jlakely
61p72 comments posted · 60 followers · following 6
12 years ago @ Big Government - Behold the Golden Toil... · 0 replies · +3 points
About 3 seconds.
12 years ago @ Big Government - Behold the Golden Toil... · 1 reply · +4 points
13 years ago @ Big Government - 9/11 Rant by Krugman R... · 0 replies · +1 points
13 years ago @ Big Journalism - NY Times' Krugman Atta... · 0 replies · +7 points
Now, Giuliani would be the first to reject the "hero" label, because he knows who the REAL heros are. He saw many of their dismembered bodies in the rubble of the WTC. He went to funerals for months on end. But what Giuliani did was of enormous value to the city of New York and the nation: He stayed calm in the face of enormous chaos and fear. And he acted as a leader — as did Bush.
Giuliani suffers in the measure of Krugman (as did Bush) for the same reasons. Both men were non-liberals (non-Democrats) who earned the admiration of the people. Krugman thought he'd be able to belittle Bush for the entirety of what he thought would be one quick term as a "pretender" who "stole" the election from Gore. Only now, of all days (but without comment), does Krugman feel the urge to scratch that long-neglected itch.
And with Giuliani, Krugman is settling and old score of the New York liberal elite. Krugman takes such a cheap shot at Giuliani because he was the REPUBLICAN mayor who — long before 9/11 — made New York City livable again, destroying the status quo of liberal governance of Gotham by the likes of David Dinkins. If Giuliani was remembered only for cleaning up the city, Krugman would still resent him — but with less vitriol. Because Giuliani ratified his wisdom and civic leadership — on a national scale in the wake of 9/11 — the man is simply due for this vicious slur that Krugman could no longer keep inside.
If Krugman thought this post would diminish Bush or Giuliani, he was (as usual) sadly mistaken. He only diminished himself.
13 years ago @ Big Journalism - NY Times' Krugman Atta... · 0 replies · +1 points
Now, Giuliani would be the first to reject the "hero" label, because he knows who the REAL heros are. He saw many of their dismembered bodies in the rubble of the WTC. He went to funerals for months on end. But what Giuliani did was of enormous value to the city of New York and the nation: He stayed calm in the face of enormous chaos and fear. And he acted as a leader — as did Bush.
Giuliani suffers in the measure of Krugman (as did Bush) for the same reasons. Both men were non-liberals (non-Democrats) who earned the admiration of the people. Krugman thought he'd be able to belittle Bush for the entirety of what he thought would be one quick term as a "pretender" who "stole" the election from Gore. Only now, of all days (but without comment), does Krugman feel the urge to scratch that long-neglected itch.
And with Giuliani, Krugman is settling and old score of the New York liberal elite. Krugman takes such a cheap shot at Giuliani because he was the REPUBLICAN mayor who — long before 9/11 — made New York City livable again, destroying the status quo of liberal governance of Gotham by the likes of David Dinkins. If Giuliani was remembered only for cleaning up the city, Krugman would still resent him — but with less vitriol. Because Giuliani ratified his wisdom and civic leadership — on a national scale in the wake of 9/11 — the man is simply due for this vicious slur that Krugman could no longer keep inside.
If Krugman thought this post would diminish Bush or Giuliani, he was (as usual) sadly mistaken. He only diminished himself.
13 years ago @ Big Government - Google Caught with Han... · 0 replies · +2 points
It's a joke for the government to play this off as a safety issue. This is about control over the monopolistic health care regime in the United States — protecting regulatory power in Washington at the FDA, and the rent-seekers in the American pharmaceutical industry.
I also find it ironic that this "law and order" stance from Obama's Justice Department happens in the same week the president's Homeland Security department declares it will basically stop enforcing deportation of illegal immigrants it determines for itself are not a "threat" — i.e. just about every illegal in the country. Also: DOJ has not investigated drug ads on Google (or any other search engine) that come from any other country. Just Canada. Interesting.
Bottom line: The United States can't start putting up walls on the 'Net to regulate commerce (or speech) it decides it doesn't like and wants to "regulate" for our own good. A free country lets it all in, and lets the people — and markets — decide what is good and useful, and what is bad and harmful.
13 years ago @ Big Hollywood - How TV Shows Get Ruine... · 0 replies · +11 points
I loved the first season. Then they decided to turn it into Moonlighting with more violence. Ugh.
14 years ago @ Big Journalism - Is The Honeymoon Over ... · 0 replies · +1 points
14 years ago @ Big Hollywood - Time For Howard Stern ... · 0 replies · 0 points
14 years ago @ Big Hollywood - 'Newsweek': 'Undercove... · 1 reply · +2 points
Right from the trailer I said to myself: "A TV version of Mr. and Mrs. Smith? No thanks."