Comments on: The Wonderful World of Kos

By: nora

nora — Mon, 02 Jan 2006 01:56:58 +0000

This is a bit off thread but I have to say how gratifying it is to hear from people reading Thomas Sowell…and his latest, “Black Rednecks White Liberals” is absolutely brilliant, maybe the single most enlightening sets of research I’ve ever read. Explains sooooo much about the way people are acting today, all based on historical research. Answers questions I’ve had for years. Highly recommend this book.
And BTW, way good chat here, thanks.

Nora

By: Right On! :: Begging the Questions :: January :: 2006

Right On! :: Begging the Questions :: January :: 2006 — Sun, 01 Jan 2006 16:12:27 +0000

[...] Mark Coffey at Decision ‘08 has an interesting recap of the liberal fawning over the Daily Kos blog. One excerpt caught my eye and begged a question: [...]

By: Stephen

Stephen — Thu, 29 Dec 2005 00:57:19 +0000

History has not as yet recorded a shortage of con men…or pigeons.

By: J. Peden

J. Peden — Mon, 26 Dec 2005 18:21:42 +0000

sgpi11: Amen – the Annointed seem to me to be composed of the Self-Annointed plus the Meme Adopters, who simply repeat the memes in order to be “in” or “elite” or “sophisticated”, thus Annointed also – and potentially in control.

The Self-Annointed act as if they think they channel the Ideal – that ideas which pop into their heads must be correct simply on that basis. Howard Dean, for example, has virtually admitted this in explaining that he knows his pop-up ideas must be correct because his “unconscious” must have worked on them.

But the Self-Annointed therefore differ from the extreme Evangelist who overtly claims that God has actually talked to him/her – but of course not to anyone else.

Yet all Annointed in practice rely upon group acceptance as the immediate proof of the correctness of their ideas – acceptance as evidenced by the echos, most importantly those produced by the Grand Echo Chamber known as the MSM, or perhaps also by the “Europeans” or “Our Allies”. And now even by Saddam Husein.

Proof by virtue of getting something done – literally anything – manifested by making the rest of us do it, comes later.

The ironic but not surprising thing about Communism is that it produces exactly that which it says it opposes: a State in which a materialistic Elite – the Party – completely enslaves the rest of the population, an epitome of control.

Oh how I have longed for a return by Freud! Could Thomas Sowell be it?

By: DG

DG — Mon, 26 Dec 2005 13:09:44 +0000

Will, Will, Will,
We had a supposed expert on all that stuff. His name was Bill Clinton. All he did way try to game the system for his own personal gratification. Now we’re getting to watch his other half (minus the stinky misplaced cigar) try to do the same thing. Fool me once ….and so on. You hate Bush because he’s not one of the pragmatic bastards you spawn out of the Dem party. He’s everything you Libs are not, which is why he continually out manuevers you. And it really chaps your butt.
And the Putin remark is just another example of the Dem ignorance of how to deal with Russians. Something that I happen to have a lot of experience with. It was a set up, dummy. He knew he had to roll Putin on the Iraqi debt relief. Putin didn’t know what hit him when Baker delivered the death blow. Bush went one better than the Gipper’s
“Trust but Verify”……Hold your friends close and your enemies closer so that when you coldcock them you don’t have to reach as far.

Two words for you….Denny Crane.

By: dick

dick — Sun, 25 Dec 2005 23:10:21 +0000

The Kossacks remind me most of the Stalinists who kept on believing in communism even after all the show trials and the killing of all the Kulaks. They could not bring themselves to understand that what they were believing was all emperor’s clothes. They also refused to believe that Alger Hiss was a spy even after it was proven and that the Rosenbergs were spies even after that was proven also. The Kossacks keep telling each other how bright they are and how right they are even after the voters turn down all they offer. They claim to be for the common man but they act as if they are the uncommon man who is a natural born leader to tell us who to follow and what to do.

What I find funny is that even after the Chinese Communists under Mao turned all the intelligentsia into peasants these people still follow him. Even though Che was a stone murderer they still follow him as well. The thing is that if they ever did have a revolution that is the group that would be first up against the wall for the firing squad.

By: wronwright

wronwright — Sun, 25 Dec 2005 13:43:39 +0000

I think the 1.3 million number is analogous to a reader of the Wall Street Journal buying one copy, reading one article, putting it down, later reading the editorials, putting it down, and later on reading the International News. For the Daily Kos that would amount to three users.

For my part, I probably will read the WSJ at ten different points of time during the day. Yet I’m only one man. Except for my other personalites. Such as Evie, the cockney flower seller. “Posies for the missus, gov’nor?” But Evie doesn’t read the WSJ so she wouldn’t count.

By: cab404

cab404 — Sun, 25 Dec 2005 06:24:44 +0000

DailyKook is largely a club of hobby Marxists, frustrated at their impotence. Not a few of them are technoids and korporatchiks with comfortable incomes who gravitate to the site because it’s the best fix around for bombast junkies. These people are not worth analyzing. Their silly utopianism and nihilism are almost always pretty half-baked stuff. They are best thought of as a mere curiosity, a statistical residue of free thought, which nearly all of them oppose, a wonderful irony.

By: Will

Will — Sun, 25 Dec 2005 05:37:52 +0000

You know why we dislike him, spgi11? Because he is the incredibly well-connected son of a president who tries to pass himself off as a “common man.” And apparently you bought it.

If by common man you meant someone who wasn’t especially intelligent or exceptional, well, I guess he’s your man. But I don’t want my doctor to have a “common” knowledge of medicine, I want him to be an expert. I want my auto mechanic to know more about cars than the average guy on the street. And I want a president who has a deep understanding of history and public policy and applies this knowledge in his decision making, not one who say, trusts a tyrant like Vladimir Putin because his gut instincts tell him that Putin is an okay guy. Perhaps that makes me a “elitist” but so be it.

By: Mark

Mark — Sun, 25 Dec 2005 03:35:15 +0000

Well, Ben, I’ll give you this much: you’re right that it is more substantive than Huff’n'Puff…