Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
User Journal

smitty_one_each's Journal: Stein to the Drunken Lefties 34

Journal by smitty_one_each
The free-spending Lefties here,
As the drunk on a beer
Bender for fortnight or more,
Knowing hangover in store,
Bangs his hogshead in vain,
Wishing 'twere full again.
Raging 'gainst coming of dawn,
When the light of the sun falls upon
The heart of man in full rut;
Hedonism fills his. But
He can't make beer from piss,
For carnal bureaucratic bliss,
Must give way to the maul,
Hammering the head until all
Thought of Socialism is purged
And the name of the one who urged
The entitlement orgy's reviled,
And thoughts return to the child,
Who somehow knew right from wrong;
Good poetry from banal song.
Gratification, delayed, that built mind.
He looks up from his puke-puddle to find
A brief Herbert Stein phrase,
That pierces his drunken daze
The way that a mother's don't:
"Trends that can't continue, won't."
--CLS 21Oct2013
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Stein to the Drunken Lefties

Comments Filter:
  • I thought this was by Ben.
    • Much like Ben Stein, it wasn't funny, so I suspected that Stein as well. However even someone who retired from writing speeches for Reagan should be able to write better lines than some of those (particularly looking at where a sentence was clumsily split only to make fragments rhyme, even though it results in the actual sentence sounding like crap). That said, Ben Stein wouldn't be able to get a job writing speeches in Washington anymore any ways, as Reagan was more liberal than anyone in Washington save
      • Much like Ben Stein, it wasn't funny, so I suspected that Stein as well. However even someone who retired from writing speeches for Reagan should be able to write better lines than some of those (particularly looking at where a sentence was clumsily split only to make fragments rhyme, even though it results in the actual sentence sounding like crap). That said, Ben Stein wouldn't be able to get a job writing speeches in Washington anymore any ways, as Reagan was more liberal than anyone in Washington save perhaps Bernie Sanders.

        Ben Stein was a speech writer for Richard Nixon, hired on about 2 weeks before he resigned IIRC, and for Gerald Ford. I've never heard of him writing for Reagan, and I cannot find a reference for that.

        • I likely misstated, though my point remains the same. Nixon, being more liberal than Regan, would be even further to the left of anyone currently serving in Washington. Being as he wrote speeches for someone that liberal in comparison to the current state he likely wouldn't be welcomed in DC presently.
          • Nixon, being more liberal than Regan[sic], would be even further to the left of anyone currently serving in Washington.

            Well, that's a wild counter-factual. Sure.

            • Nixon, being more liberal than Regan[sic], would be even further to the left of anyone currently serving in Washington.

              Well, that's a wild counter-factual. Sure.

              In what way, then, was Nixon more conservative than Reagan? I certainly don't hear any conservatives in Washington celebrating Nixon's conservative legacy. For the sake of the argument we can even ignore Watergate, go ahead and pretend that elephant was never born. Reagan was supposed to be the "new conservative" in 1980, showing America what conservatives could do after "coming out of the woods"; he spoke of how his party was lost. Are you claiming that he was actually some sort of moderate in disguis

              • In what way, then, was Nixon more conservative than Reagan?

                Reagan was not picked by the elite, losing the nomination in '76, and hardly having its support in '80.
                And he stood up to the federal government, firing the mutinying Air Traffic Controllers.
                But he was pre-internet. He didn't do anything about the standing 10th Amendment violations like the entitlements and the Federal Reserve, didn't take the Community Reinvestment Act out back and just shoot it down in cold blood. His intellectual heir, Jack Kemp, totally lacked the gravitas to keep meaningful reform go

                • In what way, then, was Nixon more conservative than Reagan?

                  Reagan was not picked by the elite, losing the nomination in '76, and hardly having its support in '80.

                  I'm not sure what point you are after there. If you are claiming that Reagan wasn't picked by the elite, and that you are supplying me with points for how Nixon was more conservative than Reagan, then it would stand that you are saying a true conservative can only be picked by the elite.

                  And he stood up to the federal government, firing the mutinying Air Traffic Controllers.

                  Yes, we remember Reagan shit-canning the air traffic controllers. How does that make Nixon more conservative?

                  I'm not sure you actually read my question before writing your response. Please, smitty, slow down and read.

                  • Lately it seems I have your feathers so ruffled that you can't bring yourself to read the questions you are providing talking point responses to.

                    I guess that's what they call a 'tell' in poker, because your tone has really slipped since the big reveal, when BHO's five-year mission to explore strange new worlds of incompetence reached its Healthcare.gov climax, and even the Codpiece Media could no longer offer an effective barrier to the suck.
                    Fret not: we have a blisteringly stupid electorate, and it's going to continue to pillory the Tea Party rather than demand any actual reform, balanced budgets, social safety net stabilization, non-GOP accountab

                    • your tone has really slipped since the big reveal

                      Is this how the Tea Party tells you to handle the situation when you are shown to be an angry hyperpartisan? My tone has changed none, while your willingness to actually read text in front of you has changed to the point of rapidly approaching zero.

                      Fret not: we have a blisteringly stupid electorate

                      Which is exactly what the Tea Party needs in order to achieve rule on the federal level, as their policies are detrimental to >>99% of the population.

                      demand any actual reform

                      Aside from discarding the parts of the constitution they don't like and making a highly regressive taxa

                    • as their policies are detrimental to >>99% of the population.

                      Based. Upon. What. Analysis?
                      We're committing slow economic suicide, as any reasonable assessment of the current course reveals; unemployment, debt &c. The President's signature accomplishment is nothing short of a pitiful cock-up. And you call lucid thinking 'detrimental'.

                      Aside from discarding the parts of the constitution they don't like and making a highly regressive taxation system even more regressive, I have seen no actual proposals for reform from the Tea Party.

                      Set up an Amazon gift account, and I will buy you a copy of Levin's The Liberty Amendments [amazon.com]. It's a fine going-in position for the reforms we need to redistribute power, not wealth. I wouldn't accuse it of being perfect, but if there i

                    • as their policies are detrimental to >>99% of the population.

                      Based. Upon. What. Analysis?

                      Based upon the simple fact that trickle-down economics and regressive taxation don't work, have never worked, and never can work. We are still running in trickle-down mode and they want to amp it up to 35.

                      And you call lucid thinking 'detrimental'.

                      There is nothing lucid about giving money to the wealthy and expecting that it will make things better for anyone else. It didn't work in the past, and doesn't work in the present. Why on earth would it work in the future?

                      Set up an Amazon gift account, and I will buy you a copy of Levin's The Liberty Amendments. It's a fine going-in position for the reforms we need to redistribute power, not wealth.

                      You can't be bothered to read the Communist Manifesto - which is freely availab

                    • I wish it could do that. Instead it is a green light for insurance companies to do WTF they want as they know have a guaranteed customer base. It gave more power to the already enormously powerful. If all these cost increases are actually caused by obamacare, then explain to me why companies that paid some of the highest annual bonuses of any companies, anywhere on earth in 2012 would need all this additional money when they are supposed to meet percent quotas for spending related to health care payments.
                      The bill is nothing but an enormous handout for the insurance industry, plain and simple. Your Tea Party leaders are just jealous that they couldn't get their own names on it.

                      I'm seeing headlines about policies being cancelled across the country [dailycaller.com] and you're telling me this is the insurance companies doing WTF they want to, and I'm left to wonder if you're simply unhinged.
                      Trying to find some manner in which you could possibly be making sense, there is the issue of regulatory capture. Maybe you're saying that the bigger fish are crushing the smaller ones here, I guess?
                      Or maybe the cartel-like behavior you seem to imply was the original intent, and the "unexpected" carnage that's

                    • I'm seeing headlines about policies being cancelled across the country and you're telling me this is the insurance companies doing WTF they want to

                      The companies are canceling policies because they know the customers have to come back. This isn't difficult. They can cancel the policies and then replace them with more profitable ones and nobody will second guess them. The insurance industry was given more power, not less.

                      and I'm left to wonder if you're simply unhinged.

                      Your conclusions as of late have been puzzling.

                      Your dodge on Levin's book

                      I'm not dodging it, I'm simply stating that you are asking more from me than you ask from yourself. Why don't the same rules and expectations apply to both of us?

                      just to appreciate fully how preaching "The kingdom of God, hold the God" is truly a recipe for hell on Earth.

                      If you read it, loo

                    • With that kind of bias ahead of looking at the first word you would likely also read the Quaran and conclude it is all about Jihad.

                      I've read about half of the Qu'ran. What actually has struck me thus far is the lack of forgiveness. Rather a binary view of reality going on there. My understanding is that you have to go through the Hadith as well to have a full grasp of the development of Islamic thought.

                      More so, if you are supposed to be all about freedom of choices, liberties, and related bullshit, why do you crusade so greatly to prevent people from being able to associate themselves with anything other than Tea Party values?

                      I guess I don't understand what you mean by 'crusade' and 'prevent' here. I've argued positively for balanced budgeting, limited government, and something resembling leadership from our elected officials.

                      You want to force your preferences down the throat of everyone regardless of what they actually want for themselves.

                      I'd be pleased to see some Libert

                    • I've read about half of the Qu'ran. What actually has struck me thus far is the lack of forgiveness.

                      Have you read the Torah? There isn't exactly a lot of forgiveness there either. The God of the Bible's Old Testament is a prick but he is a spite-monster in the Torah. He was marginally worse to the Egyptians than he was to his own "chosen people", and that's only if you take it from a view of (spitefulness)/(time); if you look at how much pain and suffering he imposed upon the Jews total versus how much upon the Egyptians total one might well form an argument that their god never liked anyone.

                      Being a

                    • Have you read the Torah? There isn't exactly a lot of forgiveness there either. The God of the Bible's Old Testament is a prick but he is a spite-monster in the Torah. He was marginally worse to the Egyptians than he was to his own "chosen people", and that's only if you take it from a view of (spitefulness)/(time); if you look at how much pain and suffering he imposed upon the Jews total versus how much upon the Egyptians total one might well form an argument that their god never liked anyone.

                      I have read the entire Bible through (in the textus receptus sense) multiple times in different translations. As for your characterization of the Torah, its hard to see where God's ever been actively harsh to those who followed Him sincerely. I suppose you can argue in the case of Job that there was permission given for harshness to occur.

                      Being as the two were written more closely in time relative to each other than either was to some of the accepted writings in the New Testament there is likely a strong historical reason for the similar voice.

                      If you're trying to say that the chronological sequence goes: { Torah => Quran => New Testament }, then I'm going to request you verify that assertion.

                      I use crusade because you are on a religious mission to suppress everyone who does not share your values. You can't actually provide any logic or facts to support your goals, and you attack those who oppose you in a way not dissimilar to how the popes during the crusades described the Muslims in the holy lands.

                      I'm wondering

                    • As for your characterization of the Torah, its hard to see where God's ever been actively harsh to those who followed Him sincerely. I suppose you can argue in the case of Job that there was permission given for harshness to occur.

                      There are plenty of times where the god of the Jews was not kind to them. How long did he leave them enslaved to the Egyptians? How long did he let them wander aimlessly in the desert? How many times did the temple of Israel fall? Those are just a few examples that come to mind easily.

                      If you're trying to say that the chronological sequence goes: { Torah => Quran => New Testament }, then I'm going to request you verify that assertion.

                      My statement is that they reached final versions in that order. The Quaran quickly went from Mohammed's draft to a final version. The New Testament was edited by an unknown number of people for many hundreds of years b

                    • There are plenty of times where the god of the Jews was not kind to them. How long did he leave them enslaved to the Egyptians?

                      You'll have to take it up with the Almighty, in prayer, as to the sequencing. You'll note that at least some Jews had become downright happy [blueletterbible.org] with the Egyptian entitlement programs. Said entitlement programs are also why Moses had to march off two generations worth in Sinai to mature them out of the slave mindset and prepare them for the next step.

                      My statement is that they reached final versions in that order.

                      How about we just let this point go?

                      Not too long ago there was a noticeable difference in philosophy and demeanor between you and Pudge. More recently that gap has shrunk dramatically.

                      Indeed, you seem to've swerved toward the peevish around 01Oct. Can't figure out what disastrous occurrence around then might b

      • Conservatives laugh at Colbert. Why? Because taking oneself too seriously is a major human downfall.
        Taking the principles of liberty, private property, freedom of speech &c seriously, however, is crucial.
    • Thanks. Possibly you can help damn_registrars resurrect his sense of humor.
      • by gmhowell (26755)

        Thanks. Possibly you can help damn_registrars resurrect his sense of humor.

        His sense of humor isn't dead; it's resting.

        Pining for the fjords, even.

        • I'm not sure that even a shot of Harry Reid's embalming fluid could get damn_registrars' sense of humor past the Francisco Franco stage.
      • Well, mine is alive and well. I think your caricature is hilarious, but it is getting repetitive, being all stuck in a box the way you are.

        • Your box; your plantation: what we need is liberty, man!
          • Yes, for all, or it doesn't count..

            • Well, hey: if YOU'RE happy with Congress hoisting a giant middle finger at the people, and blowing off the Vitter Amendment [newyorker.com], just keep throwing the reformers under the bus.
              We've got to start somewhere in the reform quest. You should think about joining it.
              • They aren't reformers. You're falling for false prophets. And though there's little point in reminding you again and again, you continue to make false assumptions about my posts. To a reasonable person they don't even imply any such approval of the current, corrupt by design, systems of today. This is simply an ongoing method of distraction on your part.

                • Why would I be distracting from reform, and with what would I substitute?
                  If you think that I'm less than 100% honest with you, then let's just quit wasting each other's time.
                  Your point about "false prophets" is not without merit. There has been some benefit of the doubt extended to the GOP, which seemed the cleaner end of the Progressive turd. McCain, in retrospect, seems like he threw the race in '08. Romney seems to have been thrown by his campaign staff in '12. And the question of who would give Hillar
                  • Tea Party... Just rename them the Koch Party, who want to return the country back to the 1850s. And do try to understand that the GOP and democrats are not in any opposition, most notably since the 1960s civil rights laws passed and the racist democrats switched over. Your continued bias in this regard does not go unnoticed. Pointing it out is definitely an exercise in futility, but what the hell... McCain and Romney were the real rodeo clowns, red noses and all, designed to scare people away from real alte

                    • The Progressives are returning to the country to the 1850s via debt slavery, vice the chattel slavery of that day.

                      And do try to understand that the GOP and democrats are not in any opposition, most notably since the 1960s civil rights laws passed and the racist democrats switched over.

                      You know, Rumsfeld himself worked to get that legislation passed, and Robert Byrd stayed a Democrat. I find your mythology unimpressive.

                      McCain and Romney were the real rodeo clowns, red noses and all, designed to scare people away from real alternative parties or individuals.

                      I'm moving toward agreement with you here, though I think McCain was totally witting, and I'm not sure about to what degree Romney was a dupe, for all that's a difference making little difference.

                      You are truly fogged over if you believe that politicians and their parties, funded by billionaires, can possibly bring about any reform to a system designed by their puppet masters. This includes the Greens and Libertarian Party. The wealth/power and the desire for it corrupts all.

                      Past your Buddhist fatalism, why do you bother, then? What if you'

                    • The "Revolution" did nothing to break the grip of power. It merely changed hands to another set of aristocrats, whose only real difference was a minor reduction in bureaucratic overhead. It was business as usual as soon as the contracts were signed. Allegiance to the motherland has not been severed.

                    • Accepting your statement as true for argument's sake: What then, to do?
                      Roll over & cut your deal?
                      Strive to bring the potential for self-government to fruition?

Put your Nose to the Grindstone! -- Amalgamated Plastic Surgeons and Toolmakers, Ltd.

Working...