Subscribe via RSS Feed

Bring Back Tech Central Station!

[ 109 ] December 27, 2012 |

Another milestone in the death of parody, from the National Review cruise:

That prompted a tall, extremely tanned blonde named Kay, from Old Greenwich, Connecticut, to ask Hassett, the co-­author of the 1999 book Dow 36,000, “So what do we do with our money?”

The contact list from the people who paid money for this cruise has to be among the most valuable set of leads in history. I’m pretty sure Mitch and Murray have already given NRO a six-figure bid.


Comments (109)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. UberMitch says:

    “A-B-C. A, always. B, be. C, cruising. Always be cruising with NRO.”

  2. Dano says:

    Dano, at this same e-mail address, was one of the first commenters on TCS to deconstruct their BS, including exposing Alex Avery’s lies about Tyrone Hayes.

    Those were the days, when there were only a few outfits shilling for the corporations. Now they are every 7th website on the Internets.



    • I once set off a major freakout on that site. The Chair of the Iowa Republican Party wrote a column in which he made a reference to “the Southern strategy of focusing on law and order issue.” I commented, “Excuse me, sir, but is this your elephant in the living room?”

      Cue fireworks. How dare I call them racists? How dare I?

      • Dano says:

        I also caught several big names using sockpuppets to push their agenda (borderline lies), including Chris Horner. I wish I had gotten screenprints before it was disappeared so I could complain to the Bar.,..



  3. wjts says:

    This charming bit of insight into Australian race relations from Mrs. John O’Sullivan has been quoted elsewhere:

    But Ms. O’Sullivan again took umbrage. As everyone went silent, she recalled a conference she attended in Australia in which a liberal nun (who “didn’t even have the decency to wear a habit”) criticized America for its “inner-city racism.” Offended, Ms. O’Sullivan recounted what she wished she’d said to this nun:

    “Pardon me, madam, but I have been in your country of Australia for ten days and the only Aborigines I’ve seen have been drunk on the street, and at least if we were in my country they would be serving the drinks at this conference!”

    But I haven’t seen anyone quote the punchline yet:

    Ms. O’Sullivan then warned against watering down the purity of the conservative agenda to placate minorities or, as she put it, rather succinctly, “the bastardization of the product.”

    Elsewhere in the article, James Lileks can’t understand why people stereotype Republicans as “the stupid people… the yokels… the dumb… the racists… the hicks… against everything that’s hip and cool.” Slander, of course: us groovy Republicans are still with it! Unless “it” is metaphorical miscegenation or drunken, lazy ape-brutes. We’re not with that at all.

    Why’s everybody looking at me like that?

    • montag2 says:

      I think it’s very much in character for a racist defender of the British colonial empire to have married an Alabama belle….

      Still, the whole event seems like the 3% to 1% on parade, with all their fear and prejudice hanging out like flab at the beach.

    • Murc says:

      Slander, of course: us groovy Republicans are still with it!

      Correction, they used to be with it. Now what they’re with isn’t it anymore, and what’s it seems weird and scary to them.

      It’ll happen to you!

    • spencer says:

      James Lileks? Wow, there’s a name I haven’t seen in a good long while.

    • Bill Cross says:

      Slander, of course: us groovy Republicans are still with it!

      Now you’re on the trolley. That Mrs. Grundy was getting all spifficated on the giggle water, shame she ain’t got It. 23 Skidoo

    • Halloween Jack says:

      Copying and pasting my comment from the alicublog thread where this was linked.

      Oh, Jimmers:

      After dinner was a program called the “Light Side of the Right Side.” A frenetic, tightly wound man named James Lileks, a National Review columnist from Minnesota, warmed up the crowd with one-liners: “If we can put a man on the moon, we can put 50 million Democrats up there as well!”

      Can’t you just imagine Bob Hope or John Wayne saying the exact same thing at the ’72 RNC? (Of course, these days it’s the likes of Newt Gingrich that’s raring to get up there, but anyway.) Or check this out:

      After a break for cookies came the 4 p.m. panel, “The Media: How Deep in the Tank?” Lileks, the energetic Minnesotan, was apoplectic that the mainstream media castigated Michele Bachmann for suggesting without evidence that Hillary Clinton adviser Huma Abedin’s had connections to the Muslim Brotherhood.

      It’s not as if I need anything more to add to the pile of things that I can point otherwise-sensible people to when they stick up for Lileks on account of past glories such as the Gallery of Regrettable Food or guesting on Rifftrax, but that will do nicely. He’s about right for something like an NRO cruise, and I suppose that it makes for a nice break from his important duties writing things like this, sprinkled throughout with imitation humor bits and–I know that this will come as a shock to you all–getting yet another post out of his trip to a retail outlet and out of his daughter.

  4. STH says:

    The best part is when one of the cruisers tells the writer to write how scared they all are.

    Yes, we know.

  5. JimmyZ says:

    I got a catalog in the mail with $1000 coffee table books they claim can go up in value. I told my friends it was a sign that there would be a violent revolution in America soon. I didn’t know about the cruise with wealthy folks trying to figure out what to do with all their money.

  6. Anonymous37 says:

    The contact list from the people who paid money for this cruise has to be among the most valuable set of leads in history.

    Okay, everyone here who would have enjoyed going on the cruise (not alone: I wouldn’t be able to do that) in order to see how long it would take before you’d burst out laughing raise your hands.

    Mine is up. Look, am I the only person here who spends some of their money on entertainment?

  7. witless chum says:

    As I remember, One Market Under God by Thomas Frank contains about 31 percent just mocking that stupid Dow 36,000 guy. But, if anything, liberals don’t hate him enough.

    • Warren Terra says:

      I remember the line Krugman often used during the market collapse in 2008 (I don’t know if it was his originally) about how the prediction made in the title of Dow 36,000 might be correct except for containing an extra digit – and we had better hope the extra digit was the “3” and not the “6” or one of the “0”s.

  8. R. Porrofatto says:

    Hassett’s 36,000 Dow prediction was supposed to come true somewhere around 2003-2004. Missing the mark didn’t stop John McCain from making him senior economic adviser to his 2008 campaign. However, the prize for investment wrongness must go, as usual, to the Blowy Kudload. Larry’s “conservative forecast” in 1999 was a Dow of 50,000 by the year 2020. Still 7 years left to go on that one, but it doesn’t look good.

  9. evodevo says:

    How DOES the 1% hang on to their money?! What a bunch of morans.

    There’s a sucker born every minute. PT Barnum

    • DrDick says:

      Just further proof that, despite what their PR people in the press tell you, the rich really are not all that bright.

    • witless chum says:

      There’s lots of answers to this, but one of the most important is that they spend a lot of money to create nerf capitalism for themselves. Golden parachutes, understanding regulators, government contracting, etc.

      Donald Trump is a special case because of his media celebrity, but that guy is pretty terrible at business and he wouldn’t be out on the street even if people didn’t like to watch him yell at other minor celebrities.

      • Uncle Kvetch says:

        nerf capitalism


      • snarkout says:

        A freind kind of admired Donald Trump — I mean, the dude is an obvious hack, but he built a business empire out of selling his name to people with more money than taste, so that shows a certain Barnum-like venality worth admiring, right? I pointed out that he had inherited a real estate business worth hundreds of millions from his dad. It talks a business genius like Trump to turn a real estate empire worth hundreds of millions to a real estate-and-Atlantic City casino empire worth hundreds of millions in only forty years.

    • Njorl says:

      The 1% are often the relatives of the 0.1%.

    • Barry says:

      Simple. Those people on the cruise are not the 1%; they’re the 25% or so.

  10. c u n d gulag says:

    John Yoo had to bring his Mommy?

    What, his Mrs didn’t want to be seen with him, while he trolled for bucks on this “Ship of Fools?”

    Either that, or she backed out when she saw him packing a whip, a blindfold, some handfuffs and thumbscrews, a Taser, and a 5 gallon water bottle, for the trip.

  11. Speak Truth says:

    I like hating on the rich.

    Yeah, I hate those actors that demand (and get) millions per picture that only takes them a few months to complete.
    LaBron James makes $53 million a year and God knows what some of the higher paid sports starts earn.

    And then there’s Oprah Winfrey that makes more than a quarter billion a year. What does George Soros earn in a year? Who knows but it’s HUGE!!

    What do the successful music stars make? Christina Aguilera? Rascal Flatts?

    Successful New York artists that command hundreds of thousands for just one painting!!

    The list is endless and they’re all capitalists. They aren’t wage earners. They’re all selling a product.

    • Uncle Kvetch says:

      I like hating on the rich.

      And I like waffles. Let us come together in a spirit of comity at this holiday season.

    • olexicon says:

      The Rich hate you and want you to die in the gutter so they can have another ivory backscratcher

    • MAJeff says:

      I’m rather enjoying laughing at terrified white supremacists.

    • Murc says:

      The list is endless and they’re all capitalists. They aren’t wage earners.

      At least half the people you list by name, and most of the professions, are by definition wage earners. Athletes earn wages. They are LABOR. So are actors. They exchange their labor for financial remuneration. They are only capitalists inasmuch as you consider labor a product to be sold, which is laughable.

      To paraphrase the great philosopher Christopher Julius Rock III, the guys you see playing professional sports may be rich, but the guys signing their checks are WEALTHY.

      Finally, nobody at this blog has any problem with people adding value to the economy by using their capital to produce things to be sold. I would be surprised if you could produce a quote to that effect.

      • Speak Truth says:

        At least half the people you list by name, and most of the professions, are by definition wage earners. Athletes earn wages.

        You know nothing. They are contractors and as such, independent business people.

        • The Dark Avenger says:

          Nope, they’re paid a salary, Speak Lies. That’s why they have their own association or union depending on the sport under discussion. Some players use their earnings to start businesses on their own, but they are usually considered for tax purposes as employees, unless they do something like set up a business entity to which their salaries are paid out instead of themselves.

          You really are pulling things out of your a** these days.

        • olexicon says:

          So to summarize you are pro-Union

    • wjts says:

      And except for George Soros and maybe those “New York artists”, they’re all in a union.

    • Joshua says:

      Lebron James, Xtina, movie stars, etc., are all wage earners. LeBron gets paid a negotiated salary in exchange for his services. The guy paying LeBron that salary is way richer than he is, and actually did way less than LeBron has done to get his fortune (it’s Mickey Arison, CEO of Carnival Corporation, whose father founded Carnival Corporation).

      They get paid a high salary, yes a salary, because their skills are very much in demand.

      it’s true that a lot of these people have “brands” that take them into quasi-capitalist territory, but in the end their “capital”, their “assets”, are the exact same thing they are earning a salary with – their in-demand skills.

      • Speak Truth says:

        They get paid a high salary, yes a salary, because their skills are very much in demand.

        How’s this any different from the presidents of large corporations, hedge funds and Wall Street Banking institutions?

        They also get paid well for the skill sets they have. Lawyers, Doctors all get paid pretty well for their skills.

        But liberals seem to think that people with no skills should do as well as those who do.

        Why would anyone think that?

        • How’s this any different from the presidents of large corporations, hedge funds and Wall Street Banking institutions?

          Athletes don’t set their own salaries, or those of their peers, where the corporate CEO/Board class in society does.

  12. Rand Careaga says:

    I drew my brother’s attention to the NRO cruise story. He expressed surprise that John Yoo felt bold enough to venture into international waters. We found ourselves giggling over the notion of commando frogmen from The Hague spiriting him overboard of a moonless tropical night and taking him east to face justice in the International Criminal Court. Maybe next year?

  13. The lesson I take away from this is that these rich conservatives have terrible taste in clothes, which doesn’t surprise me.

  14. wjts says:

    Jonah Goldberg attempted a note of optimism…
    In response, the moderator recounted the litany of dreary statistics from Reed and Rasmussen earlier that day. “So therefore we should give up and burn our passports and stay on this boat forever?” said Goldberg with real exasperation.

    Everybody wins.

    (Except the crew.)

  15. S_noe says:

    I was kind of wishing, as I read this piece, that David Foster Wallace had been there. With his Spider-Man hat. He would’ve given the staff a bit more attention.

  16. Uncle Ebeneezer says:

    The fear I have, why this election stung, I think, Obama has successfully ­de-ratified some of the Reagan revolution in a way that Clinton never could and didn’t even try to. That’s what freaks people out, that feeling in their gut, either Obama has changed the country, or the country has sufficiently changed that they don’t have a problem with Obama. That’s what eats at people.

    This may be the smartest (an admittedly low bar) thing Jonah has ever uttered.

  17. Matt says:

    Longer investment-confused wingnut on the NRO cruise: “Where can we invest that won’t be impacted by our continuing efforts to destroy the country in retribution for electing one of THOSE PEOPLE to the Presidency?”

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.