If I was going to vote on whether to authorize a war that would potentially kill 600,000 people and cost us three trillion dollars, I would read the National Intelligence Estimate. But that’s just me. I am only posting this for Mithras, who blogs here.
When Texas and Ohio vote in Tuesday’s Democratic primaries, they may bring Hillary Clinton’s campaign for the presidency to an end. If she loses either of those states, her bid is over barring the formalities. This is a position few expected her to be in. Not long ago, success in the primaries and victory in the general election were regarded as almost inevitable. What went wrong?
For the answer, one should turn (as always) to the teachings of Marx. “The secret of success in life is sincerity,” Groucho once famously observed. “If you can fake that, you’ve got it made.”
This truth about the human condition applies with particular force to politics. Mrs Clinton tries hard to fake sincerity – so hard it is painful to watch. Sometimes, in fact, I suspect that she really is sincere and only looks as though she is faking.
Okay. I fed the monkey.
I don’t get what that expression means. Maybe I’m out of the loop on something.
Anyway, I just thought I’d pass this along before heading to bed. It’s apparently the source of a lot of pro-Hillary “astroturf” that’s appearing around the tubes.
http://hillaryresponders.com
Cool, now I don’t have to read TalkLeft, MyDD, or No Quarter…I can just get the Hillary ‘scoop’ directly from the source. 🙂
Is it summer yet?
Don’t forget Taylor Marsh. Talk about off the rails
I would argue that this invasion and occupation of Iraq, a sovereign nation, has killed at least 1 Million innocent native people, displaced 4 or 5 Million more of them and left the remainder living in absolute terror. But that’s just me.
The bit about faking sincerity is something I’ve always been weary of with the Clintons. Makes you wonder if anything they’ve ever done was truly sincere, rather than just calculated fakery.
But the title of the post has me wondering WTF? I’ve heard of other verbs having to do with what you might do with your monkey, but not this one. Hmmm… So I googled and found lots of sexually suggestive stuff, but somehow didn’t figure that’s what you meant.
How ’bout this:
.
Refusing to accept problems that subordinates try to delegate upward, and instead giving them opportunities to meet with you to “feed the monkey” is the best choice for both the monkey and for its keeper. The employee who is closest to the problem usually has the knowledge and skill to solve the problem, if empowered to do so. Consultations with the manager will serve to broaden perspective and offer new ways of seeing the problem. And as the employee feeds and eventually solves the problem, he or she learns important skills that make them more valuable to the organization and to the managers.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."Metaphors for Monday, March 03:
The fat lady is about to sing. Bill Clinton sees the end has given up seen meeting has with Guistra – I read that last night under jet lag don’t ask me for the link. Guistra is the guy who donated $131 million to Clinton for intro to clinching a controversial mine deal in Kazahastan.
And more from the LA Times. Enough of this Clintonian drama and dysfunction:
As an aside, Ickes must be the biggest political masochist I have ever seen–he is routinely screwed over by both Clintons, yet he runs back to them for more.
Geeze…enough already.
Using the 2 names, Giustra & Clinton, I found a number of stories using Google then news. The longest one was by Tapper on ABC, but others came up on MSNBC (only a brief mention) and various Canadian media outlets.
Is this really the best moment for Bill to be seen with this guy in public?
It was a fundraiser for some sort of joint charity these two guys of dubious reputation have formed
Booman has a monkey on his back, and we are the monkey. So think long and hard before you start your own blog because if you succeed, people will begin to depend on you.
Or maybe he’s talking about feeding his own habit. (Criticizing Hillary, of which Mithras disapproves)
Of course, it’s hard when everything you say needs a html link to support it. That’s a great cartoon, Boo.
I’m positive it is!
I grew up in the 80s.
But that’s funny you mention that movie. I was just quoting some of it at my daughter.
So I’m thick. Which movie is that?
The Big Lebowski.
I did too, but I have no idea what that is.
I know shot the monkey and I think we all know spank the monkey but I have no idea what feed the monkey is.
Or maybe I was just too much of a nerd and not paying attention…!
‘Feeding the monkey’ means attending to your jones.
Thanks for that…um, clarification. I still feel like a dweeb, though.
Let’s look at where we are: I believe that at the end of the night tomorrow, Obama will have won Texas and Vermont, and Hillary will have won Ohio and Rhode Island, confirming that his pledged delegate lead is insurmountable. At that point, he’ll open up a double-digit lead over her in the national polls, her small-donor base will dry up, and either publicly or privately senior Dems will call on her to step down, and I think she should.
Obama has been very smart in not criticizing her personally in harsh terms: Smart, because declining to make or validate personal attacks fits his overall strategy, and because it makes it easier for Hillary supporters to accept her defeat. That makes it less likely they’ll want her to stay in the race after Tuesday and more likely they’ll be enthusiastic about Obama’s candidacy.
I don’t disapprove of criticizing Hillary; after all, I support Obama for a variety of reasons, including that he showed good instincts and judgment on issues like the invasion of Iraq that she didn’t. But millions of people voted for Hillary, and they weren’t stupid or evil for doing so. I’m just saying, towards fellow Democratic voters, be gracious in defeat and magnanimous in victory.
I fully expect Obama to be gracious in victory, as he should be for the very reasons you laid out. I, however, have no reason to be any more gracious than the DLC, The New Republic, the war hawks, Blue Dogs, and the rest of the National Security Dems have been in opposing the efforts of the progressive movement at every step since Bush uttered the words ‘Axis of Evil’ and ‘Fuck Saddam, we’re taking him out.’
I will breakdance on their grave and I will never stop breakdancing on it until I’m sure they are dead, never to be revived.
I take this shit very seriously.