tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20784936901376679422024-03-13T09:00:47.253-04:00Fire Mickey KausA Blatant Rip-Off of FJM. And Alicublog. And anything that isn't nailed down.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger169125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-65855243282285790962010-09-21T23:19:00.003-04:002010-09-21T23:34:59.923-04:00Just When I Thought I Was Out ...<a href="http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/kausfiles.html">UNBEFUCKINGLIEVABLE</a>.<br /><br />In other news, Billy Joel is looking<span style="font-style: italic;"> </span><span style="font-style: italic;">terrible</span>.<br /><br /><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_dKIzktZC71M/TJl4YDYUOBI/AAAAAAAAAGM/UbhlADRXIsQ/s1600/MickeyJoel.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 225px; height: 254px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_dKIzktZC71M/TJl4YDYUOBI/AAAAAAAAAGM/UbhlADRXIsQ/s320/MickeyJoel.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5519575172938741778" border="0" /></a><br /><br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-64642164390336164272010-06-08T23:55:00.000-04:002010-06-08T23:55:00.817-04:00Youtube ChallengeMy belated submission for Mickey's video contest <a href="http://bit.ly/d3a19q">here</a>. <br /><br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-55395249225467749612010-06-08T09:20:00.002-04:002010-06-08T10:09:35.124-04:00Today's The Day!Today, California gets its chance to actually fire Mickey Kaus.<br /><br />I'm so jealous.<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-16748402837689824262010-05-12T08:59:00.001-04:002010-05-12T08:59:00.434-04:00Okay Maybe It's Not All Boring<a href="http://kaus.sitebuilder.completecampaigns.com/sbcc/blog_permalink.php?seq=1&id=694">Mickey for</a><a href="http://kaus.sitebuilder.completecampaigns.com/sbcc/blog_permalink.php?seq=1&id=694"> </a><a href="http://kaus.sitebuilder.completecampaigns.com/sbcc/blog_permalink.php?seq=1&id=694">the Non-Union Equivalent of California 2010</a>:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Fred Barnes raises the possibility of a "mad duck" Congress, in which Democrats lose their majorities and their soon-to-be-ex Congressmen reconvene in December to pass all the most controversial parts of the Democratic agenda</span><br /><br />Oh, no! Those monsters! What diabolical parts of their agenda will they seek to pass? Mickey suggests the immigration bill -- <span style="font-style: italic;">quelle surprise!</span> -- and ... a value added tax. Huh?<br /><br />Apparently, the idea of a VAT has become yet another of the right wing noise machine's terror-and-outrage objects, after Paul Volcker (an actual golem created to haunt Larry Summers) idly suggested a VAT was "not as toxic" as it used to be and a handful of Democrats didn't rule out a VAT at some point in the future. The Senate then passed a resolution against the VAT 85-13, which puts its chances for immediate passage somewhere on the level of the <a href="http://www.snpp.com/episodes/2F11.html">Amended Springfield/Pervert Bill</a>. [<span style="font-style: italic;">But Obama said it was "on the table"!!! -- ed</span>. Yes, presumably somewhere between the butter, the napkin holder, and the nuclear strike on Iran].<br /><br />Honestly, I'm just surprised that Mickey didn't add the revival of the fairness doctrine, the banning of salt, the outlawing of hunting, and the general confiscation of all firearms to his list.<br /><br />Anyway, nothing ever happens during a lame duck session -- remember 2006, when they <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/02/AR2006120200764.html">sneakily passed every single item on the Republican agenda?</a> -- but nothing's too scary for Mickey when Democrats are in power! They'll use every trick in the book to advance their horrible agenda of sensible financial and environmental regulation!<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Alert reader J. suggests "an all-out filibuster" would stop a mad-duck legislating binge. Not if the legislation can be put in the form of "reconciliation" bills--and I would think a VAT would qualify because of its obvious budgetary impact. ...</span><br /><br />Except that reconciliation can only be used once a year, has already been used this year, and the new Congressional term begins on January 3rd, 2011 -- information which I acquired at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reconciliation_%28United_States_Congress%29">this incredibly obscure research database</a>.<br /><br />BUT ZOMG WHAT ABOUT THE FIRST TWO DAYS OF 2011??? WHO WILL PROTECT US THEN???<br /><br />A <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-endorse-20100507-18,0,6999694.story">Democratic-gadfly persona</a>, that's who! Kaus 2010!<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-53683784673522077312010-05-08T14:58:00.004-04:002010-05-08T16:24:44.938-04:00Understatement<a href="http://kaus.sitebuilder.completecampaigns.com/sbcc/blog_permalink.php?seq=1&id=695">Mickey</a>:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">I'll be debating unionism today, Friday, May 7, from 3 to 3:30 P.M. on KPFK, 90.7 FM in Los Angeles. </span><br /><br />And then again from 3:30 P.M. until Judgment Day.<br /><br />Apologies for the lack of posting, but following Mickey as he repeats the same four things he's ever said while pretending to be speaking to a completely new audience -- "God, can you believe Eugene Robinson's latest column? It ... it ... reminds me of, uh, why Barbara Boxer needs to go!" -- on a blog that's even more sporadic than Kausfiles is, well, pretty boring.<br /><br />The only bright spots are Mickey's <a href="http://kaus.sitebuilder.completecampaigns.com/news/newsitem.php?section=PRS&id=8407&showcat=2&seq=1">press releases</a>. Even though it's mostly just him reprinting his blog in quotation marks, the bits where he pretends he's his own communications director and talks about himself in the third person are just classic.<br /><br />I presume the drafting sessions go something like this:<br /><br /><object height="385" width="480"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dE-mxVxFXLg&hl=en_US&fs=1&"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dE-mxVxFXLg&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" height="385" width="480"></embed></object><br /><br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-74370938036271390482010-04-18T22:13:00.005-04:002010-04-18T22:32:36.021-04:00Mickey Wins The Lou Dobbs PrimaryHoly cow, Mickey finally approves of unions acting in their own self-interest!<br /><br />... you know, <a href="http://kaus.sitebuilder.completecampaigns.com/sbcc/blog_permalink.php?seq=1&id=672">so long as it hurts Mexicans, somehow</a> ...<br /><br />And then Mickey wonders why he isn't more popular at the California Democratic Convention.<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-69284972203931606362010-03-27T06:34:00.000-04:002010-03-27T06:34:00.192-04:00In Which Tom Friedman Becomes His Own Sassy Black FriendTom Friedman's <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/24/opinion/24friedman.html">latest ode to America's suspiciously Tom-Friedman-esque "independents and centrists"</a> has been rightly mocked, mostly for lines like this:<br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br />That is why I want my own Tea Party. I want a Tea Party of the radical center.</span><br /><br />As valid as <a href="http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/29565.html">those criticisms</a> are -- and I mean, here's Tom Friedman wishing aloud for a political movement that simultaneously represented the majority of the American public and also wanted to enact all of Tom's policy preferences, which is just about the saddest bout of narcissism committed to page ... and poor Tom can't even describe his fantasy majority party without being <span style="font-style: italic;">completely incoherent</span> -- I submit that the line is even more spectacular in context:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">That is why I want my own Tea Party. I want a Tea Party of the radical center.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Say what?</span><br /><br />That's right, Tom Friedman just imagined you, the reader, as an ethnic supporting character on a mid-90's sitcom who was just BLOWN AWAY by the off-the-wall craziness of Friedman's vision.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">"What's that, Tom Friedman? A party for extremist moderates? You better chiggity-check yourself before you wreck yourself!"</span><br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-9480176319632028632010-03-25T14:53:00.001-04:002010-03-25T14:53:00.296-04:00Doomed To FailNot that I don't agree with the sentiment behind Gawker's <a href="http://gawker.com/5492244/introducing-the-mickey-kaus-oppo-research-project">Mickey Kaus oppo research project</a>, but I just can't see it going anywhere, for three reasons:<br /><br />(1) <span style="font-weight: bold;">Mickey is the Boring Kind of Weird</span>. Here's a man who has been making literally the same three or four points -- illegal immigrants bad, welfare bad, unions bad, and sometimes health care good -- using the same arguments written the same way in the same forum for what feels like an eternity. That's a different kind of weird than "screwing a member of your staff and then having a creepy fundamentalist organization encourage you to bribe your way out of it"-weird.<br /><br />(2) <span style="font-weight: bold;">Nobody Cares</span>. Oppo research is valuable for finding embarrassing information or proving that someone is a hypocrite. I doubt Mickey is actually capable of embarrassment (how would he write what he writes otherwise?) and in any event he's likely to be too boring to have done anything particularly embarrassing (see #1). As for hypocrisy, Mickey's political leanings are so wildly incoherent that it's pretty much impossible to tar him as a hypocrite. Only one thing would really get to Mickey's reputation: evidence that he knowingly hired illegal immigrants. [<span style="font-style: italic;">What about buying a Chris Bangle BMW? -- ed. </span>Okay, <span style="font-style: italic;">two </span>things.] Everything else is either common knowledge (he's an idiot) or representative of his acknowledged past as an actual liberal. Even if he committed a Kardinal Sin and once *joined a union* [<span style="font-style: italic;">The Harvard Law School Local 402? -- ed. </span> I know, I know, bear with me], he can just claim that doing so helped him see the light and turn into the blog version of the Pinkerton Detective Agency.<br /><br />(3) <span style="font-weight: bold;">You Don't Need Oppo Research for a Crackpot</span>. There's a reason why the phrase "Hey, Lehane, what do we have on Dennis Kucinich?" has never been uttered. I mean, look at Mickey's greatest hits:<br /><br />- Referring to waterboarding as <a href="http://firemickeykaus.blogspot.com/2009/05/pure-torture.html">"semi-torture"</a> and believing that the issue was an electoral winner for the GOP.<br /><br />- Screaming about how health care reform <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2009/12/22/health-care-the-cbo-s-alternate-universe.aspx">will be incredibly expensive</a>, <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2009/08/12/will-you-won-t-you-be-on-my-death-panel.aspx">obliquely referring</a> to death panels and then <a href="http://firemickeykaus.blogspot.com/2010/02/mickeys-new-friends.html">endorsing health care reform</a> anyway.<br /><br />- <a href="http://firemickeykaus.blogspot.com/2009/04/wherein-i-shockingly-find-flaws-in.html">Tinfoil hat speculation</a> involving Obama encouraging a flood of illegal immigration in advance of the 2010 Census.<br /><br />- His hilariously habit of <a href="http://firemickeykaus.blogspot.com/2009/04/bookmarks-of-damned.html">linking to the kind of websites</a> that are on Southern Poverty Law Center watch lists.<br /><br />- His fervent desire to <a href="http://firemickeykaus.blogspot.com/2009/08/mickeys-first-orszagism.html">drastically cut social security benefits</a> for current recipients. (Remember, he's a Democrat!)<br /><br />- Displaying <a href="http://firemickeykaus.blogspot.com/2009/12/it-was-six-years-ago-today.html">foreign policy chops</a> that Tom Friedman would find woefully naive.<br /><br />- Opposing <a href="http://firemickeykaus.blogspot.com/2009/02/lie-down-with-dogs.html">help for the unemployed</a> in the midst of high unemployment because it represents an nefarious, secret attempt to repeal his precious welfare reform, and citing to wingnut think tanks for proof.<br /><br />- Having literally no idea <a href="http://firemickeykaus.blogspot.com/2009/06/more-fun-with-kausfiles-karchives.html">how Washington works</a>.<br /><br />- Having literally no idea <a href="http://firemickeykaus.blogspot.com/2009/02/just-askin.html">how Wall Street works</a>.<br /><br />- Seriously believing <a href="http://firemickeykaus.blogspot.com/2009/02/no-big-deal.html">that dire predictions about the housing bubble</a> and its effect on the U.S. economy were just ploys by liberal do-gooders to expand the welfare state, and that the housing bust was "no big deal".<br /><br />And that's just random stuff I managed to write about when I was bored! His archives are a veritable treasure trove of offensive and wrong.<br /><br />****************<br /><br />That's really Mickey's advantage here: if you get one thing wrong, you'll hear about it forever ("And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they <strong></strong>cling to guns or religion", etc.); but if you <span style="font-style: italic;">live </span>wrong, then there's too much to work with -- it'd be like criticizing Christopher Hitchens for making inflammatory statements or Lady GaGa for dressing like a MegaMan boss ... where do you even start?<br /><br />Good luck, Gawker. You're gonna need it.<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-25485778360091818512010-03-23T23:14:00.006-04:002010-03-24T01:42:55.241-04:00Leave The Record Alone Mickey<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_dKIzktZC71M/S6mgC4uiV_I/AAAAAAAAAF8/HqMORcSx1BE/s1600-h/CSPAN.jpg"><br /></a><a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2010/01/24/the-left-takes-a-powder.aspx">Kandidate Kaus</a>, just two short months ago:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Let the record show that, in the crunch, it was the "progressive" left that bailed on health care reform.</span><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_dKIzktZC71M/S6mgC4uiV_I/AAAAAAAAAF8/HqMORcSx1BE/s1600-h/CSPAN.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 320px; height: 180px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_dKIzktZC71M/S6mgC4uiV_I/AAAAAAAAAF8/HqMORcSx1BE/s320/CSPAN.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5452064795356452850" border="0" /></a><br />Well, I'm going to assume without looking it up that those 34 'nay' votes are all members of the progressive left who have totally bailed on health care reform for the reasons Mickey said. Not even going to look at <a href="http://politics.nytimes.com/congress/votes/111/house/2/165">the roll call</a>. Nope.<br /><br />And I'm also going to assume that the progressives were the ones who went down to the wire engaging in <a href="http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0210/Stupak_Unacceptable.html">pointless political theater</a> while the Blue Dogs successfully negotiated key changes to the Senate bill to ensure passage. And that the progressives wanted to <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34753.html">scrap the process and start over with a smaller bill</a> while centrist Democrats supported the ultimately successful effort to pass the comprehensive bill establishing universal health care for the first time in America. I mean, there's no way Nancy Pelosi wanted to see this thing pass, right? Must have happened in spite of her, and not because of her ... what with her and her kind being <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2010/01/24/the-left-takes-a-powder.aspx">deluded, angry outsiders afraid to pass health care reform because it just might work</a>.<br /><br />Look, if there's one thing that I've learned from studying at the feet of Mickey Kaus, it's that progressive politicians are always stupid, corrupt, shameless panderers overwhelmed by their emotions and incapable of either political or policy success -- and there's simply no way that recent events could have proven that thesis wrong.<br /><br />After all, that's the reason why we <span style="font-style: italic;">need </span>people like Mickey in the Senate: to keep progressives from screwing everything up, just like they always do.<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-17720836632020377082010-03-05T06:09:00.001-05:002010-03-05T06:09:00.037-05:00... So Long As You Aren't A Money Liberal<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_dKIzktZC71M/S49AlRb59nI/AAAAAAAAAF0/o9T61siyr7g/s1600-h/Uncle+Kaus.JPG"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 447px; height: 492px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_dKIzktZC71M/S49AlRb59nI/AAAAAAAAAF0/o9T61siyr7g/s320/Uncle+Kaus.JPG" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5444641483594004082" border="0" /></a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-31578195308705266782010-03-03T23:06:00.004-05:002010-03-04T00:13:27.860-05:00There Is A Man ... A Certain Man ...<div style="text-align: center;"><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_dKIzktZC71M/S49AATWRUSI/AAAAAAAAAFs/GN-V6-GJUVo/s1600-h/Citizen+Kaus.JPG"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 456px; height: 588px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_dKIzktZC71M/S49AATWRUSI/AAAAAAAAAFs/GN-V6-GJUVo/s320/Citizen+Kaus.JPG" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5444640848452079906" border="0" /></a><br /></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-90113306535009996422010-03-02T01:43:00.011-05:002010-03-02T02:35:57.910-05:00Does Mickey Really Look Like A Guy With A Plan?<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_dKIzktZC71M/S4y_wH6Q4WI/AAAAAAAAAFk/r3bgts66H1U/s1600-h/Untitled2.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 444px; height: 108px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_dKIzktZC71M/S4y_wH6Q4WI/AAAAAAAAAFk/r3bgts66H1U/s320/Untitled2.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5443936883062137186" border="0" /></a><br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_dKIzktZC71M/S4yzlgeU_uI/AAAAAAAAAFE/rZH-m9DKB9o/s1600-h/lolwut.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 287px; height: 320px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_dKIzktZC71M/S4yzlgeU_uI/AAAAAAAAAFE/rZH-m9DKB9o/s320/lolwut.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5443923506537758434" border="0" /></a><br />******************************<br /><br />Mickey's just <a href="http://blogs.laweekly.com/ladaily/city-news/mickey-kaus-for-senate/">a dog chasing cars</a>. He wouldn't know what to do with one if he caught it.<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-59884712654938189862010-02-28T23:24:00.008-05:002010-03-01T02:08:33.586-05:00Mickey's New FriendsApologies for the lack of posting, but February's been pretty rough. [<span style="font-style: italic;">You've just been watching the Olympics, haven't you? -- ed.</span> Only to double check <a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/02/vancouver-medal-count-projections-day_27.html">Nate Silver's medal predictions</a>! Snot-nosed little punk always using his "numbers" and his "math" to make predictions ... that's <a href="http://gawker.com/388026/the-predictions-game-with-famous-blogger-mickey-kaus">not the Mickey Kaus way</a>!]<br /><br />Anyway, after spending the week rattling off several "organized labor will ruin America" posts notable only for their redundancy, Mickey decided to finish off a pretty lousy month with <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2010/02/24/the-real-reason-cynical-dem-pols-should-vote-for-the-health-care-bill.aspx">a pretty lousy pep talk</a> for Congressional Democrats:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The Real Reason Cynical Dem Pols Should Vote for the Health Care Bill</span><br /><br />Good start there. I would have gone with "Listen Up, Jerkwads" for the headline, but that's why Mickey's the pro. The gist of the post is that Republicans might be actually -- gasp! -- <span style="font-style: italic;">lying </span>about the horrible things that health care reform does, and that the best thing for Democrats would be to pass the bill and show the public that the Republicans might have been exaggerating about "socialized medicine" and "death panels" and the like. [<span style="font-style: italic;">Which Republicans, exactly? -- ed. </span>You know, the ones that say things about Obama supporting "<a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2009/08/12/will-you-won-t-you-be-on-my-death-panel.aspx">a panel of independent experts making end-of-life recommendations in order to save costs that have an effect at an individual level</a>" ... you know, <span style="font-style: italic;">those </span>Republicans.]<br /><br />So Mickey makes this pitch, the most pathetically tepid endorsement of health care reform to date -- "Democrats should pass health care reform because it doesn't suck as much as Republicans say it sucks" -- and his commenters respond with <a href="http://firemickeykaus.blogspot.com/2010/02/no-comment.html">the enlightened discourse</a> that we've come to expect from Mickey's readers:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span><span style="font-weight: bold;">Request an explanation why you don't seem to give a hoot about what this monstrosity costs.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Annihilate what remains of the public fisc? Or become France? Thanks, no.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">How many deaths and needlessly limited and painful lives will the "lack of innovation" cause, which, Mickey cynically hopes will not happen for a few years?</span><br /><br />Got that, Mickey? You're cynically supporting the deaths of thousands of people by half-assedly throwing your support behind passage of health care reform. Maybe <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2009/12/ezra_kleins_venomous_slam_of_jo.html">Bizarro Charles Lane</a> will come to your defense.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">In case you haven't gotten the word, socialism never works for anything under any circumstances, anywhere, anytime. But the dreamers keep dreaming for some reason only they understand.</span><br /><br />That second sentence is almost a Joni Mitchell lyric.<br /><br />Note that for the first time in eight solid months, Mickey (a) admits that the Democrats' plans for health care reform won't lead to outright disaster, and (b) acknowledges that the Republican attacks are wildly hyperbolic. For this affront, his audience -- his real audience, not the wide-eyed-liberals-in-need-of-some-hard-truths that he pretends he's addressing -- calls him a communist, and not a soul defends him.<br /><br />But, uh, well ... hey, aren't unions a bunch of ridiculous jerks? Right? Guys?<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-16718303610402543652010-02-06T11:28:00.002-05:002010-02-06T11:39:25.353-05:00No CommentHave they finally done it? <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2010/02/03/don-t-start-the-orgy-of-recrimination-without-me.aspx"> Enabled comments on Mickey's precious blog</a>? I never thought I'd live to see the day ... mostly because I hoped that he'd be fired first.<br /><br />Finally, Mickey gets to really see what his readers think -- no doubt they are the kind of discerning neoliberals who understand the basic necessity of government services yet resent the influence that entrenched interests have in shaping the distribution of resources ... you know, the sort of old new leftists who see tension and perhaps hypocrisy in a political philosophy devoted to a just and equal society that is dependent on groups formed around fragmentation and selfishness for its electoral success.<br /><br />Let us hear their wisdom:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">this seems to be a new discuss facility; how secure is the external log in service? are they able to capture my yahoo password?</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Hey, look! It's me. Hi, everyone.</span><br /><br />Okay, okay, rough start, that's to be expected. Technical difficulties and whatnot.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Mickey, this quote from Obama made me realize what is so jarring about his mode of communicating with the public. He speaks as if he is one of the guys, letting us in on hoiw things really are. It is informal and personal. He says "you can't go blow a lot of money in Vegas" and similar riffs. But more and more of the public know from other news sources that he is distorting and covering up what is actually going on in Washington.</span><br /><br />Oh, hey, someone lamely complaining about Obama's wildly successful rhetorical style, and then complaining that NOBAMA LIES. Well, you know, they can't all be gems. How about you, kind sir:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Has anyone ever sat down with this man and told him that if he has to say this, and "Let me be perfectly clear..." and "As I already told you ..." and all the other permutations of those statements that there might be something wrong with his communication style? No. Probably not. Because I think it is one of those verbal tricks used by sales and con men and propagandists to frame whatever follows as something very obvious that the message RECEIVER has (ostensibly) failed to comprehend. The trick is, of course, that in this case, the speaker has often communicated the very opposite, but this statement of certainty raises uncertainty in the RECEIVER's mind. It's therefore the RECEIVER's fault for not 'getting' it.</span><br /><br />And then it's right after this he tries to hook you up to an e-meter.<br /><br />Nobody has yet shared their secrets about where you can meet wealthy men online, but maybe they're just biding their time.<br /><br />**************************<br /><br />Official Fire Mickey Kaus prediction for Mickey's comment section: lots and lots of CAPS LOCK.<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-85686551877862053952010-02-01T20:51:00.005-05:002010-02-01T21:40:34.205-05:00Bills To Pay The SkillsIn <a href="http://slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2010/01/31/name-first-shame-later.aspx">arguing against</a> unspecified attempts to expand the social safety net during a recession -- it's for their own good, you see! -- Mickey links to <a href="http://www.city-journal.org/2010/eon0126hm.html">this piece</a> by Kaus heartthrob Heather MacDonald:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Championing Dependency</span><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The poverty industry renews its attack on welfare reform.</span><br /><br />Poverty industry! Even Mickey prefers to insinuate that evil politicians and dumb Money Liberals are profiting off of the very conditions they purport to eradicate -- not actively manufacturing poverty like it's some sort of consumer good. Oh, this is awesome.<br /><br />(Wealthy Banker: "Shit, what I am doing in finance, when I could be raking in that sweet poverty cash? <span style="font-style: italic;">Poor people have tons of money</span>!")<br /><br />In that spirit, the author describes her foes thusly:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">poverty advocates</span><br /><br />I'm sure she meant "anti-poverty advocates" there. It's not like she actually believes that these advocates who have dedicated their lives to low-paying work on behalf of the least fortunate are purposefully working to keep them poor. Oh, wait ...<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">dependency-promoting bills</span><br /><span><br /></span><span>T</span><span>he Live Off Welfare Forever Act of 2009 was totally misunderstood.<br /></span><span style="font-weight: bold;"><br />Albany dependency brigades</span><br /><br />Hey, the Albany dependency brigades fought valiantly at Antietam before falling into their current disreputable state.<br /><br />Here's the article's thesis, in case you couldn't guess:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Powerful political forces are trying to make dependency acceptable again</span>.<br /><br />If by "powerful political forces" she means banking industry, and by "dependency" she means "depending on the federal government's bailout of AIG, cheap money from the Fed, and an implicit guarantee to step in in the case of failure", she'd make a ton of sense, and actually be speaking truth to power. The reality-- that she's using the phrase to describe anti-poverty advocates in the very same piece where she gamely tries to spin a 26.5% child poverty rate as a <span style="font-style: italic;">success </span>-- is just ugly.<br /><br />[I do hate to turn every criticism of Mickey & co.'s anti-anti-poverty idiocy into GOLDMAN SACHS GOLDMAN SACHS GOLDMAN SACHS ... but still, any use of the phrase "powerful political forces" that doesn't refer specifically to the banking industry is now, by definition, histrionic.]<br /><br />The gem of the piece:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">[T]he best way for an unskilled worker to enter the workforce is actually to start working, rather than spend years in often fruitless “education and training” programs</span>.<br /><br />Really? The <span style="font-style: italic;">best </span>way to enter the workforce is to start working? Isn't that <span style="font-style: italic;">the only way</span>?<br /><br />Even assuming she meant "escape poverty" or "break the cycle of dependency" or some other such blather -- and ignoring that her "just go work" prescription is being offered at a time of 10% unemployment -- why put "education and training" in scare quotes? Are those dependency advocates in the Obama administration sending the unemployed to the University of Phoenix?<br /><br />Are they going to business school?<br /><br />Oh, and how precisely are unskilled workers supposed to get skilled without education and training? Mickey and his ilk are always deploying that vaguely insulting term to suggest that <span style="font-style: italic;">those people</span> could have gone out and gotten some skills if they wanted to, and since they didn't they deserve their fate. [<span style="font-style: italic;">Hey, Mickey has a Harvard Law degree, and he's still fucking useless -- ed.</span> Good point!] Yet every damn time someone proposes something that could conceivably skill-ify the downtrodden -- encouraging enrollment in a four-year college, say -- these same anti-anti-poverty-advocacy advocates declare that such efforts are "fruitless" and these slovenly types should just go work at Wal-Mart or something.<br /><br />It's almost as though they possess a "fundamentally inegalitarian and elitist" belief that only certain people are capable of being skilled workers -- and it just so happens that those with "educational credentials and yuppie resumes" fit the bill ... oh, wait, Mickey's says <a href="http://slate.msn.com/id/2124546/&#comparable">it's feminists who think like that</a>. My bad!<br /><br />The Pro-Poverty-and-Dependency Lobby must have gotten to me, too!<br /><br />*******<br /><br />Hey, remember that scene in <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110057/"><span style="font-style: italic;">Hoop Dreams</span></a> when Arthur Agee's mother gets her certification to be a nurse's assistant and weeps openly at the school's graduation ceremony, knowing that she can now provide for her family?<br /><br />That was when Mickey Kaus left the theater in disgust.<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-60390923983032508192010-01-17T10:48:00.001-05:002010-01-17T10:48:00.751-05:00Disqualifying Statements?Does <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2149332/&#maxb">this Kausfiles Klassic </a>from September 2006 <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2010/01/14/how-to-blow-it-all-in-one-twitter.aspx">count</a>?<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">RT partner "R" emails to give the upshot ... Only 1 of 5 Democrats look to be in any trouble at all, so the magic number for the D's remains 15 or 16 at the worst.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Doesn't sound like a baked cake, does it? ... And if the Dems aren't convincingly ahead in enough of those races now to pick up 15 seats, doesn't it seem like the GOPs have a chance?</span><br /><br />That was the mid-term election in 2006. You know, the election when Democrats won <span style="font-style: italic;">thirty-one seats</span>?<br /><br />In Mickey's universe, a cake is not fully baked until it is fired from a cannon into the sun.<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-67678675360788275432010-01-15T13:08:00.000-05:002010-01-15T13:08:00.446-05:00Kausfiles Recycles!Note that before there was <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/tags/SAVE+JANET_2100_/default.aspx">this</a>, all the Napolitano news was tagged with <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/tags/SECRETS+OF+CAFE+MILANO/default.aspx">this</a>.<br /><br />I'm not sure what precisely this Napolitano business has to do with Mickey's prior wrongness regarding Bill Richardson [<span style="font-style: italic;">They're governors ... in the southwest ... do I need to draw you a picture? -- ed. </span>Yes, and try to work <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Gibbons_%28U._S._politician%29">Jim Gibbons</a> in, too -- the next time Mickey mentions him will be the first ...] and I'm still not sure why Napolitano's role in the Anita Hill affair would result in <span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">bipartisan </span>protection [<span style="font-style: italic;">Because the Anita Hill hearings roughly coincide with the last time Mickey had any relevance in Washington? - ed.</span> Hey, that's not right ... Mickey *never* had any relevance in Washington ...], but it's clear that when we think of Janet Napolitano, Mickey thinks we should be thinking of whoever the hell it is that Mickey thinks Bill Richardson had sex with.<br /><br />A normal person would ask "why?" But a normal person does not read Mickey Kaus.<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-6636567912947323742010-01-14T13:13:00.000-05:002010-01-14T13:13:00.554-05:00Nobody Could Have Seen This ComingFrom the New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/business/economy/12bailout.html?ref=todayspaper">article</a> on taxing the banks:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">The most likely alternatives would be a tax based on the size and riskiness of an institution’s loans and other financial holdings, or a tax on profits.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Lobbyists for bankers, taken by surprise, immediately objected to any new tax.</span><br /><br />Suggested follow-up questions:<br /><br />- Taken by surprise meaning that you've seen it coming for ages and have been desperately spinning to try to forestall the inevitable ("the housing bubble took us by surprise!")?<br /><br />- Taken by surprise meaning you totally knew it would happen and you're just trying to act as though it's so inconceivably crass that you never saw it coming ("the furor over bonuses took us by surprise!")?<br /><br />- Or taken by surprise like you're all bunch of know-nothing, backwards idiots getting high on your own supply ("financial deregulation leading to complete collapse took us by surprise!")?<br /><br />Then again, when a <span style="font-style: italic;">lobbyist </span>for <span style="font-style: italic;">bankers </span>tells you he's shocked -- shocked! -- by something, I'm sure it's totally genuine.<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-19363289444395871082010-01-13T09:09:00.001-05:002010-01-13T09:13:15.628-05:00Gotta Beat LifeMickey, in the midst of <a href="http://slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2010/01/11/peter-orszag-is-no-gary-hart.aspx">explaining his inexplicable contrarianism</a>:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">[T]he purpose of the health care system is to keep people alive--it's enemy is, in effect, death, which will never be defeated.</span><br /><br />You mean we're MORTAL? Oh, man, I'm glad Mickey's around to help us out.<br /><br />STOP THINKING YOU'RE VAMPIRES, PEOPLE.<br /><br />Actually, you know the best part of this help-me-help-you-understand-my-ridiculousness post?<br /><br />He lists as a "contradiction" something that was never a contradiction in the first place (he wants to spend more money on health care and less money on the military; this approach endorsed by a <a href="http://www.eisenhowermemorial.org/speeches/19530416%20Chance%20for%20Peace.htm">noted neoliberal contrarian here</a>), yet his explanation as to why it's not a contradiction is <span style="font-style: italic;">also wrong</span>. (Who thinks that the rational purpose of a nation's military is not to "keep people alive"? Genghis Khan?).<br /><br />Mickey then declares failure, and asks for help from his readers:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">None of these answers is completely satisfying. Suggestions welcomed.</span><br /><br />Suggestion: you're an idiot.<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-74008220563177791202010-01-12T08:43:00.000-05:002010-01-12T08:43:00.550-05:00Rending Of GarmentsSo, is it <a href="http://nymag.com/news/politics/63045/index6.html">Elizabeth Edwards or John Heilemann's source</a> who is <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=tcP82ts37cMC&pg=PA51&dq=tom+stoppard+rock+and+roll+%22look+at+it%22&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false">completely ripping off Tom Stoppard</a>?<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-49657045504475864892010-01-10T23:02:00.002-05:002010-01-10T23:02:01.154-05:00All I KnowWe know three things:<br /><br />1) Mickey is king of <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2181118/#undernews">the undernews</a>.<br /><br />2) Mickey hates Peter Orszag, for attempting to murder Mickey by personally mandating how many hospital beds are available in North Dakota. [<span style="font-style: italic;">No, seriously ... -- ed. </span>No, <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2010/01/07/the-nyt-is-peter-orszag-s-love-child.aspx">seriously!</a>]<br /><br />3) "[T]he fact that Mr. Orszag’s ex — Claire Milonas, a 39-year-old venture capitalist — was pregnant with his daughter was well known among Beltway swells." <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/fashion/10orszag.html?hp"><span style="font-style: italic;">Link</span></a>.<br /><br />So, um, Mickey ... if you can't deliver on #1, even in service of #2, what exactly is your purpose here?<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-24085110114942884932010-01-08T22:20:00.000-05:002010-01-10T22:52:30.182-05:00The Theory Goes Right Out The WindowThe Washington Post, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/06/AR2010010604931_pf.html">showing off</a> their economic chops:<br /> <br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Employers, the theory goes, would put the savings into higher wages.</span><br /><br />When this theory is the underpinning of your outlook on life, you should really give up on your theory, and probably give up on life. This theory, my theory goes, is completely idiotic.<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-74421783950422436702009-12-31T11:19:00.000-05:002009-12-31T11:19:00.135-05:00Where Every Day Is Opposite DayMickey's take on health care is pretty formulaic at this point, so there really isn't much to examine. The man has literally three concepts that he trots out to explain every new development:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">"<a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/tags/KABUKI/default.aspx">Kabuki</a>"</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Use</span>: Any time a liberal attempts to make anything better.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Why</span>: Liberals are evil, scheming bastards who don't actually want to ever accomplish anything. Also, they once called Mickey a "bald jerk" and he will never, ever forgive them.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">"<a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/tags/MONSTERS+FROM+THE+ID/default.aspx">Id</a>"</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Use</span>: Any time a politician attempts to kill the useful bits of health care reform, no matter how obviously nonsensical or venal his/her motive.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Why</span>: Mickey can't argue that various centrist democrats have been bought by the industries they purport to regulate -- this would violate his core thesis that <span style="font-style: italic;">liberal </span>democrats (Dick Durbin! Boo! Hiss!) are to blame for all the evil in the world -- so he attributes the centrists' perfidy to the fear that the public simply hates subsidized universal health care. Because ... well, because it's made by liberals! (<span style="font-style: italic;">see </span>"Kabuki")<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">"<a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2009/10/09/the-dems-fate-accompli.aspx">Juice</a>"</span><br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Use</span>: To explain why health care is still alive, despite its many setbacks (<span style="font-style: italic;">see </span>"Id").<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Why</span>: Democrats are evil, scheming bastards who pretend to want to accomplish things only to extract money from interested parties.<br /><br />*****************<br /><br />So, in summation, Mickey Kaus has his head so far up his ass that he thinks politicians act in fear of the <span style="font-style: italic;">voting public</span> and treat <span style="font-style: italic;">corporate donors</span> like suckers.<br /><br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-4842359490899341862009-12-29T11:28:00.002-05:002009-12-29T11:28:00.286-05:00It Was Six Years Ago Today ...A <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2093002/">Kausfiles Klassic</a>, with Mickey showing off his foreign policy chops:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">Two very useful reports on the Iraq timetable (in WaPo, and the Los Angeles Times ) suggest that while we may or may not be moving too quickly to hand over sovereignty, the "artificial timeline" derided by Hillary Clinton has some obvious virtues. The June 30 deadline focuses the minds of the Americans on what they can and can't expect to accomplish before they've outstayed their welcome--do we really need to "cash out" Iraq's food rationing program in accordance with Milton-Friedman's theories before we leave?--and it focuses the mind of Iraqis on what they need to do as well, including what compromises they may need to make.</span><br /><br />Wow! If Iraqis minds were that focused in December 2003, imagine how focused they must be now! At this point, they can probably bend spoons with their minds!<br /><br />With that combination of simplistic analysis, churlish liberal-bashing and outright idiocy, it's actually somewhat puzzling that Mickey hasn't been offered a spot at the Brookings Institute yet. They must be in thrall to the Money Liberals!<br /><br />p.s. Coming soon to a terrible op-ed page near you: Mickey Kaus and Michael O'Hanlon think a turning point is just six months away!<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2078493690137667942.post-47410573134834894732009-12-26T06:06:00.001-05:002009-12-26T06:06:00.170-05:00KabukkakeMickey <a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2009/12/20/health-care-will-kabuki-kill-pong.aspx">on the left's awful, awful desire</a> to see the health care bill get better:<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">What do we want? More Kabuki! Will the angry left's need for cathartic Kabuki kill the promising "Pong" gambit--and maybe kill health care reform entirely (by forcing a House-Senate conference and a conference bill that then never gets re-passed by the Senate)? ... Kausfiles awaits Ezra Klein's denunciation of Howard Dean, Keith Olbermann, Jane Hamsher and Markos Moulitsas for being "willing to cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in order" to satisfy an emotional need to 'fight' for a doomed plan.</span><br /><br />Can you spot the flaw in Mickey's swipe at Ezra Klein? I'm busy writing letters to Senators Dean, Olbermann, Hamshet and Moulitsas, so just write your answer down and mail it to me at your earliest convenience.<br /><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com