Name that Vice-Presidential Candidate

What politician, whose name is currently being kicked around for vice president under McCain, said this?:

"If you go back to 2000, when I helped the president in the campaign, I said that I was, in effect, kind of Libertarian on this issue, and meaning by that that I have been concerned about a government role in this issue."

reason contributor and Denver Post columnist David Harsanyi has the answer.

Update: The Wash Post is reporting that Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform and the "Leave Us Alone Coalition" has said that Condoleezza Rice would "would be a great president....[and a] great vice president."

Comments

Elemenope | April 8, 2008, 9:35am | #

It would be foolish (foolish, I say!) to pick her as VP. Not only are many southern republcians hesitant to vote black (or female), but also it would prevent the party from using all the sexist or race-baiting ad techniques that will be necessary for them to defeat either of the dems.

Oh, and she's pro-choice.

Stupid, stupid pick.

John | April 8, 2008, 9:36am | #

"Attempting to understand where Rice stands on policy is, in fact, an exasperating job, as they do not seem to actually exist on record."

Harsanyi needs an editor.

Warren | April 8, 2008, 9:38am | #

Rice? Are you kidding. Condoleezza Rice is about as libertarian as a Schnauzer. I'd just as soon have Jerry Rice as VP.

david harsanyi | April 8, 2008, 9:42am | #

John -- Sadly, I have one.

joe | April 8, 2008, 9:45am | #

Rice took a beating on the right wing for saying, in the aftermath of the Jeremiah Wright debacle, that racism has historically been a problem in the United States; that its effects can still be seen today; and that we have difficulty talking about this issue.

For some reason, these obvious and mild observations rendered her wholly unacceptable to a lot of Republicans, a dangerous black radical who is insufficiently grateful that her ancestors were enslaved.

And how deluded is that columnist?

A Rice pick would also reek of identity politics — the type of positioning the right typically decries. See, I wouldn't have thought that selecting the sitting Secretary of State - one who's been on the job for an entire presidential term, after having previously served as National Security Advistor - would be an act of tokenism. I see this a lot on the right; people so passionately opposed to racial tokenism that, when they look at a black political figure, all they can see in a token, regardless of her record, resume, and history.

Yet, with plenty of gifted African- Americans and women to pick from Yes, think of all of those women and black people in the Republican Party who are substantially more qualified that Rice. Ummmmmm...

Abdul | April 8, 2008, 9:50am | #

it would prevent the party from using all the sexist or race-baiting ad techniques that will be necessary for them to defeat either of the dems

I don't know about that. She could be like McCain's Robin Quivers.

shrike | April 8, 2008, 9:56am | #

Yeah, despite the libertarian angle, I don't see how Rice works for the all-important base of the GOP that Karl Rove worked so hard to "energize" in the 2004 election - greasy-headed rednecks.

Lamar | April 8, 2008, 9:57am | #

Rice is a poor choice for the very reason that she carries the stink of Bush on her. Wow, I didn't mean for that to sound so dirty....

David | April 8, 2008, 9:59am | #

On abortion, the driving issue for social conservatives, Rice told a reporter in 2005, "If you go back to 2000, when I helped the president in the campaign, I said that I was, in effect, kind of Libertarian on this issue, and meaning by that that I have been concerned about a government role in this issue."

Couple that with McCain's desire for perma-war and you have a ringing endorsement from Donderooooooooooooooo!

joe | April 8, 2008, 10:00am | #

Condoleeza Rice's resume in public service is significantly more weighty than John Edwards'.

Four years as NSA and four more as Sec. of State vs. Six years a Senator.

I never once heard John Edwards described as a "token," despite the fact that he was clearly chosen because he could tawk lahk this to folks in Carolahna and part of Ohio.

I don't think "reeks of tokenism" means anything else in that sentence than "is black and female."

Stretch | April 8, 2008, 10:01am | #

Joe, regardless of her qualifications, there's no question that picking Condi for VP will certainly be seen as tokensim during this election. That's not going to help McCain to get elected.

bigbigslacker | April 8, 2008, 10:04am | #

shrike, I think you meant "nappy headed hos".

joe | April 8, 2008, 10:07am | #

You're probably right, Stretch. It would be "seen as tokenism."

That columnist certainly sees it that way.

Stretch | April 8, 2008, 10:21am | #

In general, the VP is a token position, chosen primarily to mine votes. If she's not going to help him secure a voting block, she'll be chosen to counteract the historic nature of the Dem candidate. In essence, she really would be a token.

Of course, in McCain's case he probably needs to choose someone voters feel comfortable enough with to assume the presidency if he keels over.

shrike | April 8, 2008, 10:28am | #

There are indications that Obama will choose a high-profile woman to placate the Hillary supporters, so Rice would be neutralized in terms of tokenism. And Rice is definitely not "nappy", in fact, she is nicely coiffed and may even pull in some of the pervo/B&D vote if she keeps it up with the thigh-high boot look. THAT would cut into the Dem base!

sage | April 8, 2008, 10:30am | #

She may not be the best politician, but she'll bring home the gold in the Olympics.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 10:34am | #

joe, do you have a point or are you just flailing about because your hangover is a mean one?

LarryA | April 8, 2008, 10:35am | #

Of course, in McCain's case he probably needs to choose someone voters feel comfortable enough with to assume the presidency if he keels over.

Given the number of candidates I'd rather vote for than McCain, I don't see that as a limiting factor.

For me, the real question is, is Condi stupid enough to subject herself to campaigning and possibly serving as VP under McCain? I doubt it.

Too bad, as she is articulately pro Second Amendment. That’s something McCain desperately needs, particularly with D.C. v. Heller looming in the middle of the campaign’s home stretch.

kinnath | April 8, 2008, 10:36am | #

I expect John McCain to ask Dick Chenney to help him pick a running mate . . . .

semm | April 8, 2008, 10:39am | #

In terms of bringing in people who might ordinarily not vote for McCain i guess you can say it might not be a strategic choice. But I really like her as a pick. I hope McCain selects her. I also agree with Joe, there's no way you can look at her resume and say 'token' unless you are so utterly cynical that you can't see a good candidate except through the lens of race.

joe | April 8, 2008, 10:48am | #

joe, do you have a point or are you just flailing about because your hangover is a mean one?

joe | April 8, 2008, 10:49am | #

joe, do you have a point or are you just flailing about because your hangover is a mean one?

Yes, Episiarch, I do. As opposed to you. I've made a point - the one Stretch figured out and responded to - and it has something to do with Condaleeza Rice, the Vice-Presidency, the election, and tokenism.

Try sounding out each word; maybe that would help.

thoreau | April 8, 2008, 10:51am | #

Rice, for all of her faults, is less repugnantly incompetent than a lot of other people in that administration. Singling her out as a token puts me in the incredibly uncomfortable position of having to defend her.

There are so many perfectly good reasons to detest her, why should anybody have to trot out the "token" talk?

joe | April 8, 2008, 10:51am | #

Semm, would you mind helping out Episiarch?

He's about 1/3 as smart as he thinks he is, and is really having trouble with what I wrote.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 10:52am | #

How many shots was it, joe? I'll bet it was epic.

Cracker's Boy | April 8, 2008, 10:53am | #

"reeks of tokenism" = "is black and female."

like

"racist" = "white male".

While I don't expect to vote for McCain*, I would be MORE likely to vote for him if Condi was his running mate.

CB
*The Libertarian Party chooses NOT to field ANY candidate.

joe | April 8, 2008, 10:55am | #

How many shots was it, joe? I'll bet it was epic.

joe | April 8, 2008, 10:56am | #

How many shots was it, joe? I'll bet it was epic.

So far, I've taken two shots at you. Now this makes three.

And while it was a pretty obvious beat-down, I'd reserve the term "epic" for whuppings that take a little more effort.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 10:58am | #

Considering the trouble you're having mastering the posting system here at reason, I'm going to go with "20". Bushmills? Jameson?

Warty | April 8, 2008, 10:58am | #

She's a big Browns fan. She has my ringing endorsement.

joe | April 8, 2008, 11:02am | #

How badly must one be pwned to think that speculating about how hung over one's pwner must be seems like a good way to save face?

Any luck penetrating my incredibly difficult point?

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 11:07am | #

Wow, two "I've won/pwned" posts within 3 posts of one another. Do you ever feel any embarrassment, or are you beyond oblivious?

short, fat bastard | April 8, 2008, 11:12am | #

Yesterday Edward . . . Today joe . . . death to another interesting thread.

garth bater | April 8, 2008, 11:12am | #

For once I find myself agreeing with joe, who makes a good point re: Condi and tokenism above and is now being inexplicably accused of alcoholism (well, he is part Irish).

joe | April 8, 2008, 11:14am | #

Oh, heavens, no! Rubbing your face in it when you jerk with outrage at every slight to John McCain and the Republicans is just so much fun.

Do I feel embarrassed when I slap your obtuse whining down repeatedly? No. Not at all.

Back atcha, though: is it even a little embarrassing to write the comment "do you have a point," and then see several other people responding and discussing that very point, without having an difficulty figuring it out?

That's the sort of thing I'd find embarrassing.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 11:19am | #

Rubbing your face in it when you jerk with outrage at every slight to John McCain and the Republicans is just so much fun.

Is this a joke or are you really this stupid?

Don't answer that, I already know. Anyone who rips on you for your man-crush on Obama must be a Republican, right? It's like a time warp: joe can only think in partisan terms. Good to know you never change and neither do your thought processes.

joe | April 8, 2008, 11:24am | #

garth bater,

Since the "tokenism" charge is so obviously inapplicable, how do you explain such a thing?

Obviously, the inability to see through race is one answer, but it's probably just a pretext.

I find it more likely that the real problem is that Rice was, with Powell, in the less-insaely-neoconservative faction of the Bush cabinet, across the table from Cheney and Rumsfeld. She wanted to "talk to evil," she paid attention to what the professionals in the State Department were saying about post-war Iraq. Certainly, once The Decider made the call, she carried out his policies, but everything I've seen about the workings of the administration suggests that she was the target of a pretty intense effort to marginalize her in the decision-making process.

joe | April 8, 2008, 11:29am | #

It's like a time warp: joe can only think in partisan terms.

You do realize this is a tread in which I'm defending a prominent Republican, right?

Oh, yeah, I forgot; no, you don't realize that. My point eluded you.

Kolohe | April 8, 2008, 11:29am | #

Rice, for all of her faults, is less repugnantly incompetent than a lot of other people in that administration.

I disagree, she's more. Additionally, she not even a good enough politically hack to be good at infighting to get her way. Plus, she's basically the only one left besides Cheney and Bush themselves.


This is why she shouldn't be VP; if she was associated with success (like for instance like Powell pre-2003), she would make an excellent choice - for Romney. (An alternate dimension successful Rice would still not 'balance out' McCain due to too much congruence in perceived skill sets.)

Other Matt | April 8, 2008, 11:31am | #

I find it more likely that the real problem is that Rice was, with Powell, in the less-insaely-neoconservative faction of the Bush cabinet, across the table from Cheney and Rumsfeld. She wanted to "talk to evil," she paid attention to what the professionals in the State Department were saying about post-war Iraq.

Gawd it is funny to watch joe trying to deal with a black woman conservative. I'm sure the froth is all over the keyboard.

And while it was a pretty obvious beat-down, I'd reserve the term "epic" for whuppings that take a little more effort.

You know, without exception, anyone who uses the number of physical violence descriptions as joe does is about incapable of anything physical. Do you feel big and bad when you talk about physically beating someone? I'd love to hear how you talk to all the people in the mean ole nasty 'hood where you run to get away from all them (other) white people, telling them how you slapped them around, etc.

That's the sort of thing I'd find embarrassing.

No, joe, you have no shame, it takes intelligence and honor to have shame. You have neither.

joe | April 8, 2008, 11:32am | #

Kolohe,

Perhaps the only foreign policy success of this administration was its diplomatic offensive surrounding the anti-Syrian protests in Lebanon. That unusual bit of competence had Rice's fingerprints all over it.

Ditto Ukraine. Political philosophy aside, she was a decent Secretary of State, when Cheney let her.

joe | April 8, 2008, 11:33am | #

Oh, good, Other Matt, too.

Why do you people keep doing this to the threads?

Pro Libertate | April 8, 2008, 11:34am | #

The assumption that Rice would not help in the South may not be entirely accurate. She's from Alabama, after all. And listens to Skynyrd.

Play "Free Bird"!

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 11:35am | #

You do realize this is a tread in which I'm defending a prominent Republican, right?

Wow, you really are impaired today. Are you really so dense that you don't understand that I was talking about your partisan hard-on conviction about me having some love for McCain? A guy I have never, ever said a positive thing about and have ripped many a time?

Only someone as partisanly blind as you can make that connection. Here is the joe math:

Don't want to fellate Obama = McCain lover

You're so busy fellating Obama, how could anyone else get on him?

Warren | April 8, 2008, 11:36am | #

I wouldn't have thought that selecting the sitting Secretary of State - one who's been on the job for an entire presidential term, after having previously served as National Security Advistor - would be an act of tokenism.

The problem with that, is that she has served as a token in those previous positions as well.

Powell was a huge disappointment. I will never forgive him for taking that bag of piffle down to the UN. But at least Powell, while towing the company line in public, was supposed to be a great backroom infighter. Those in the know say he was working against Rumsfeld but was shutout by Cheney.

Has Condi ever said anything to her superiors other than "Yowzer"?

joe | April 8, 2008, 11:37am | #

Actually, you show up and defend him on pretty much every Matt Welch thread. Don't you remember, I even called you on it last time?

Bingo | April 8, 2008, 11:39am | #

Most of Rice's domestic policies lean more libertarian than McCain's and she is a very qualified candidate. I don't really understand the hatred toward her.

Given the foreign policy ideals of the Bush administration, I think she did pretty good as SecState. You don't have to agree with her, but she's obviously got the right stuff for the job.

Basically, I agree with joe, it isn't tokenism even if people want to see it that way.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 11:43am | #

Actually, you show up and defend him on pretty much every Matt Welch thread. Don't you remember, I even called you on it last time?

Are you serious? You really have been drinking. Show me that you don't have memory issues.

fyodor | April 8, 2008, 11:44am | #

Why do you people keep doing this to the threads?

Because you respond, joe. You must enjoy it as much as they do!

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 11:50am | #

joe, I'm waiting. Please, I want you to link to me defending McCain. Because either I have a split personality or you are a fucking idiot.

Neil | April 8, 2008, 11:51am | #

Rice would be great as VP, but General Patreaus would be the best choice!

14-year-old | April 8, 2008, 11:51am | #

Don't mess with Joe. He will pwn you. He is teh l33t!

joe | April 8, 2008, 11:52am | #

True, enough, fyodor.

But sometimes - as in, just about all the time - it's such low-hanging fruit.

"joe, you are teh partisan for arguing that Condoleeza Rice would be a good candidate." Blargh flargh, personal insults.

"You must hate yourself for being white, and be a ferocious partisan to boot, if you can write positive things about Condoleeza Rice." Blargh flargh, personal insults.

Sometimes, the table's set up, you just gotta sit down.

joe | April 8, 2008, 11:54am | #

joe, I'm waiting.

Ohnoes!!! He's WAITING!

Um...no, I don't think I'll spend all afternoon searching the archives for the thread from last week.

fyodor | April 8, 2008, 11:55am | #

Because it's politics, most any choice would be examined for what faction of the electorate is being appeased and/or what message it sends. Condoleeza Rice doesn't strike me as nearly the token that say, Clarence Thomas, was. I'd like to think the only reason reasonable folk would bring it up in this context is that the idea that she's being used to counter Obama's race comes quickly to mind. But who knows and WTF, that's politics. Usually it's a matter of whether it's effective tokenism or inneffective tokenism. Maybe that's Harsanyi's point, that it's too obvious, and that's why it "reeks." I don't have my finger on the pulse of the masses enough to know if he's right or not.

joe | April 8, 2008, 11:56am | #

Episiarch | April 4, 2008, 10:07am | #

I think I've asked this before, but when can we expect McCain to take out a restraining order on Matt?

Hasn't fallen off the page yet. I think it's more plain-old denial than anything as interesting as MPD.

Neil | April 8, 2008, 11:56am | #

How can people seriously say Rice would be a token when she has more experience than the guy who is going to be at the top of the Democrat ticket? If Rice is tokenism, what is Obama then?

Oh thats right, its not tokenism when the Democrat Party does it.

short, fat bastard | April 8, 2008, 11:58am | #

Why do you people keep doing this to the threads?

Dysfunction: The only consistent feature in all of your dissatisfying relationships is you.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 11:58am | #

Oh joe, so pathetic. You say something patently false, disappear for a while frantically searching the archives for me ever defending McCain, utterly fail, and this is your response? Limp-dicked "I don't think I'll spend all afternoon searching the archives for the thread from last week"?

You really are an idiot, and it amuses me no end that you stupidly and egotistically revealed yourself for that just now.

Kolohe | April 8, 2008, 11:59am | #

Perhaps the only foreign policy success of this administration was its diplomatic offensive surrounding the anti-Syrian protests in Lebanon.

That was a good thing, but has been followed with a war since then; not sure of how much of that feeling is left.

I'll give you Ukraine; I just wonder how the impact of latest sorta dead NATO effort (which I'm in favor of) will work out long term. But I'm a big fan of Princess Leia Yulia Tymoshenko, too bad *she's* not constitutionally eligible.

joe | April 8, 2008, 12:00pm | #

Actually, Obama's career in public service goes back father than Rice's. He was a State Senator for somethink like 8 years.

But, yes, they're roughly equivalent - he's been in government a little longer, she held a higher post for a while. Then, Sec of State vs. Senator. Same ballpark.

I don't think anyone is going to call either of them a greybeard, but we're not talking about nobodies here.

fyodor | April 8, 2008, 12:00pm | #

But sometimes - as in, just about all the time - it's such low-hanging fruit.

...

Sometimes, the table's set up, you just gotta sit down.

Well, gorge yourself if that's your choice. I'm sure the citizens of Boston can do well without your planning their lives out for a few hours! :-)

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 12:01pm | #

I think I've asked this before, but when can we expect McCain to take out a restraining order on Matt?

Hasn't fallen off the page yet. I think it's more plain-old denial than anything as interesting as MPD.

Oh. My. God. You didn't realize that this was a joke? You really are that humor-impaired? You actually thought that this was some sort of defense of McCain?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

(catches breath)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh joe, two gifts in one day, and it's not even my birthday!

joe | April 8, 2008, 12:02pm | #

You really are an idiot, and it amuses me no end that you stupidly and egotistically revealed yourself for that just now.

appears two minutes after...

joe | April 8, 2008, 11:56am | #

"Episiarch | April 4, 2008, 10:07am | #

I think I've asked this before, but when can we expect McCain to take out a restraining order on Matt?"

Hasn't fallen off the page yet. I think it's more plain-old denial than anything as interesting as MPD.

Ha ha, should have read the whole thread.

Best. Prebuttal. Ever.

SOOOOOOOO set you up.

I've got a great idea: how about you keep starting with me? It's really, really going well for you.

joe-pesiarch | April 8, 2008, 12:04pm | #

Whoa, just a joke, folks! Uh, I don't keep talking about how totally WEIRD it is to write bad stuff about John McCain.

Not me, boy. Only someone with a crush on Barack Obama could think that!

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 12:04pm | #

Ha ha, should have read the whole thread.

Best. Prebuttal. Ever.

SOOOOOOOO set you up.

I've got a great idea: how about you keep starting with me? It's really, really going well for you.

Maybe you should follow your own advice, joe.

Three gifts now!

Cheap Seats | April 8, 2008, 12:06pm | #

Stop the fight, ref! He's going to kill him!

Neil | April 8, 2008, 12:06pm | #

Joe I'm sorry but being a mere state senator isn't going to give you the same experience as being a National Security Advisor. Being President isn't about fixing some state road in Cairo, Illinois, its about keeping us safe.

Obama has zero foreign policy experience and thats the last person we need in the Presidency in a time of global war.

Cheap Seats | April 8, 2008, 12:13pm | #

Joe I'm sorry but being a mere state senator isn't going to give you the same experience as being a National Security Advisor.

That's true; on the other hand, he was a state senator for just about twice as long as she was NSA.

Being President isn't about fixing some state road in Cairo, Illinois, its about keeping us safe. When you look at his record in the state senate, you see that he did wade into big issues. The bill he sponsored and pushed through requiring that police videotape interrogations and confessions in murder cases, for example - that's an issue of national significance (it's served as a model for other states). He certainly didn't spend his time just keeping a seat warm and getting roads paved.

Obama has zero foreign policy experience and thats the last person we need in the Presidency in a time of global war. The obvious answer here is "So you're thinking more along the lines of a Cheney or a Rumsfeld. I don't mean to dismiss your point entirely, but Obama has exactly as much foreign policy experience as Ronald Reagan did when he took office. Yours is a valid concern, but it's not the only one worth considering.

joe | April 8, 2008, 12:13pm | #

Cheap Seats was me, in case that wasnt' obvious.

sage | April 8, 2008, 12:15pm | #

Hey, if you hold your cursor over "14 year-old," you get "[e-mail]."

Teh funny.

Neil | April 8, 2008, 12:17pm | #

Joe Ronald Reagan was speaking out against international Communism from the very beginning of his career. He may have not had experience but he was on the right side. When was Obama speaking about against international Islamofascism? Reagan knew the real threat, I don't think Obama does.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 12:18pm | #

Cheap Seats was me, in case that wasnt' obvious.

So you sock-puppeted someone claiming victory for you?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You are so sublimely pathetic that it's not even funn...what am I saying, it's hilarious!

You are no longer "joe"; I christen you "jopolean". I knew you were massively insecure, but this is fucking beautiful.

Pro Libertate | April 8, 2008, 12:19pm | #

Governor is the best experience for the presidency, ideally with some national experience as well. Of course, plenty of governors have sucked as presidents. The real point is that the electorate prefers some experience by which a candidate's real merits can be judged. I daresay I'd make a better president than any of the candidates left, but my lack of public experience makes me a total mystery man to voters. Words mean so little, which is one reason I find Obama love so odd. Not that he shouldn't be preferred to the equally inexperienced HRC, but why him and not Richardson or someone with a record we can honestly evaluate?

joe | April 8, 2008, 12:24pm | #

Neil,

Joe Ronald Reagan was speaking out against international Communism from the very beginning of his career. He may have not had experience but he was on the right side. When was Obama speaking about against international Islamofascism? Reagan knew the real threat, I don't think Obama does.

If you don't like his ideological and policy stasnces, fine. To each his own. But we were talking about experience.

joe | April 8, 2008, 12:26pm | #

Please, I want to hear more about Episiarch's feelings. Doesn't everybody?

BTW, the tally so far is 0-13. You have written 13 comments; 13 have been about your feeling about me, and zero have been about the subject of the thread.

Just about par for the course, I'm afraid.

joe | April 8, 2008, 12:28pm | #

So you sock-puppeted someone claiming victory for you?

I write that same joke about stopping the fight every time I do this to you.

I assumed everyone would have picked up on it by now.

Warty | April 8, 2008, 12:29pm | #

This looks fun. I'll chime in...ahem, here goes:


Joe eats shit.

sage | April 8, 2008, 12:30pm | #

FWIW, I think having her as a VP candidate would be a bad idea because people are going to want to forget about the Bush white house and anyone touching it.

Do it, John! Barr for prez!

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 12:36pm | #

I write that same joke about stopping the fight every time I do this to you.

You do? Really? You're just making shit up today. How pathetic.

joe | April 8, 2008, 12:38pm | #

sage, if the McCain campaign can't draw a distinction between different pro-war factions of the Republican Party, he's toast anyway.

crapass mcgee | April 8, 2008, 12:40pm | #

Hmm, normally I enjoy watch Epi slamming Joe, but in this thread I find myself firmly on Joe's side.

Such is the unpredictable ambiguity that makes H&R worth reading!

joe | April 8, 2008, 12:40pm | #

0-14

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 12:43pm | #

I wish I could live in jopolean's fantasy world.

Isaac Brock | April 8, 2008, 12:43pm | #

Play "Free Bird"!

If this were the Make-A-Wish Foundation and you were going to die in 20 minutes -- just long enough to play "Free Bird" -- we still wouldn’t play it.

joe | April 8, 2008, 12:48pm | #

0-15

Pro Libertate | April 8, 2008, 12:49pm | #

Isaac Brock,

If Rice ever becomes president, I happen to know that her first act in office will be to declare "Free Bird" to be our national anthem.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 12:56pm | #

jopolean must be posting the odds that he has any credibility. I admire your honesty.

sage | April 8, 2008, 12:58pm | #

sage, if the McCain campaign can't draw a distinction between different pro-war factions of the Republican Party, he's toast anyway.

In that respect he's making Bush look like the more moderate faction, what with McCain's "hundred years" comment dogging him.

But you're right, unless the war becomes less and less of an issue as we get closer to the general.

joe | April 8, 2008, 1:17pm | #

0-16. Funny, about my credibility, everyone keeps saying I'm right.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 1:24pm | #

Yes jopolean, sock-puppetry (which you were dumb enough not to change your handle back from--that's priceless), making shit up, and not getting jokes make you extremely credible. Just ask "everyone"! Oh, and I forgot "pre-buttal" crowing.

Invisible Finger | April 8, 2008, 1:29pm | #

I don't really understand the hatred toward her.

She's perpetuating the horrible foreign policy of the Bush administration which is "shoot whenever you're scared and don't even ask questions later. And kiss Saud ass cuz they buy our planes 'n' shit."

BakedPenguin | April 8, 2008, 1:29pm | #

[Rice]...may even pull in some of the pervo/B&D vote if she keeps it up with the thigh-high boot look.

You know the 'worm' vote's going to Hillary if she gets the D nom, and McCain if she doesn't, so I don't Rice helping out there.

...I'm a big fan of Princess Leia Yulia Tymoshenko...

полиция у вас!

Mick | April 8, 2008, 1:35pm | #

There's no term limit for the Vice President.
Why not just keep Cheney?

joe | April 8, 2008, 2:07pm | #

0-17.

Figured out that point yet?

joe | April 8, 2008, 2:10pm | #

It would probably be wiser, at this point, just to acknowledge that this hasn't gone very well for you, and stop posting comments.

But, then, you seem to have adopted your hero's incapcity to know when to say "when."

Stay the course, Episiarch! No surrender! Why, you don't mind I keep rubbing your nose in it for a hundred years.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 2:31pm | #

Ah yes, the chest-pounding. Why do I find you so amusing? I don't know, but don't ever change (yes, I know--you won't). What else would I do during slow days at work?

joe | April 8, 2008, 2:34pm | #

0-18

joe | April 8, 2008, 2:34pm | #

What else would I do during slow days at work?

Contribute something relevant and intelligent to the discussion on the thread?

Naaaaaaaaahhhhh...way over your head.

Pro Libertate | April 8, 2008, 2:39pm | #

Episiarch,

Who do you plan to vote for?

joe | April 8, 2008, 2:39pm | #

For example:

Grover Norquist is also a pro-Iraq War conservative who was on the outs with the hawkier-than-thou, lockstep conformity to Dear Leader in the years after 9/11. Just like Rice, and just like McCain himself. While not predictable, his endorsement makes sense.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 2:42pm | #

Episiarch,

Who do you plan to vote for?

No one.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 2:44pm | #

Contribute something relevant and intelligent to the discussion on the thread?

Naaaaaaaaahhhhh...way over your head.

jopolean, if you want your hyper-partisan bullshit to be actually relevant or intelligent, you need to step outside your fantasy world. Sucking off Obama all day doesn't cut it.

Pro Libertate | April 8, 2008, 2:48pm | #

I see. So you're not for McCain.

For the record, if I had to pick between either Democratic candidate and McCain, I'd pick McCain. I also think he's going to win. I don't want a President McCain and will almost certainly vote LP, but that's the way it is.

joe | April 8, 2008, 2:55pm | #

1-20.

Progress!

joe | April 8, 2008, 2:56pm | #

jopolean, if you want your hyper-partisan bullshit to be actually relevant or intelligent, you need to step outside your fantasy world.

You mean like, a thread where people with enormous philosophical and partisan differences with me keep agreeing with the points I'm making?

Or did that elude you, too?

joe | April 8, 2008, 2:59pm | #

You know; hyperpartisan bullshit.

Like talking up the performance of a political figure from the other party.

Or discussing how that other party has different factions and shouldn't all be lumped together.

You know, THAT kind of partisan bullshit.

I think it would be a really, really good idea for you to keep doing this. And also, I do not wish to be thrown into a briar patch.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 3:02pm | #

joe, constant appeals to authority and consensus may make you feel good, but they are meaningless.

Jim Bob | April 8, 2008, 3:07pm | #

These "joe vs. Episiarch" threads are getting more brutal. You guys should meet for a beer, have some tacos, work this thing out.

joe | April 8, 2008, 3:21pm | #

1-21

joe | April 8, 2008, 3:25pm | #

joe, constant appeals to authority and consensus may make you feel good, but they are meaningless.

Actually, when YOU raise the question of my credibility, or to whether I've written anything with comprehensible point - yes, yes they do. They go precisely to the topics YOU raised.

ed | April 8, 2008, 3:26pm | #

Cat fights between men just aren't the same.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 3:34pm | #

Actually, when YOU raise the question of my credibility, or to whether I've written anything with comprehensible point - yes, yes they do. They go precisely to the topics YOU raised.

So you're saying that your best argument is an appeal to authority and consensus. Wow, sounds just like your global warming argument.

joe | April 8, 2008, 3:35pm | #

1-22.

How how does this figure have to be before you're relegated to the status of a troll?

joe | April 8, 2008, 3:38pm | #

So you're saying that your best argument is an appeal to authority and consensus.

Read it again. You don't seem to have gotten your mind around yet another rather simple statement I made.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 3:42pm | #

How how does this figure have to be before you're relegated to the status of a troll?

Considering that you're the only one keeping score, and it's completely your own fabrication, the "howness" of the score doesn't really matter.

Or are you so delusional that you think anyone cares about your ape-like chest-beating antics? Well, you must, or you wouldn't do it.

joe | April 8, 2008, 3:43pm | #

1-23

And I don't think anyone cares about these little spats.

It's just fun to give you your comeuppance.

joe | April 8, 2008, 3:45pm | #

Speaking of keeping score, which point do you think you've repeated the most? Don't look!

A. No point
B. Chest-beating
C. Repetitious

I think it's C, which is some world-class irony.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 3:48pm | #

It's just fun to give you your comeuppance.

One of the most amazing things about you is that you actually, truly believe this. You fascinate me, jopolean. Your ability to act out your dominance fantasies on a blog is so creepy yet interesting at the same time, that you just have to be studied. It's like a car wreck--I can't look away.

joe | April 8, 2008, 3:53pm | #

1-24.

Congratulations, you actually got something right!

Yes, indeed, I do seem to fascinate you.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 3:56pm | #

You're actually still posting the score. Awesome stuff, joe.

Strim | April 8, 2008, 3:57pm | #

Thread-locking time!

joe | April 8, 2008, 3:58pm | #

"jopolean"

That IS clever!

But when your own handle is a translation of the Latin term for "King Pussy," how exactly am I supposed to respond in kind?

joe | April 8, 2008, 3:58pm | #

1-25

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 3:59pm | #

jhgjjg;h;h;lkhjhfhgf

joe | April 8, 2008, 5:15pm | #

No, fghffhagasdgfgjghj.

Oh, 1-26.

joe | April 8, 2008, 5:15pm | #

:-P

Other Matt | April 8, 2008, 5:19pm | #

You're so busy fellating Obama, how could anyone else get on him?

joe's not that tall.


Hat tip to SHort Fat Bastard, my sentiments exactly.

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 5:23pm | #

Episiarch | April 8, 2008, 5:23pm | #

}8-D

Pro Libertate | April 8, 2008, 5:33pm | #

I'm unclear on one thing. Who is more politically pure: Episiarch or joe? We've established what sexual acts joe will perform on Obama, I suppose, but surely there are other litmus tests?

joe | April 8, 2008, 5:40pm | #

1-28

Cesar | April 8, 2008, 6:03pm | #

This is the worst thread I've ever read on here.

Pro Libertate | April 8, 2008, 6:08pm | #

Cesar,

Worse than the Santorum thread?

Warty | April 8, 2008, 6:16pm | #

This thread is worse than smegma.

green mamba | April 8, 2008, 8:12pm | #

Too bad, because the topic of Rice as a potential VP candidate is kind of interesting.

Other Matt | April 8, 2008, 8:24pm | #

Too bad, because the topic of Rice as a potential VP candidate is kind of interesting.

I agree. The basic problem is that it's a pander to try to reduce the impact of Hillary being female and Obama being black. Rice does have qualifications, though nothing which causes her to stand out as THE candidate for VP. She does have the, somewhat logical, correlation or attachment to Bush, which may hurt or help depending on your point of view.

The biggest problem I see in this election is people are so caught up on what gender or color the Dems are, they don't look past the lack of substance on Obama's part or the outright conniving power lust on Hillary's part. It would be not unexpected, though somewhat of a shame, to see both parties caught up in gender and color.

However, if nothing else, this thread is an illustration of the problem. I admit I consider joe to be a assbiting idiot, but this is a personal view as the shitbird insults people and therefore deserves to be treated like the pimple that he is. Beyond this, if you accept that his Master Troll behavior is based loosely on reality, he simply cannot see beyond the fact that Obamaa is black. If you look at the general tone of his comments on the whole, black is good, white is bad.

Obama appeals to these types simply due to their racism, they see someone with dark skin and substance and accountabilty are secondary. I guess that the Repubs are appealing to the same demographic, though they are much more prevalent in the Dems, at least nullifying the effect somewhat if people were willing to leave the party over it.

It's a shame in that it is somewhat degrading to Rice to do this, but I guess it does have value. Just look at the convolutions and consternations joe was subject to, I thought it was hilarious, but on a grander scale there are probably a large number of joes (not so much assholes, but people who see color and stop) out there.

All that said, I think the current talk about here is nothing more than a trial balloon designed to distract, and won't amount to much.

joe | April 9, 2008, 2:38pm | #

this is a personal view as the shitbird insults people

Hilarious!

he simply cannot see beyond the fact that Obamaa is black. If you look at the general tone of his comments on the whole, black is good, white is bad.

Better than Cats!

Obama appeals to these types simply due to their racism, they see someone with dark skin and substance and accountabilty are secondary.

Two thumbs up, a rollicking good time!

Even if you did make sure to post it hours after everyone had already given up on the thread.