[Rhodes22-list] The Ben and Brad show...(Political)

[Steven Alm]

"Elites of course don't think those of us with degrees from state
universities are sophisticated enough to handle complex problems."

Brad, you're talking about Bush, right?  A Yalie.

On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 8:15 AM, Brad Haslett <flybrad at gmail.com> wrote:

> Ed,
>
> Better get your licks in on the NY Times while you can.  The "grey
> lady" as been morally bankrupt for some time and their business model
> is failing - they will soon be financially bankrupt as well.
>
> I like Dave Ramsey and occasionally listen to his radio show.
> Personally, I supported the 700 Billion dollar "bailout" plan even
> though it went against personal and political philosophies.  Now that
> it's been rejected (and wealth equivalent to the entire economy of
> India has been wiped away in a single day) perhaps it's time to look
> at some alternatives.  The mark to market accounting rule change
> bought us some time.
>
> I'm including an article out today from Fred Thompson on Sarah Palin
> because he references Brooks, the author of Ben's article.  Sarah was
> able to shake-up the 'good ole boy' network in Alaska and made a
> market based end-run around the Big Oil stranglehold on the pipeline
> deal.  We could use some "Joe six-pack" common sense in Washington.
>
> Elites of course don't think those of us with degrees from state
> universities are sophisticated enough to handle complex problems.  We
> couldn't do any worse than they have.
>
> Brad
>
> ---------------------------
>
> Qualified
> Fred Thompson
> Tuesday, September 30, 2008
>
> When John McCain selected Governor Sarah Palin, as his running mate,
> the Democrats and their far-left constituency let out a primal scream
> that could be heard from sea to shining sea. How dare he choose
> someone that they and their pals in the media had not had a chance to
> vet (i.e. libel, slander, and otherwise and otherwise eviscerate). Ah,
> but it was not too late. These seekers of "a new kind of politics"
> poured torrents of malicious abuse upon her and her family.
>
> Plane loads of scandal mongers, lawyers and other truth seekers became
> more numerous in Alaska than the polar bear, as they rallied local
> Democrats and disgruntled Republicans to their cause.
>
> Here was a woman who chose to have children and a career. Aging
> Washington socialites weighed in with newly discovered sensitivity for
> mothers with careers outside the home. Here was a woman who became
> upset because her ex-brother-in-law had tasered her nephew and
> threatened her father. The Democrats and their friends had to save the
> country from a woman like this.
>
> Governor Palin's every comment was scrutinized by the media and judged
> against what Jefferson or Lincoln might have said. Never mind that her
> counterpart, the 30-year-Washington-veteran Joe Biden, apparently is
> unaware that America relies upon coal for a lot of it's electricity or
> that he recently referred to a top level U.S. official's visit to Iran
> that never happened. That's just Joe being Joe – protected by the
> sheer number of his gaffes and the fact that he is Barack Obama's
> running mate.
>
> For a while there it seems the fact that so many uninformed yahoos
> (average people) love her was going to drive the main stream media
> nuts. They had a hard time grasping the fact that people like her
> because she is precisely the kind of politician that everyone has been
> saying they've wanted: Independent, not a captive of the Beltway
> including a Congress with a 9% approval rating, who will take on hacks
> of either party; who has the tenacity to win and the courage to fight
> for the long-term benefit of those she represents.
>
> Apparently what no one counted on was that a politician like this
> would actually show up on the national scene. The media was caught by
> surprise. The media doesn't like surprises.
>
> Naturally, there was a backlash to the treatment of Governor Palin and
> cooler-headed critics have largely concentrated on what they claim is
> her lack of qualifications. Of course much of the criticism of her
> qualifications reveals the application of the same old double
> standard. Less accomplished governors in times past have been
> considered to be perfectly "well-qualified" as VP picks.
>
> However, it is a legitimate issue and should be taken seriously. I
> especially take seriously the criticism of people such as New York
> Times columnist David Brooks who I consider to be an insightful
> analyst of the political scene.
>
> He recently wrote that governance is hard. It requires acquired
> skills. Most of all it requires prudence. What is prudence? Among
> other things, it is the ability to absorb information and discern the
> essential current of events – the things that go together and the
> things that will never go together. It is the ability to engage in
> complex deliberations and to understand which arguments have the most
> weight. How is prudence acquired? Through experience. Experience
> allows a leader to judge what is important and what is not. He added,
> "Sarah Palin has many virtues. If you wanted someone to destroy a
> corrupt establishment, she'd be your woman. But the constructive act
> of governance is another matter."
>
> One can hardly disagree with the desirability of our leaders having
> the qualities that Brooks describes (putting aside the question of how
> many of our leaders who are not Sarah Palin have demonstrated these
> qualities). But there are other important qualifications, such as
> will, courage, and determination. Frankly, an infusion of these
> qualities into our body politic is desperately needed – not just to
> raise hell with the establishment, but to speak the hard truth about
> unpleasant choices facing our country. To push for choices that will,
> in the long term, benefit our country, our children and our
> grandchildren. In other words, things which "prudent" leaders are all
> too often reluctant to do.
>
> For many years we have failed to address looming problems that will
> prove catastrophic to our nation. It's not because we are bereft of
> leaders with great experience. And it is not because they do not
> understand the "essential current of events." They know these things
> all too well. It is because they do not have the political courage to
> do anything about it.
>
> Recently, a Washington Post editorial pointed out that even before the
> recent financial crisis on Wall Street, the Government Accountability
> Office issued a report declaring the federal government on an
> "unsustainable long term fiscal path." This was primarily due to the
> projected cost of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, brought on
> by an aging population. We will be spending $41 trillion dollars more
> on these entitlements in the next 75 years than we will receive in
> payroll taxes and premiums, although the crunch will actually begin
> much sooner than that. And we already owe Japan and China about $500
> billion each.
>
> David Walker, the former Comptroller General of the United States
> calls this problem much larger than the recent financial rescue plan.
> In fact he calls it the "super sub-prime crisis." Which bring me to
> the current sub-prime crisis.
>
> Wall Street and Washington were full of people who were "qualified and
> experienced" in the field of finance. Sen. Barack Obama, for one, has
> a great deal of experience in the housing field. So do many of his
> closest advisers. I would have traded some of that experience for a
> few more leaders with less experience and more courage to buck the
> establishment and tell the truth about what was happening.
>
> This brings me back to Governor Sarah Palin, and why I say that
> courage and political will are at the very top of the "qualification"
> requirements for today's leaders. So the question is, how does Sarah
> Palin compare on that score with Biden and Obama, for that matter?
> Very well, I'd say.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 7:04 AM, Tootle <ekroposki at charter.net> wrote:
> >
> > Ben and Brad Show:
> >
> > Ben said,"
> >
> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/opinion/30brooks.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
> >
> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/opinion/30brooks.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
> >
> > The above link is to my favorite NY Times main stream media columnist.  I
> > like the way he thinks about the "bailout" issue.
> >
> > Brad said, "He got much of it right."
> >
> > Ben citation of the New York Times and its columnist is an issue for two
> > reasons.  The New York Times once billed itself as printing all the new
> that
> > is fit to print.  It lost that standard over the years and the rest of
> the
> > country recognizes it.  It has lost its credibility.
> >
> > Secondly, the New York Times is solidly main stream media as Ben said.
>  This
> > means that reasonable people in the other parts of the country understand
> > that what ever it prints, it is biased reporting.  So even when as Brad
> > says, "He got much of it right", its veracity is questioned by the rest
> of
> > the country.
> > Ben has coalesced into the Northeast Pseudo Elitist mold.   This type of
> > reasoning is exemplified by Chris Mattews.  Specifically that is put down
> > 'Blue Collar' America, because I have more than a high school education I
> > understand better and more.
> >
> > Blue Collar America does not read nor will it accept advice [even if it
> > good] from the New York Times.
> > Here is where Blue Collar America is getting it ideas on the situation
> from:
> >
> http://www.daveramsey.com/etc/fed_bailout/3_steps_to_change_the_nations_future_10928.htmlc?ictid=mlfrnd
> >
> > Now a read of David Brooks column cited shows that he has read George
> Soros
> > books and his thinking is influenced by Soros's concepts of capital flow.
> > Why has no major media interview Soros?  That is a big mistake and lost
> > opportunity.
> >
> > And the White House failed in not inviting Buffet and Soros to get their
> > perspective and ideas.  Because you seek advice does mean you have to
> follow
> > it.  But do get some good advice and not insider advice from Goldman
> Sachs
> > via Hank Paulson.  (Goldman Sach is openly supporting your opposition, so
> > why would they give you the best advice?).
> >
> > Brad, thank you for pointing out that the old lack luster McCain has
> looked
> > at the accounting issues and spoke about them.  Whereas Obama has
> developed
> > an elitist attitude that is to let others decide.  Obama has demonstrated
> a
> > real lack of understanding and leadership.  It seems that he does not
> have
> > even average intelligence.
> >
> > This guy is a real example of Elmer Gantry, Jim Baker and other con men.
> If
> > Obama was an army second lieutenant in combat he would have been fragged
> a
> > long time ago.  He is a phony leader, a false god image.
> >
> > Ed K
> > Greenville, SC, USA
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> http://www.nabble.com/The-Ben-and-Brad-show...%28Political%29-tp19759011p19759011.html
> > Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> > __________________________________________________
> >
>
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>