Skip to content

Politics as either high art, or insanity

Whether you think Carl Paladino is serious, insane, or the next sub-genius, his campaign certainly is ironic. Maybe he is just following in the footsteps of some of the crazier members of the Republican party (cough, Bachmann, cough Palin) and trying to see how insane you can be and ironically still get away with it.



  1. ebdoug wrote:

    I live in “Carl Country”. I live where 70% of the people are part of the “intellectual underclass”. I explained to each and everyone of my tax clients that when the stock market surges, money flows into New York State from Wall Street workers who come in from New Jersey and pay tax to NYS.
    I’ve lived here since 1973 and seen it happen three times. When there is a surplus, we are given money back on our property taxes. When Wall Street Money dries up, we have a deficit. Lord help the party in power the intellectual underclass does not understand.
    One Representative said “I’m going to fight for your property tax rebate” This while people are losing jobs all over the place. Needless to say I let her have it. I don’t want people laid off from nursing homes with not enough care given to the elderly. (That was my selling point to my tax clients)
    Fortunately NYC will save us. This gross underhanded Palodino won’t get in. He still has not released his financial statements on-line for fear they are going to show conflict of business in his contracts with the state.
    Of course, if he does, I can put it on my Web Site

    Monday, October 4, 2010 at 6:54 am | Permalink
  2. Sammy wrote:

    I like Rachel Maddow, but that whole piece was just an odd, disjointed mess.

    Monday, October 4, 2010 at 10:54 am | Permalink
  3. curmudgeon wrote:

    Rachel Maddow makes Sarah Palin look smart *and* hot

    Monday, October 4, 2010 at 12:18 pm | Permalink
  4. patriotsgt wrote:

    Its no wonder she has no ratings, who could actually watch that whole thing without thinking she has lost it (I made it about 1/4 the way thru). Sad, what passes for journalism. What are they teaching these young doctorate students nowadays? Maybe she’s trying to compete against Glen Beck, thats one explanation.

    Monday, October 4, 2010 at 3:21 pm | Permalink
  5. TENTHIRTYTWO wrote:

    Fairly certain Maddow falls into the opinion category. Also fairly certain that any honest, halfway sensible person could not compare her with Glenn Beck.

    Monday, October 4, 2010 at 6:41 pm | Permalink
  6. patriotsgt wrote:

    Ah, I wrote compete, not compare. I’m not sure about the sensible, but honest I am.

    Monday, October 4, 2010 at 7:31 pm | Permalink
  7. TENTHIRTYTWO wrote:

    Maybe…I just can’t imagine any context that wouldn’t be virtually synonymous with compare.

    Do you mean compete for ratings? That’s the only one that comes to mind.

    Monday, October 4, 2010 at 7:50 pm | Permalink
  8. patriotsgt wrote:

    exactly, getting weird and outlandish to compete for the audience that actually believes that kind of hype. In that regard, they can all be compared, Maddow, Olberman, Matthews, Beck, Hannity, Oreilly, Sanchez, Shultz, Stewart, Colbert,etc. as opinion givers. Unfortunately, many take them as journalists who should report the facts without any spin. There are not many, (PBS, BBC, local stations excepted)in the cable news arena who qualify, but they keep selling commercials.
    For instance, CNN is going to air Sanchez replacement show tonight Parker/Spitzer. A once respected journalist paired up with “client # 9”. Come on, what are they thinking, and better yet what is she thinking. Oh yea I remember, her salary.

    Tuesday, October 5, 2010 at 7:22 am | Permalink
  9. tenthirtytwo wrote:

    So…you were comparing them?

    Tuesday, October 5, 2010 at 7:58 am | Permalink
  10. patriotsgt wrote:

    In the original comment, no. How can one literally compare a ultra liberal doctorate holder and a right wing recovering alcoholic history teacher want to be.
    They are however, in the same business and reach for the same goal, that is to make their employers and themselves more money. In that regard not their content, philosophy or credentials, they are all part of the same group and thus could be compared like any members of a group.

    As you can tell I don’t always make myself so well understood, which is one of the reasons I enjoy this site. I get to read some very well crafted thought processes and you all get to decipher mine. Fortunately, I am a little more adept at debate in person then on paper. (can’t type as fast and forget what i thought).

    Tuesday, October 5, 2010 at 1:09 pm | Permalink
  11. Iron Knee wrote:

    PatriotSgt, your comments are crafted just fine, and I appreciate your thoughts, even when I disagree with them.

    Tuesday, October 5, 2010 at 8:06 pm | Permalink
  12. Dan wrote:

    Come on, let’s stop with the false equivalences.

    In one group, you have viewers of Rachel Maddow who are told, and understand, when a piece is serious and when a piece has a lighter, entertainment value.

    In the other group, you have viewers who mistake the continuous entertainment for truth and news.

    Content matters, you know.

    Wednesday, October 13, 2010 at 7:07 pm | Permalink