Bandit is writing a book!

[qwerty]

http://members.iglou.com/bandit/

[dazzleman]

I read a little of his biography and it's pretty sick.  If this guy's for real, it's really sad.

[qwerty]

[© tweed]

I'm going to buy his book.

[opebo]

Admirable!

I also like his web site.

[minionofmidas]

The colour scheme is ugly.

[King]

If there is every a Bandit book signing I will go over there wearing a Bush-Cheney '04 t-shirt

[Gabu]

That is quite possibly the ugliest website that I have seen in a year.

[AuH2O]

What a disturbed person. Oh well, the world is full of them.

[WalterMitty]

i like it!

i give bandit props for being a non-conformist.

[Jake]

His biography is so sick. He needs counseling because he thinks everyone is a nazi.

[John Dibble]

I predict it will be wildly unsuccessful.

What the critics are saying: "Never heard of it." "Who?" "I stole this book to sell for crack money, but I can't even use it for that!"

[qwerty]

The best was his political cartoons,,,

This editorial cartoon is from our 5/27/96 edition. The accompanying article, which blasted Bob Dole's Naziistic proposal to require welfare recipients to be tested for drugs, suggested that fascist politicians who support drug testing should be required to perform the tests themselves by drinking the urine of those being tested.

[opebo]

The best was his political cartoons,,,

This editorial cartoon is from our 5/27/96 edition. The accompanying article, which blasted Bob Dole's Naziistic proposal to require welfare recipients to be tested for drugs, suggested that fascist politicians who support drug testing should be required to perform the tests themselves by drinking the urine of those being tested.

Hilarious!  And a very good depiction of Dole.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

I read a little of his biography and it's pretty sick.  If this guy's for real, it's really sad.

Clearly he was expelled from public schools because of his high IQ, and not because he liked to urinate on cafeteria tables and destroy school property as a five-year-old.

I'm not sure which is scarier: this bio being true, or this bio being made up.

Although, having been kicked out of parochial school myself in third grade for doing some extremely messed-up things, I shouldn't point fingers. :-)

[A18]

Hey Beef, when did you become a Democrat from Montana?

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Hey Beef, when did you become a Democrat from Montana?

My economic views have always been very centrist, and the Republicans have way too much... how shall I say it?  Baggage.

The 2004 election is over, and the correct outcome occurred.  The situation abroad required keeping GWB as president.  Now that that's all squared away, I have found myself looking at our own country.  And I don't like what I see.  Economic opportunity is abysmal for about 75% of Americans, and the behavior of Corporate America has become downright reprehensible.

I would like to see the Democrats adopt a moderate pro-life stance on abortion, and with the ascendency of people like Harry Reid, that is becoming more of a reality.  The Democrats are a much better home for Pro-Lifers than they were 10 years ago.

The Democrats need to rediscover their mission: that of being the party of the Little Guy, the worker, the farmer, the underdog.  It needs to leave behind the outdated radical social agendas of the 90s and become a political umbrella that both minority inner-city dwellers and "flyover-country" working-poor megachurch Christians can embrace.  I want to help make this happen, in whatever small ways I am capable of.

[A18]

Economic opportunity is small for about 75% of Americans because of Republicans? Where do you get that?

What is the reprehensible behavior of Corporate America, and what does the GOP have to do with it? I'm not really challeneging you, just asking.

It is interesting to have Harry Reid as Senate Minority Leader.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

Economic opportunity is small for about 75% of Americans because of Republicans? Where do you get that?

What is the reprehensible behavior of Corporate America, and what does the GOP have to do with it? I'm not really challeneging you, just asking.

Outsourcing jobs, accounting scandals, screwing employees in the name of bottom line... The GOP has encouraged an environment in which coporations can behave this way and get away with it.

Used to be you could get a high school diploma, enter the workforce, and in a few years, be making enough money to purchase a four-bedroom home.  And have job security, and get a nice pension to accompany Social Security.  And the family could afford to have one parent stay at home.  You could make it if you were willing to work hard. 

Nowadays?  Two working, college-educated parents can make barely enough to hold a home together.  Unless you are blessed, as I am, with an aptitude for developing highly technical skills, what is there for you to do?  Somewhere between 1965 and 1995, the system fell apart.  I don't know what went wrong, but the GOP is the party of the status quo in this regard.

I've just seen too many bright, young, hard-working people get utterly crushed in today's economy.  I want change.

[Nym90]

Hey Beef, when did you become a Democrat from Montana?

My economic views have always been very centrist, and the Republicans have way too much... how shall I say it? Baggage.

The 2004 election is over, and the correct outcome occurred. The situation abroad required keeping GWB as president. Now that that's all squared away, I have found myself looking at our own country. And I don't like what I see. Economic opportunity is abysmal for about 75% of Americans, and the behavior of Corporate America has become downright reprehensible.

I would like to see the Democrats adopt a moderate pro-life stance on abortion, and with the ascendency of people like Harry Reid, that is becoming more of a reality. The Democrats are a much better home for Pro-Lifers than they were 10 years ago.

The Democrats need to rediscover their mission: that of being the party of the Little Guy, the worker, the farmer, the underdog. It needs to leave behind the outdated radical social agendas of the 90s and become a political umbrella that both minority inner-city dwellers and "flyover-country" working-poor megachurch Christians can embrace. I want to help make this happen, in whatever small ways I am capable of.

Wow. Awesome post, Beef! I couldn't possibly agree more, well with the exception of the vote for Bush, but hey, as you say, that's in the past. Time to move on.

Welcome to the party. I hope you can have a positive change. It's nice to see someone see the light about what's happening in America with the economy these days. I greatly respect your vote for Bush and your reasons for it. I can see where you were coming from. But I'm happy to have you on board.

You are EXACTLY the kind of person the Democrats need....this brightens my day just a little. There is hope after all.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

My economic views have always been very centrist, and the Republicans have way too much... how shall I say it?  Baggage.

The 2004 election is over, and the correct outcome occurred.  The situation abroad required keeping GWB as president.  Now that that's all squared away, I have found myself looking at our own country.  And I don't like what I see.  Economic opportunity is abysmal for about 75% of Americans, and the behavior of Corporate America has become downright reprehensible.

I would like to see the Democrats adopt a moderate pro-life stance on abortion, and with the ascendency of people like Harry Reid, that is becoming more of a reality.  The Democrats are a much better home for Pro-Lifers than they were 10 years ago.

The Democrats need to rediscover their mission: that of being the party of the Little Guy, the worker, the farmer, the underdog.  It needs to leave behind the outdated radical social agendas of the 90s and become a political umbrella that both minority inner-city dwellers and "flyover-country" working-poor megachurch Christians can embrace.  I want to help make this happen, in whatever small ways I am capable of.

Excellent post :-)

[opebo]

I would like to see the Democrats adopt a moderate pro-life stance on abortion, and with the ascendency of people like Harry Reid, that is becoming more of a reality.  The Democrats are a much better home for Pro-Lifers than they were 10 years ago.

This is pointless - is it preferable to loose the votes of the 40% of the country that is pro-choice and gain a couple of precent of the religious vote? I think, and  hope, that the Democratic party will be holding firm on abortion rights, simply because it makes electoral sense.   

[J-Mann]

Economic opportunity is small for about 75% of Americans because of Republicans? Where do you get that?

What is the reprehensible behavior of Corporate America, and what does the GOP have to do with it? I'm not really challeneging you, just asking.

Outsourcing jobs, accounting scandals, screwing employees in the name of bottom line... The GOP has encouraged an environment in which coporations can behave this way and get away with it.

Used to be you could get a high school diploma, enter the workforce, and in a few years, be making enough money to purchase a four-bedroom home.  And have job security, and get a nice pension to accompany Social Security.  And the family could afford to have one parent stay at home.  You could make it if you were willing to work hard. 

Nowadays?  Two working, college-educated parents can make barely enough to hold a home together.  Unless you are blessed, as I am, with an aptitude for developing highly technical skills, what is there for you to do?  Somewhere between 1965 and 1995, the system fell apart.  I don't know what went wrong, but the GOP is the party of the status quo in this regard.

I've just seen too many bright, young, hard-working people get utterly crushed in today's economy.  I want change.

I've gone the opposite way of you in terms of party choice, but I agree with this post about the economy.  I think it sucks, and there is so much more to life than just a bottom line.  I don't know that the GOP created this atmosphere, but they aren't doing much to counter it.

Thanks for the post, Beef.  Very well put.

[Nym90]

I would like to see the Democrats adopt a moderate pro-life stance on abortion, and with the ascendency of people like Harry Reid, that is becoming more of a reality.  The Democrats are a much better home for Pro-Lifers than they were 10 years ago.

This is pointless - is it preferable to loose the votes of the 40% of the country that is pro-choice and gain a couple of precent of the religious vote? I think, and hope, that the Democratic party will be holding firm on abortion rights, simply because it makes electoral sense.

I don't think the Dems would lose all of the pro-choice voters. Assuming that the GOP was still pro-life, the pro-choice voters might stay home and not vote, but the great majority still would vote Democratic even if they weren't happy with the abortion position.

The reality is that those who are pro-life are much much more likely to refuse under any circumstances whatsoever to vote for a candidate who is pro-choice, even if that person agrees with them on every other issue. Those who are pro-choice are more willing to support a pro-life candidate as long as they like most of the rest of what they have to say.

So while the country is split down the middle, with actually slightly more people being pro-choice than pro-life, it is politically advantageous to be pro-life.

Gun control is another issue that fits this. About 70% of Americans oppose the NRA's position on gun control, and generally favor it, but there are very few people who are so pro-gun control that they would refuse to ever support an NRA backed candidate. There are lots of NRA members who would never under any circumstances whatsoever support a candidate who didn't have the NRA endorsement.

So again, most people are pro-gun control, but politically, it's better for a candidate to be anti-gun control.

[opebo]

I would like to see the Democrats adopt a moderate pro-life stance on abortion, and with the ascendency of people like Harry Reid, that is becoming more of a reality.  The Democrats are a much better home for Pro-Lifers than they were 10 years ago.

This is pointless - is it preferable to loose the votes of the 40% of the country that is pro-choice and gain a couple of precent of the religious vote? I think, and hope, that the Democratic party will be holding firm on abortion rights, simply because it makes electoral sense.

I don't think the Dems would lose all of the pro-choice voters. Assuming that the GOP was still pro-life, the pro-choice voters might stay home and not vote, but the great majority still would vote Democratic even if they weren't happy with the abortion position.

The reality is that those who are pro-life are much much more likely to refuse under any circumstances whatsoever to vote for a candidate who is pro-choice, even if that person agrees with them on every other issue. Those who are pro-choice are more willing to support a pro-life candidate as long as they like most of the rest of what they have to say.

So while the country is split down the middle, with actually slightly more people being pro-choice than pro-life, it is politically advantageous to be pro-life.

Gun control is another issue that fits this. About 70% of Americans oppose the NRA's position on gun control, and generally favor it, but there are very few people who are so pro-gun control that they would refuse to ever support an NRA backed candidate. There are lots of NRA members who would never under any circumstances whatsoever support a candidate who didn't have the NRA endorsement.

So again, most people are pro-gun control, but politically, it's better for a candidate to be anti-gun control.

You're probably right, sadly.  Although it will be interesting to see if there would be any backlash once women's bodies are again under the control of the State.