nancynall.com » Saturday morning market.

Saturday morning market.

I’m mov­ing to Coozledad’s veg­e­tar­ian farm.

48 responses to
“Saturday morning market.”

  1. brian stouder said on February 6th, 2010 at 12:21 pm

    Hey! — the Fox News pig heads are at the market?

    Excel­lent

  2. coozledad said on February 6th, 2010 at 1:15 pm

    There’s some Ital­ian (ancient Roman) dish that’s made with pork cheeks, lin­guine, toma­toes and Pecorino Romano. Seems like it starts with a B.(Edit– buca­tini all’amatriciana.)
    There’s a house across the street from us that’ll prob­a­bly be on the mar­ket fairly soon, on sixty acres (a lot of it wooded). The elderly woman who lived there is too frail to be out there by her­self any­more. The house is right cute, but it’s gonna need a whole lot of work. A por­tion of it is the orig­i­nal 1830’s? struc­ture.
    We’ll pay you for access to the well!

  3. Rana said on February 6th, 2010 at 2:19 pm

    It’s the eyes drawn on the pig’s head’s wrap­ping that makes the pic­ture. Goodness.

  4. alex said on February 6th, 2010 at 3:56 pm

    What the devil is that in the top pic­ture? Looks like a bird with a wal­rus head and its left eye socket stuffed with a cot­ton ball. My middle-aged eyes can’t see shit on this lit­tle lap­top anymore.

  5. Dexter said on February 6th, 2010 at 4:00 pm

    This is Noah Cross. Quiz: How did he pre­fer to have fish served?
    http://​www​.mem​phis​magazine​.com/​b​i​n​a​r​y​/​c​e​2​7​/​p​o​i​n​t​_​c​o​u​n​t​e​r​p​o​i​n​t2.jpg

    NOAH CROSS
    Uh-huh — oh I hope you don’t
    mind. I believe they should be
    served with the head.

    Jake Gittes glances down at the fish whose isin­glass eye
    is glazed over with the heat of cooking.

    GITTES
     – Fine, as long as you don’t
    serve chicken that way.

    CROSS
    (laughs)

  6. Jolene said on February 6th, 2010 at 5:01 pm

    It’s a sheep, Alex. What looks like a cot­ton ball to you is its ear.

  7. nancy said on February 6th, 2010 at 5:45 pm

    It’s actu­ally a wee lamb. The guy always brings live­stock, usu­ally chick­ens, ducks, turkeys and a few rab­bits, but today he brought all of the above plus two very unhappy lambs and even a small pig. I love pork but pigs are as intel­li­gent as dogs and it’s hard to see them on the hoof wait­ing for their doom. (Although God knows who would buy a live pig in the heart of the city like that. Where are you going to slaugh­ter it? Your back yard?) I wanted to lib­er­ate the whole truck­load to Belle Isle.

  8. Dexter said on February 6th, 2010 at 6:07 pm

  9. MichaelG said on February 6th, 2010 at 6:29 pm

    Pork jowl is often cured and made into a type of bacon called guan­ciale. It’s excel­lent — tastes pretty much like reg­u­lar bacon.

  10. Connie said on February 6th, 2010 at 9:25 pm

    Dutch grand­mas make balken­brij from pig’s heads and it was always the most dis­gust­ing smelling thing I ever was around as a kid. A lot like head cheese I suspect.

  11. brian stouder said on February 6th, 2010 at 11:32 pm

    Speak­ing of that, I watched the Big Cheese of the Tea Party move­ment regale her Nashville crowd — and it was gen­uinely funny stuff. (the Q & A after­wards was ok, but her speech was so laugh­able and silly that it’s almost tempt­ing to think that she’s AIMING to emu­late Tina Fey)

    She-Who seemed to have lost her place a time or three (those teleprompters ain’t so easy to use after­all!), and was com­i­cally inco­her­ent another sev­eral times (she mis­tak­enly upheld Alaska instead of Amer­ica as the hope of the world, for one example).

    If that per­son is elected pres­i­dent, one would have to view our choice as a fit of will­ful, self-destructive igno­rance; a sort of national Jim Jones moment, but with vats full of know-nothing tea bags instead of Kool Aid.

    Aside from polit­i­cal head cheese, today Pam and I went and saw “Dear John” at the movies. I had no idea what the movie was going to be, except that Pam had read the book.….and when we walked into the the­ater for the mati­nee, there was maybe 200 peo­ple in there — with maybe 5 or 6 males in the whole place.…which was Clue One for me!

    But let me just say — I thought it was a fine movie; more than a lit­tle pow­er­ful. I really, really like Amanda Seyfried (she’s the rea­son to watch Mamma Mia) — but the assem­bled women seemed to enjoy see­ing Chan­ning Tatum.

    Aside from the eye-pleasing cast, I thought the movie had some­thing to say, and it said it in a mem­o­rable way.

  12. brian stouder said on February 7th, 2010 at 12:26 am

    I finally read the arti­cle about the Kala­ma­zoo woman who col­lects all the Play­boy mag­a­zines, and this pas­sage struck me as pretty funny (with empha­sis added):

    Through the mail­ing list — which its mem­bers call the PML for short — she met Mark Tom­lon­son, who, oddly enough, was also from Kala­ma­zoo. Tom­lon­son began review­ing cen­ter­folds on the list in an “attempt to recall the impact cer­tain out­stand­ing cen­ter­folds had had on me when I first saw them,” he explains in an e-mail. Even­tu­ally he took on all of them, churn­ing out a 200-word review on each Playmate’s birth­day over the course of 18 months: “In my per­sonal life, sev­eral things were tak­ing a turn for the worse.…” he writes. The reviews “pro­vided struc­ture in my life at a time when the old struc­tures seemed shaky.”

    Tom Sny­der on NBC’s old Tomor­row show once forth­rightly stated that the mis­sion of Play­boy (et al) was to facil­i­tate mas­tur­ba­tion — and this guy’s “churned out reviews” and “shakey struc­tures” brought that right back

  13. Jolene said on February 7th, 2010 at 1:37 pm

    Check out this too-funny pic­ture of the cheat sheet Sarah Palin used dur­ing the Q&A part of last night’s speech. Hard to believe that some­one could be both such an idiot and such a pow­er­ful force.

  14. mark said on February 7th, 2010 at 2:19 pm

    In what world would that be con­sid­ered a cheat sheet? As some­one who has spo­ken extem­po­ra­ne­ously before crowds of vary­ing sizes, a few words writ­ten down to remind of points of intended empha­sis is hardly uncommon.

    Hard to believe how many peo­ple waste a por­tion of each day check­ing up on and post­ing about Palin. Too bad you can’t charge rent for all the space she leases in your heads.

    I’ll bet she isn’t even bright enough to be a Navy “Corpseman”.

  15. Joe Kobiela said on February 7th, 2010 at 2:34 pm

    Thanks Mark you made my day. You summed up my thoughts exactly. I bet most peo­ple on this board prob­ley don’t under­stand the “corps­man” refer­ance, but I bet they would if W or Dan Quail or any other connservi­tive said it.
    Pilot Joe

  16. crinoidgirl said on February 7th, 2010 at 2:43 pm

    Jolene, that is a hoot and a half. Con­firms her level of intel­li­gence and sin­cer­ity, for me at least. Like the guy said, it’s not like she’s tak­ing a math exam and she can’t remem­ber a qua­dratic equation.

  17. Dexter said on February 7th, 2010 at 2:56 pm

    Army medic , Viet­nam vet­eran Dex­ter weigh­ing in. It actu­ally hurt a lit­tle bit to hear my Com­man­der in Chief refer to “corpse-men”. Lan­guage is an art, as we all remem­ber Rea­gan say­ing “Guv-munt” and Bush43 with the “nuke-lrr” thing, and Jimmy Carter’s right-hand man could not even pro­nounce his own name. That would be the late Hamil­ton Jor­dan, pro­nounced “jurr-dunn”.
    But geez…Obama is a damn law pro­fes­sor, he’s smart…and “corpse-man” ?!?
    A corps­man is usu­ally a Navy medic, and mostly used to sig­nify a medic assigned as a first-response tech­ni­cian to an injury in a field oper­a­tion. We were the same, it’s just that the Navy and U.S. Marines used the corps­man des­ig­na­tion and we responded to “medic”. We were all called “Doc”, however.

  18. alex said on February 7th, 2010 at 2:59 pm

    I read that She Who Can­not Be Named trot­ted out the old Obama TelePrompTer chest­nut — and fal­tered numer­ous times read­ing from the one directly in front of her face. This morn­ing on Fox News she went through fan­tas­ti­cal con­tor­tions to defend Rush Lim­baugh for diss­ing Democ­rats as ‘tards while still call­ing for Rahm Emanuel’s head.

    Only the most rabid of par­ti­sans could for­give this twit for being such a dip­shit. She’s just the pres­i­dent they deserve. I say we hold a national ref­er­en­dum on remov­ing them all to Alaska and mak­ing them secede.

  19. moe99 said on February 7th, 2010 at 3:48 pm

    Mark and Joe: If you back down on the teleprompter crap that was slung about Obama, I’ll not gloat that Palin needs to not only con­sult her palm pilot but have cheat notes writ­ten on her hand.

    http://​www​.oliv​er​willis​.com/​2​0​1​0​/​0​2​/​0​6​/​s​a​r​a​h​-​p​a​l​i​n​-​c​a​u​g​h​t​-​r​e​a​d​i​n​g​-​h​e​r​-​s​p​e​e​c​h​-​o​f​f​-​h​e​r​-hand/

    and Palin in her speech, where she was using her hand notes to crib, even crit­i­cized Obama for using a teleprompter!! Can one say “schaden­freude?“
    http://www.google.com/gwt/x?ei=6sZuS4iSJpGNoAeP7b3PDQ&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com/stefan-sirucek/did-palin-use-crib-notes_b_452458.html&wsc=gh&wsi=3bcf03d25ab3ea1e

    And I would bet there are many who do not know how to prop­erly pro­nounce corps­man. If all you’ve done is read the word, not hear it used in daily par­lance, it could be a trip up. How about colonel? adju­tant? reveille? or in the legal pro­fes­sion: voir dire?

    I remem­ber as a kid know­ing lots of big words because I read a lot. But not know­ing how to pro­nounce them. And mak­ing a num­ber of gaffes as a result.

    I would bet that if Obama ever says the word ‘corps­man’ again, it will be pro­nounced cor­rectly, If not, I will buy you each a latte when you next come to Seattle.

  20. Jeff Borden said on February 7th, 2010 at 3:48 pm

    Mark and Joe,

    Dog­gone it, now, I’m just a hard-workin’ real Amer­i­can and I find Sarah Palin end­lessly enter­tain­ing. Gee, I love watch­ing her fleece the rubes who hang on her every one– syl­la­ble word almost as much as watch­ing the gri­maces from real Repub­li­cans who now under­stand just what sad, ol’ John McCain loosed upon our land.

    In a Repub­li­can Party dom­i­nated by soul­less, joy­less, gray drips like John Boehner, Eric Can­tor and Mitch McConnell, she is a pea­cock among pigeons. Why would I not want to watch her? She’s “Real House­wives of Orange County,” “Jer­sey Shore” and “Inter­ven­tion” wrapped into one delec­table media goodie.

  21. coozledad said on February 7th, 2010 at 3:51 pm

    I’d like to charge rent for the space she occu­pies in the media. for a vic­tim she cer­tainly spends an inor­di­nate amount of time wal­low­ing in front of a fuck­ing cam­era. There have to be a cou­ple of Repub­li­cans some­where that will acknowl­edge that it was a mis­take to posi­tion some­one whose intel­lec­tual and emo­tional devel­op­ment plateaued their senior year in high school as a can­di­date for high office. Sarah’s behav­iors are more con­sis­tent with a kind of mild autism than with the core tal­ents nec­es­sary to become a mod­er­ately suc­cess­ful politi­cian.
    In choos­ing her, McCain and his folks also laid waste to the idea that he’s ever been any­thing but a sim­per­ing com­pany man, no mat­ter how attrac­tive that bogus Mil­bank nar­ra­tive seemed. The more accu­rate nar­ra­tive for McCain, and by exten­sion, the Repub­li­cans, is a story of enti­tled under­achiev­ers who have too far to fall before they’re com­pelled to enter a twelve step pro­gram. In the mean­time, they’re gam­bling people’s careers and liveli­hoods away– peo­ple on their own fuck­ing side– peo­ple who have sig­nif­i­cantly more tal­ent and abil­ity, more guts,and infi­nitely more char­ac­ter.
    I think it’s a result of reach­ing back to that vac­u­ous leath­ery pup­pet, Rea­gan, for every­thing from ide­o­log­i­cal per­spec­tive to how to make their can­di­dates seem more human. I’m glad I’m not a gam­bler: twenty years ago I would have bet Elvis was going to be the next trailer trash Jesus. At least he could sing.

  22. Jolene said on February 7th, 2010 at 3:57 pm

    Of course, peo­ple use notes when they give talks, but, in this case, the method is amus­ing, and the con­tent is embar­rass­ing. Has Sarah Palin ever given a talk in which she did not men­tion energy? You’d think by this time it’d be sec­ond nature.

    Trust me, there are few things I’d rather do than for­get the exis­tence of Sarah Palin entirely. But she keeps pop­ping up in the news, and a siz­able num­ber of peo­ple seem to want her to be pres­i­dent – an idea that I find both sick­en­ing and horrifying.

    And yes, it’s dis­ap­point­ing and, to me, sur­pris­ing that Obama didn’t know how to pro­nounce corps­man, but, still, I’d bet on his level of gen­eral knowl­edge and abil­ity to use the Eng­lish lan­guage appro­pri­ately over Palin’s pretty much any day of the week.

  23. brian stouder said on February 7th, 2010 at 6:30 pm

    Jolene, I’m not dis­ap­pointed in the least. When it comes to the pro­noun­ci­a­tion of words, our 44th pres­i­dent is a clear improve­ment over our 43rd (yeah — I know — some of our more thin-skinned Repub­li­can friends HATE it when we com­pare our cur­rent pres­i­dent with our last one. But, really, too bad)

    And aside from that, his forth­right actions speak louder than his words — or the yip­ping of the ankle-biters of the blo­gos­phere or the rightwing fly­ing mon­keys of the airwaves

  24. Deggjr said on February 7th, 2010 at 7:51 pm

    Extem­po­ra­ne­ous speak­ing? Palin was paid $100,000 for the appear­ance with weeks or months of prepa­ra­tion time. Could it have her as much as 30 sec­onds to ‘prepare’?

    As the link said, remem­ber­ing those par­tic­u­lar talk­ing points would be like try­ing to remem­ber her birth­date (or if you pre­fer, her favorite color).

  25. LAMary said on February 7th, 2010 at 8:28 pm

    Buca­tini all’amatriciana is one of the best things in the world. I use pancetta becuase it’s hard to find guan­ciale in these parts.
    I was going to make lamb shanks for sup­per tonight but I couldn’t face going into the fancier gro­cery store to buy eight shanks. The line of over­price super­bowl snack shop­pers was very long. Instead we’re going to have red beans and rice in honor of N.O. Whether they win or not.

  26. MichaelG said on February 7th, 2010 at 9:57 pm

    Saints win and Ash­ley smiles.

  27. LAMary said on February 7th, 2010 at 9:57 pm

    Alright. They won one for Ashley.

  28. brian stouder said on February 7th, 2010 at 10:27 pm

    I was going to be happy who­ever won, and was only hop­ing for a good game; and it was a humdinger, wasn’t it?

    When the Saints’ coach went for an on-side kick to start the sec­ond half — and it worked! — the fore­shad­ow­ing was unmistakeable.

    And see­ing Drew Brees with his lit­tle son at the end was just flat-out good stuff

  29. MichaelG said on February 7th, 2010 at 10:42 pm

    Mary, it’s also great in Car­bonara. And I don’t think I’ve ever seen two posts with the same time stamp. Must have been a bit­ter­sweet moment for Archie Man­ning, who, by all accounts, is one of the true nice guys of the NFL.

  30. Dexter said on February 7th, 2010 at 11:03 pm

    Fuck all the fuck­ing fuck­mooks who dissed Drew Brees ever since he went to Pur­due. I loved it in the postgame, when he told how this cur­rent Saints team came together, a bunch of free agents, and the kind of free agents that nobody wanted.
    They banded together and kept improv­ing, and now they are the crown wear­ers. “They” said Brees would never make it in the Big Ten Conference…too slow…and he starred. He was given lit­tle chance to make it in the pros, too lit­tle arm strength, way too short in height. This is even bet­ter for us that fol­lowed Brees and wished him the best. This is even bet­ter than bag-boy Kirk Warner’s Super Bowl win with St. Louis. Brees just would not believe all the neg­a­tiv­ity.
    Tom Brady is another case. He was not her­alded at Michi­gan, he was back-up most of his career there, he barely made the taxi-squad with NE Patri­ots, and only got a chance because of injuries. And now Drew Brees joins Pey­ton Man­ning and Brady as the class of their era, or as Steve Young just called him, “elite”. Who dat? Drew Brees and the fab­u­lous NOLA Saints!

  31. Joe Kobiela said on February 8th, 2010 at 4:44 am

    I won­der if we can FINALLY quit hear­ing about poor New Orleans. I’m glad they won, but enough about kat­rina.
    Pilot Joe

  32. Dorothy said on February 8th, 2010 at 8:53 am

    Why don’t you guys do what I do when She-Who comes on what­ever chan­nel I hap­pen to be watch­ing? Switch to another chan­nel! Prob­lem solved. I chose not to hear, speak or think about her — except, of course, when it comes to read­ing nn.c commentary.

    Due to the Big Storm this week­end I had time to sit and knit and chose to finally watch some CDs my sis­ter gave me. Have any of you seen the BBC pro­duc­tion of “Bleak House” from 2005? It’s mes­mer­iz­ing stuff. I’ve seen 7 of the 15 or 16 episodes so far. A really out­stand­ing story and won­der­ful actors.

  33. brian stouder said on February 8th, 2010 at 9:02 am

    Dorothy — Pam loves that Emma thing on PBS, and we both enjoyed Dear John this past week­end (major, major chic flick — but that’s OK)

    I won­der if we can FINALLY quit hear­ing about poor New Orleans

    Is that the rule? — that once a sports fran­chise wins a cham­pi­onship, the rest of us are free to ignore any­thing bad that pre­vi­ously hap­pened there, or thereabouts?

    So since the Red Sox finally won a World Series, we can skip all this horse shit about “tea par­ties” and so on, right? And indeed — the Yan­kees won in 2009, so no more of this end­less talk about what hap­pened there on Sep­tem­ber 11, 2001, right? We are free from worry about “Pre-9/11 think­ing”  — ’cause there’s noth­ing to learn from those events, or how we dealt with them  — espe­cially now that a pro­fes­sional sports fran­chise won a championship?

    Not sin­gling out Joe for this; I’ve already heard this com­ment enough times this morn­ing that I expect it will become a right wing meme before the sun goes down tonight — right along with the astound­ing and deeply sig­nif­i­cant fact that the pres­i­dent mis-pronounced the word corpsman.

  34. Jeff (the mild-mannered one) said on February 8th, 2010 at 9:14 am

    Gotta love the Pur­due QB at work last night — the Hoosier State was a win­ner how­ever that game went, but the bet­ter team won. And on the eve of the 100th birth­day of the Boy Scouts of Amer­ica, how could not the team with a fleur-de-lis on their hats win?

    By the way, Palin didn’t use a teleprompter. Not that there’s any­thing wrong with that.

  35. brian stouder said on February 8th, 2010 at 9:21 am

    Yes — because she knew her speech like the back of her hand!

  36. Jeff (the mild-mannered one) said on February 8th, 2010 at 9:25 am

    It looked like it was in the palm of her hand, actu­ally. The three word note, and the room as a whole.

  37. brian stouder said on February 8th, 2010 at 9:33 am

    and the room as a whole.

    Indeed, and to answer Dorothy, this is why I tuned in to watch; I wanted to see for myself. And it was enter­tain­ing (for now). In that room she could do no wrong. Her speech was some­what halt­ing and she seemed to lose her place (or her train of thought, or what­ever) sev­eral times, and she mis-spoke a time or two.

    But when it’s your beau ideal up there, all is for­given, yes? I know that feel­ing (although I don’t have it for her)

    And, not for noth­ing, but that Nashville audi­ence was as uni­formly white as Joe Biden’s hair, from what crowd shots I could see.

    Just sayin’

  38. Jeff (the mild-mannered one) said on February 8th, 2010 at 9:42 am

    Say­ing that there is racism among the Tea Party mob is as indica­tive as say­ing there are social­ists among Obama sup­port­ers. I buy nei­ther argu­ment as mean­ing­ful. Are there more racists (avowed and uncon­si­cous) among Tea Partiers than among Obama sup­port­ers? Doubt­less. Are there more social­ists among Obama’s adher­ents than in the Tea Party lead­er­ship? Unques­tion­ably. Nei­ther asser­tion really tells us anything.

    I would agree that the Tea Party move­ment, as pub­licly seen so far, seems to have Sarah Palin and Steve Forbes as their youth­ful, edgy outer bounds, and they look older and cer­tainly whiter. That would tend to argue for a) some short term elec­toral gains, since grandma and grandpa vote more con­sis­tently than the grand­kids, but b) doesn’t cre­ate a last­ing basis, since grandpa and grandma die more con­sis­tently than the grand­kids. Demo­graph­i­cally, they don’t seem to have a ten year out­look that holds up.

    On the other hand, the grand­kids, as they start look­ing at their paystubs and prop­erty tax tick­ets, will keep get­ting older. And a lit­tle dis­ori­ented at their gross/net percentages.

  39. John said on February 8th, 2010 at 9:49 am

    Any­one else creeped out by the bleached whale peek­ing out from Pete Townshend’s shirt?

  40. jcburns said on February 8th, 2010 at 9:52 am

    Y’know, Jeff TMMO, actual Social­ism (as a polit­i­cal the­ory) is way way more benign and, well, people-promoting than any fla­vor of racism. (Yes, I know, con­ser­v­a­tives like to sput­ter “Social­ism” in a way that equates it with Stal­in­ism, but y’know? It’s not. It’s kinda closer to Medicare. Which I like, and would like even more peo­ple to have.)

    I know you know that.

    And the ‘ism’ that involves claim­ing our Pres­i­dent is depen­dent on teleprompters while writ­ing notes—prompts! on her hand — is called hypocrisy…uh..ism.

    And don’t get me started on the US need­ing a com­man­der in chief more than a law pro­fes­sor. So much for ‘nation of laws’, eh? New slo­gan: ‘nation of commanders.’

    Read Garry Wills about how the ‘Com­man­der in Chief’ title has been dis­torted over the years into some­thing quite imperial.

  41. brian stouder said on February 8th, 2010 at 9:52 am

    I buy nei­ther argu­ment as meaningful.

    fair enough.

    Are there more social­ists among Obama’s adher­ents than in the Tea Party lead­er­ship? Unquestionably

    I would ques­tion that one. Lots of angry teabag­gers tote signs that say “Leave My Medi-Care Alone!!”; but I’d agree that angry racists on the one side are can­celled by angry social­ists on the other, leav­ing folks like you and I to sort out the rest

  42. Jolene said on February 8th, 2010 at 9:55 am

    Are you equat­ing racism and social­ism, Jeff, or putting them on some kind of dimen­sion of polit­i­cal phi­los­o­phy? Because I don’t think they work that way. Social­ism is a political/economic phi­los­o­phy; one may or may not find it com­pelling, but it’s a log­i­cal sys­tem w/ some claim to plau­si­bil­ity and moral­ity. I sup­pose one could say that racism is a political/economic phi­los­o­phy too, but I’d don’t think any­one advo­cat­ing its plau­si­bil­ity or moral­ity would get far.

  43. Jeff (the mild-mannered one) said on February 8th, 2010 at 10:49 am

    I’m talk­ing about gaug­ing a movement’s core from out­liers. Not gonna do it. Wouldn’t be pru­dent. And I dis­like racism a bit more than social­ism, but not as much as my brother Jeff would like. The fact that we have some social pro­grams (some of which work quite well) does not equate to the desire to see a larger share of the indus­trial econ­omy directly man­aged by the state and gov­ern­men­tal elites. Say­ing “nyah, nyah, your mother gets Medicare!” doesn’t mean that social­ism is fine or that I’m a hyp­ocrite for dis­lik­ing it because my par­ents use a state program.

    If single-payer Medicare For All would work, I’d be for it. I don’t think it will, at least not in a way that I’m less com­fort­able with than the cur­rent sit­u­a­tion. Grant­ing that the sta­tus quo is non-sustainable, I think we’ll end up see­ing some form of Medicare For All/Medicare Part E and polit­i­cal dis­putes over end of life care, end­ing of life “care,” and abor­tion. Which we have already, so I’m philo­soph­i­cal. But Hamilton’s “report on man­u­fac­tures” shows you can have a national indus­trial pol­icy with­out state con­trol of the means of pro­duc­tion … or at least, that’s how I read it. Off to the slip­pery slopes of our fair county …

  44. jcburns said on February 8th, 2010 at 10:54 am

    Um, again, Medicare is Social­ism. And there are a lot of pro­grams that come from Social­ist the­ory that have made our coun­try great (or kept it afloat) over the 200-plus years. Racism is not some­thing to dis­like ‘a bit more’ — it’s some­thing that, in its pure form, makes peo­ple evil. For­tu­nately, we only wit­ness it in highly diluted form most days these days, but make no mis­take, it leads (by def­i­n­i­tion) to humans hat­ing their fel­low humans. Evil.

  45. moe99 said on February 8th, 2010 at 11:27 am

    Jeff tmmo, go read the book The Help and see if you think racism is just a smidge below social­ism. I would think that some­one with your back­ground, would be fer­vently denounc­ing racism.

  46. Jeff (the mild-mannered one) said on February 8th, 2010 at 1:42 pm

    Smidge would be your word, not mine. “A bit” may not be enough to sat­isfy you, but there’s enough space between them for me to dis­tin­guish them. Jeff, you keep assert­ing that Medicare *IS* social­ism. It isn’t, it’s a gov­ern­ment pro­gram, and I’m not opposed to all of them.

    And I don’t fer­vently denounce much of any­thing. Plenty of fer­vent denounc­ing and curs­ing of the dark­ness all around me, they don’t need my help.

  47. moe99 said on February 8th, 2010 at 2:09 pm

    That’s really dis­ap­point­ing. I don’t see any good side to racism. Per­haps you could enlighten me.

  48. brian stouder said on February 8th, 2010 at 3:16 pm

    you keep assert­ing that Medicare *IS* social­ism. It isn’t, it’s a gov­ern­ment pro­gram, and I’m not opposed to all of them.

    Allow me to LEAP to agree with the polit­i­cal sen­ti­ment expressed here, even as I sus­pect that those folks with Obama-as-Commie-Joker (Heath Ledger ver­sion) signs at the teabag­ger con­fabs would never, ever, ever accept that any ‘gov­ern­ment pro­gram’ pro­posed by the Obama admin­is­tra­tion is any­thing less than unre­fined socialism.

    But beware; every gov­ern­ment pro­gram is a man­i­fes­ta­tion of “socialism” — if words have mean­ing; or else, there is no such thing as “social­ism” at all

Leave a Reply