9 additional pieces of "analysis" about Sarah Palin's resignation

Mark Halperin over at Time's The Page lists the 9 takes on Sarah Palin's resignation that he deems to be "flat out totally wrong". Some of them are totally contradictory (i.e. this means she can't run for president vs. this means she is definitely running for president), but Halperin explains away these differences by...well he doesn't explain them. He just says they're wrong, and because he's Washington insider Mark Halperin, by definition they must be wrong.

Since no justification is needed to make up a list like this, I figured I would also expose nine additional analyses that are factually incorrect:

1. Governing got in the way of her bi-annual moose hunting trips.


2. She wanted to watch the Wimbledon finals today in peace.


3. Resigning will make it easier for her to continue her bi-coastal affair with David Letterman.


4. Rudy Giuliani reminded her that she can't be president because she had no direct involvement with 9/11.


5. She needs more time to shop on Amazon for a quality telescope to see Russia with.


6. Her fantasy football team, the Wasilla Leaking Amnio Fluids, is defending its league title, and studying for the draft takes top priority.


7. She wants to give herself some time and space to get over the death of Billy Mays.


8. She wants to spend more time with Bristol to make sure she doesn't go hiking on the Appalachian Trail any time soon.


9. Oprah wants her to host her newest talk show venture, titled You Betcha!

The libertarian pony rides again!

I've been told that quality of the magazine Reason has seriously declined over the past few years. Given the silliness of its current state, I'll take it on faith that it had some level of respectability during its existence.

Now they've ventured into the video business. A friend posted this clip on their Facebook page that can only be described as childly simplistic:



Yes, absolutely! Who needs amendments saying that the government can't jail you based solely on what you've said, and then hold you indefinitely without a trial?

When I hear pie in the sky "we should all come together and demand less government" libertarian talk like this, I'm reminded of what is universally regarded as one of the greatest blog posts of all time.

The authors of Examined Life came up with the theory that, when you wish for things like this, you should also wish for a pony too. And why shouldn't you? After all, wishes are totally free, and they don't affect the likelihood of them coming true.

This works very well with the concept of libertarianist thought, which is based almost solely on wishes. As Belle artfully ponders, "[j]ust imagine that we live in a state of perfect liberty, free from taxation and instrusive government, and we should all be wealthier and freer. Now wish that people would, despite any restraint on their actions such as policemen, functioning law courts, the SEC, and so on, not spend all their time screwing each other in the predictable ways ranging from ordinary rape, to the selling of fraudulent stocks in non-existent ventures, up to the wholesale dumping of mercury into the public water supply. Awesome, huh? But it gets better. Now wish that everyone had a pony!"

I guess when you know you're only going to garner 1-2% of the vote, you can afford to take some outlandish positions, because you know you're never going to have to follow through on any of them (BTW, the Naderites are every bit as guilty of this). So why not wish for an idealistic state that bears no similarity to any existing government of an industrialized country in the world?

Click your heels three times and say it with me: PONIES PONIES PONIES!!

Jon Stewart, reader of DL Cinci Blog

I'm guessing that Jon Stewart has been checking out our website recently, because at about 1:25 he hits on exactly the point I made just a couple weeks ago:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Osama bin Laden Needs to Attack America
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Jason Jones in Iran

Remind me again why the people that curse are the ones that ought to be censored? Oh that's right, because we're the fucking dangerous ones.

One small step

Finally, India is crawling into the 21st century.

New Steve = Old Steve?

Via FDL, we learn that Steve Driehaus is one of 19 dems who

...will not vote for healthcare legislation "unless it explicitly excludes abortion funding from the scope of any government-defined or subsidized health insurance plan."

Ain't the new Steve great?

Update: Call Steve Driehaus and tell him to vote for healthcare legislation with a public option, no strings attached. Ask Steve Driehaus to protect a woman's right to choose.

Cincinnati: (513) 684-2723
Fax: (513) 421-8722

Lieberturd flip-flops on health care

Well, is any one surprised that the d-bag from Connecticut is now against the public option? Knowing the dem pussies in the senate, they will probably give him a new committee chairmanship for opposing the public option.

(x-posted)