Comments on: Did Nancy Pelosi REALLY Think We Were That Stupid?

By: Mark

Mark — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 23:47:28 +0000

Hey, say what you like, but I LOVE the WSJ op-ed pages, and always have. There is actually a wider spectrum of opinion there than you give credit for – on the opinion pages, if not the editorial.

If that makes me a moron, well, I enjoy what I enjoy…reading op-eds in the NY Times is like listening to Air America – it’s very partisan, true, and maybe the WSJ is guilty of the same crime – but worse, it’s no fun to read. The WSJ is almost ALWAYS an interesting read, even if you disagree with the writer…

By: Jacques Distler

Jacques Distler — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 17:05:38 +0000

Speaking of feckless morons

No, Ryan.

Morons would, occasionally, blurt out something true.

I have not observed that behaviour among the writers of the WJS Op ed and Editorial pages. I, therefore, conclude that they are not morons.

On the other hand, those who believe anything they read on the WJS Op ed and Editorial pages …

By: Ryan

Ryan — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:09:29 +0000

Jacques – Speaking of feckless morons…

DBrooks and Aaron – Say what you will about Nancy et al (and I am no fan of Harry Reid by any measure), but they aren’t Republicans. That’s enough for me.

By: Jacques Distler

Jacques Distler — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 02:47:48 +0000

In short, standard of living typically goes up with population, not inversely as Malthus suggested.

Hmm. Let’s see.

According to the UN, the countries with the top 5 birthrates in the world are

1. Democratic Republic of the Congo
2. Guinea-Bissau
3. Liberia
4. Niger
5. Afghanistan

The countries with the lowest 5 birthrates in the world are

191. Japan
192. Germany
193. Singapore
194. Hong Kong
195. Macau

The US is #139.

Yup, sounds like the WSJ Op Ed page has outdone themselves, yet again.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:10:58 +0000

WSJ had a column up yesterday comparing Pelosi to Malthus. In short, standard of living typically goes up with population, not inversely as Malthus suggested. Declining birth rates are ~~part of~~ the reason social security is going bankrupt. The fact that the US has a higher birth rate than Europe and Japan is the reason we aren’t experiencing the demographic time bomb to the same magnitude that they are.

Are any of the above known to drool, DB? I think just “feckless morons” would be an accurate description.

By: steve

steve — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 21:52:24 +0000

We need more people spending more money on more goods and services, how does preventing pregnancies make that happen?

By: DBrooks

DBrooks — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 21:06:23 +0000

“What, no jokes about condoms controlling emissions?”

I’m still speechless because Ryan described a government run by Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, Harry Waxman, etc as being run “by people who aren’t feckless, slobbering morons.”

By: peter

peter — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 21:01:54 +0000

What, no jokes about condoms controlling emissions?

By: Bob from Ohio

Bob from Ohio — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:11:04 +0000

“Eventually we have to do it,”

Why eventually?

By: Ryan

Ryan — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:27:17 +0000

A) What is the multiplier on a pack of condoms? Sex is pretty recession-proof. Heck, if you don’t have a job, what are you going to do all day?

B) We wouldn’t have to increase emissions standards while the auto industry is going bankrupt if we had just taken the opportunity to increase them when the economy was fine. Eventually we have to do it, and there’s no particular reason why we should put it off more. We finally have a government run by people who aren’t feckless, slobbering morons; we may not get this chance again for a while.