Comments on: On “Hard” Politics

By: konstanze

konstanze — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 21:48:23 +0000

This is so true! Working in DC I met so many people like this–it’s part of the reason I had to get away.

By: exelizabeth

exelizabeth — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 22:47:49 +0000

This is an excellent article and I don’t have much to add, just to share that when I worked in politics, I would often try to make sports metaphors as long and convoluted as possible about what we were doing. It’s a fun game when you’re feeling like you might brain yourself because of the idiocy.

By: SarahMC

SarahMC — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 17:05:18 +0000

The economic stimulus debate really brings this to light.
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2009/01/28/lessons-stimulus-debate-male-lawmakers-and-talking-heads-need-sex-ed

By: Pilgrim Soul

Pilgrim Soul — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 14:03:33 +0000

Maddow started out well. I do find her a bit policy-wonky at times, but I don’t get the impression she misses the forest for the trees, you know? She was right out in front yelling about the Rick Warren thing and pointing out that Sarah Palin lies. I rarely hear her focus on floor counts. She tends to cut to the heart of the issues, which is mostly what I wish the jocks would do.

To be clear, I don’t know that Chris Matthews and Keith and the cable news pundit brigade generally are really anything other than blowhards overly impressed with the sound of their own voices. They aren’t poly sci jocks per se, although their discussions usually wander in that direction at some point. But their interest is in politics as a vehicle for self-promotion; any mention of what’s “actually going on” is window dressing to make them appear as experts to others.

By: aspiringexpatriate

aspiringexpatriate — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 10:45:00 +0000

I like to give Spencer the benefit of doubt, as most often he seems to strive for greater understanding than simply winning, unless he gets into a bickering match with a conservative pundit.

Punditry in general I find really annoying. Though I do have to wonder where you’d categorize Maddow in this political joke atmosphere. (Huh, I meant to type jock, but that works too.)

Also, Primary Colors is an awesome film.

By: Diziet_Sma

Diziet_Sma — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 05:26:39 +0000

@Diziet_Sma: Not snarking this post, you understand, which is spot-on; rather, snarking on the mens. Bastards, the lot of them, obvs.

By: Diziet_Sma

Diziet_Sma — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 05:20:05 +0000

Politics reduced to boring sports-talk, you say? It's almost as if they didn't want women to get in the game! Wait. . .

By: Pilgrim Soul

Pilgrim Soul — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 04:19:34 +0000

Oh, PhD, today he opined that since the birth control attachment to the stimulus bill was “tangential” he saw no issue with dropping it. Because reproductive choice has nothing to do with economics, I suppose, when one is a privileged white dude blogging in your pjs as opposed to a single mother agonizing about how to feed another kid on minimum wage.

By: PhDork

PhDork — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 03:40:16 +0000

Ah, sophistry! The redoubt of the pampered, power-seeking dilettante and douchebag since Plato’s day.

How delightful to have so few problems that one can play chess with other peoples’ lives. I can’t read Yglesias at all, and Ezra, while smart, makes my butt itch.

By: Pilgrim Soul

Pilgrim Soul — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 03:26:30 +0000

Claudia/Bluebears, I found poly sci extremely alienating as well! I thought it would be about how to get shit done, but instead it was boring abstract theories that bore little resemblance to any world I knew.