Unemployed Negativity"
The second shocked me with the insight that the current generation of twenty-somethings are erasing and rewriting history just as the Soviets or Mao's China did. The Cuban Missile Crisis will now forever be, not a conflict of expansionist socio-political systems, but just another struggle over tactics within oppressed minorities and subalterns.
Shit like this blog doesn't make me feel smart, quite the opposite, though it makes most of what is on my blogroll look really dumb. But it does seem useful.
|>
The second shocked me with the insight that the current generation of twenty-somethings are erasing and rewriting history just as the Soviets or Mao's China did.
This sentence seems to be on the verge of being self-contradictory. It uses an extremely tenuous historical analogy to criticize people for being careless about their historical analogies.
25:Do we really want to go here? It was, as always, a bit of a joke. But with a gain of truth, in that anyone watching the movie will have at best two competing narratives rattling in their heads, and more exciting one may get the foreground. Thus it was in revisionist states, where people had to juggle "truths" Poor Winston Smith.
Currently taking a break between volumes of old-fogy Cambridge Japan with state-of-the-academe Blackwell Companion. The Blackwells are open and just a little disconcerted by the areas that are no longer being covered as new trends gain prominence. Thus maybe it always, but these changes do have consequences.
In addition, is there a limit, individually and globally, in the amount of information that can be usefully absorbed? I swear, I am starting to believe Dollhouse, however flawed and awkward, is the smartest series ever. The linked article is strongly recommended
To quote Franco Berardi, "The worker does not exist any more as a person. He is just the interchangeable producer of microfragments of recombinant semiosis which enters into the continuous flux of the network."
I almost pasted the above over at Quiggin's reformist thread, but I don't care enough anymore.
There is thus a certain sense in which Dollhouse presents a new version of the apocalypse, one that is explicitly technologically and political rather than ecological. Thus, breaking with the pattern of contemporary popular culture where the apocalypse is either ecological or sublime, unexplained. In Dollhouse the apocalypse is brought about by the excess of information over subjectivity*. This is the apocalyptic vision shared by such thinkers as Bernard Stiegler who point to a breakdown of the basic conditions of subjectivation brought about by the speed of communication and new technologies. To quote Berardi again, "The great majority of humanity is subjected to the invasion of the video-electronic flux, and suffers the superimposition of digital code over the codes of recognition and of identification of reality that permeate organic cultures."
If "subjectivity is alienation" then what we have is not really "information overload" but infinite opportunities to objectify ourselves in multiple identities and instant connectivity. The cozy huddling of lemmings.
It was, as always, a bit of a joke.
For what it's worth I considered responding with, "big words from somebody who's claiming that Dirk Nowitzki is a top-ten all time player."
That seemed like a funnier response, but I didn't want to divert the thread into another NBA discussion.
21: with the possible exception of Kucinich who seems to have decided thatwinning the babe having the morally and legally correct stance on the issues of the day was about as good as he could do.
What a sucker that Kucinich was.
That's true. Taking the morally correct stance usually results in far more pain.
21: I doubt anybody who has ever run for the nomination didn't think of themselves as a convincing, charismatic demagogue
I'm not talking about the nomination! Rather, the *winner* of the nominating primaries, the actual Republican nominee who goes up against Obama. That person has to convince not just their base but the power brokers that s/he is a charismatic blah-blah, according to this theory that all the Republicans might want to do is get people to the polls for their downticket votes.
Not to yammer on about this, but in case you need more about why Rick Perry is problematic as a viable national candidate, Ed Kilgore at TNR.
The guy is holding hands with John Hagee. That's just a bit much.
My final contribution to what's become my monologue on this matter: another piece in TNR on the in-fighting within the Republican party. Relevant passages:
Probably the most prominent group targeting Romney is FreedomWorks, the Dick Armey-led conservative organization
And at the end:
But what of the possibility that these attacks could backfire and end up benefiting President Obama? FreedomWorks' Steinhauser says this isn't their top concern.
Two things: I'm pretty sure the RNC finds itself underfunded, and since the Citizens Untied decision, this country has effectively privatized elections. Hence FreedomWorks et al.'s relative power.
And: I'm not sure these people are interested in winning the election. It's a long game, I guess (and I tend to think a losing battle), a little disconnected from current reality.
I don't know, but 538 has been tweeting about this and he still think Romney is the favorite with Pawlenty in 2nd. He has Perry in third.
Also, Citizens United would have a much smaller effect on the relative strength of the RNC vs. the other groups if everyone was cheating on the "independent" part of "independent expenditures."
33: Perry hasn't even declared yet, if he even will. What on earth would 538 be basing this on? There haven't been any polls in which Perry is an option, have there? Maybe there have.
Frankly, all I care about is that Obama wins reelection. Republican infighting is a sidebar, but important -- I'm chiefly interested in their long game there, since they're pandering to and cultivating and firing up the misinformed.
Romney is the favorite with Pawlenty in 2nd. He has Perry in third.
That's a depressing sentence. The Republican field really is a disaster this year, isn't it?
36: I read it on twitter. It must be true.
IIRC, the favorites back in June 2007 were Romney, McCain, and Giuliani. As far as domestic policy goes, think of what those people then represented: cap and trade, HRC, and immigration reform with a path for citizenship for illegal immigrants. Now think of what Pawlenty, Perry, and the current incarnation of Romney say they're for. Also a sharp move to the right on Medicare, Medicaid, and even taxes.
For those who are making the FDL fuck Obama, he's just the same argument, just think: on domestic policy he's about the same as Gore back in 2000, while the Republicans are well to the right of Bush during his election campaign. Either they're complete idiots who haven't a clue about contemporary US politics, or they're deliberately lying in favor of a 'heighten the contradictions' strategy.
||
***Spoilers***
Baby dragons! Awwwww...
I would post a picture, but there is the fireproof naked lady they are cuddling and cooing....awww
...and they will burn castles and armies at her command.
And she will so command.
|>
32: That piece demonstrates to me that TNR, or at least Kilgore, still doesn't understand the conservative movement. Rick Perry's "weaknesses" are supposed to be that he's hypocritical on policy, provides poor public services in his home state, is given to corrupt sweetheart insider corporate deals and is not particularly competent. Has Ed Kilgore not noticed by now that this is a description of the Republic Party? Has he really not noticed by now that the GOP runs not on coherent policy positions and interest in the welfare of the general public, but on the exploitation of tribal affinities and wishful-thinking economics? Kilgore is fantasizing if he thinks Republican primary voters are going to turn away from Perry merely on account of his being hypocritical on policy. The only thing that could hurt him would be if he had done something even remotely positive for the poor and the general public in his state.
McCain did repudiate John Hagee... and he also lost traditional GOP strongholds. Rick Perry's embrace of theocrats might hurt him in a general election -- it depends on how much of the Christian Right's strength has really eroded -- but it won't hurt him in a GOP primary. The trend of movement conservatism is almost always towards normalizing today what was "radical" yesterday.
The trend of movement conservatism is almost always towards normalizing today what was "radical" yesterday.
With the important exception of race, gender, sexual orientation and sexual mores. On those issues they've been dragged kicking and screaming by changing social attitudes.
39: For those who are making the FDL fuck Obama, he's just the same argument
I don't think anybody here is making that argument except Bob.
As for the Republicans, I have no idea what they're doing. They're on a losing track demographically. All they can really do is get out the vote among conservatives (and suppress the vote among likely Democrats).
Here, no.
43.2. I expect that in the short run they're expecting to increase their share of the white vote. In the long run, assimilation and deliberate Repub strategy will make 3rd plus generation Latiinos just as white as Italians.
44.2 In my experience, a lot of 3G Latinos are ALREADY as white as Italians, for most intents and purposes. The question is what happens when there are a lot more 3G Latinos around. Is there sort of a reverse-assimilation effect, where La Raza can actually mean something important to upwardly mobile, non-activist types? It will be interesting to see.
42: Inasmuch as those attitudes have required them to build better dog-whistles and make subtler use of tokenism. But even then, anti-abortion and homophobia are still bring out the base issues and the racism underlying much of the radical anti-Obama sentiment is only just barely camouflaged.
anti-abortion and homophobia are still bring out the base issues and the racism underlying much of the radical anti-Obama sentiment is only just barely camouflaged.
Lord knows this is true. I listened to bits and pieces of speeches from this past weekend's Republican Leadership Conference, and the racist (in particular) dog-whistles were all over the place. Barely camouflaged, as you say. A bit stunning, actually.
Though they did yank that Obama impersonator comedian off the stage.
44.2, 45: Doesn't it seem that the Republicans' anti-labor stance lately is a serious problem for them? Among however-much-assimilated Latinos or Italians or any other ethnicities?
49: Republicans are pro-labor. "If you get pregnant, you should have to go into labor."
The second shocked me with the insight that the current generation of twenty-somethings are erasing and rewriting history
Jonathan Mostow is part of the current generation of 20 somethings? If you poked your head out of your cocoon for a moment you'd realise that entertainers have been rewriting history to make a better story since Herodotus and politicians have been rewriting history to justify their ideologies since Moses. What's interesting?
Don't spoil it, chris, I'm still chuckling at the suggestion that these ignorant Stalinists we call "young people" will apparently come to believe that Magneto was involved in the Cuban Missile Crisis.
But with a gain of truth, in that anyone watching the movie will have at best two competing narratives rattling in their heads, and more exciting one may get the foreground.
go full bore on some version on Catfood Commisson, cutting everything, including the home mortgage exemption. And another new war
You're not a great one for reviewing predictions in mid-course, are you?
Not unexpected of course, but insane nonetheless.
Further to my 43.last: All they can really do is get out the vote among conservatives (and suppress the vote among likely Democrats).
People are aware of the latter, right? See E.J. Dionne's column in the WaPo if not.
55: It's predictable; that's the language they use in response to everything they don't like.
On the other hand, glittering is fucking stupid.
Yes. I can't imagine being mad enough to throw stuff but not mad enough to throw something that would hurt or smell or stain. Except at a wedding, I suppose.
Most people get angry at weddings, right?
59: It occurred to me at a recent wedding that I've never been at a wedding where the officiant did that, "If anyone knows any reason this couple shouldn't wed" thing, and I wondered if anyone actually included that in the wedding program. But I suppose if one were expecting to raise an objection and didn't get the opportunity, that would certainly make one angry.
But no matter how angry, you only throw rice (or bird seed, if you're the kind to buy absurd warnings and not want to see what an exploding bird looks like.)
My in-laws were plenty angry with each other during my first wedding and got separated almost immediately afterwards. But that really didn't have anything to do with our wedding and was more just "We'll postpone the plainly inevitable so as not to disrupt the daughter's wedding."
While that may not be a universally doomed strategy, successfully executing it was well beyond their abilities.
True story: My brother was so drunk at my wedding reception that he couldn't find my car to decorate it when he was the one who parked it.
My sister-in-law found our wedding so stressful that she puked in the bushes before the reception. She seems to like me okay now, but I don't think she approved at the time.
not want to see what an exploding bird looks like
I didn't want to see what an exploding bird looked like in the rear-view mirror, but I found out yesterday when a little bird flew right in front of my car, which was traveling 70mph at the time. (To make matters worse, I happened to be listening to this warbler episode of Radiolab at the time.)
the shooting-a-frozen-chicken-into-jet-engines thing is one of those things i google youtbe ever 6 months.
It occurred to me at a recent wedding that I've never been at a wedding where the officiant did that, "If anyone knows any reason this couple shouldn't wed" thing, and I wondered if anyone actually included that in the wedding program.
It's ubiquitous in the UK, I think; it's certainly part of the ceremony at every wedding I've been to (and that's COS, COE, RC and civil).
Awesome humorous interlude on Wikipedia:
Saltwater crocodiles are capable of explosive bursts of speed when launching an attack from the water. Stories of crocodiles being faster than a race horse for short distances across the ground are little more than urban legend. At the water's edge, however, where they can combine propulsion from both feet and tail, eyewitness accounts are rare.[emphasis added]
It's part of the default civil ceremony and the Service for the Solemnisation of Matrimony in the CofE. I suspect this is the case also in the CofS. As far as I can see the law (Statute and Canon) is all about requirements to publish banns before the ceremony rather than during it, so it may be required by Common Law, or it may simply be tradition.
I don't know what would happen in the UK if you wrote your own script and left it out. I don't know anybody who's tried.