Let’s say you run a Presidential Administration that takes on some water. It takes on water in a manner reminiscent of The USS Arizona at Pearl Harbor. It’s not over after the Germans get done bombing, but things are looking pretty bad there. Somebody has to fall on the gladius and take the blame. Pearl Harbor Day for this administration appears to be scheduled one month early this year, and the lucky guy getting to do the sword plant appears to be none other than Rahm Emanuel.
Yet this operation isn’t just as simple as whacking someone in the private sector. After all, this is Rahm “Effing” Emanuel were talkin’ about here, not some stinkin’ Jabroni. You can’t just leave the gun and take the cannoli. Rahm is a man of respect, he has to be properly taken care of.
Now it just so conveniently happens that Mayor Daley of Chicago has decided to hang up the spikes. That Rahm Emanuel leads a life of serendipity. It just so happens that Rahm Emanuel would love to be the Mayor of Chicago. Daley wants to move on, Rahm has been encouraged to leave DC, what do you think the likelihood of such a bizarre yet fortuitous coincidence occurring on Earth would be?
It somehow seems like this is Rahm’s place to lie down and peacefully die. It’s a perfect little Romania upon which he can unleash his inner Ceausescu. Now if he can just train his secretary the way Boss Man Bill from Arkansas had ‘em trained….
Yet all may not be tranquil in paradise. A few members of the family want to alter the deal. According to Jim Geraghty at NRO, an organization called The Progressive Change Campaign Committee issued the following fatwa against Rahm Emanuel.
“Rahm is unfit to represent Democrats in office. He’s a cancer on the Democratic Party. Democrats’ current 2010 situation is due to a weak Rahm Emanuel mentality that says water down real reform at the urging of Republicans and corporations, thus making Democratic reform less popular with voters than the real deal would have been.”
I almost hope Barack Obama has to actually endorse Rahm Emanuel for this job. It would be about the most stinging rebuke imaginable. It would also garun-frikken-tee that this is lights out for Emanuel’s political career. The City of Chicago would no longer be a temporary sinecure, but would instead be his Office by the River, in The Japanese Corporate sense.
Let Rahm Emanuel actually become a liability to the Democratic Party, let his bowing out at the White House become a national joke, and people will then become reminded of just how charming a person Mr. Emanuel has been throughout his glorious tenure of service to our great nation. I can’t imagine anyone with even a remotely kind thought for Eric Massa willingly stumping in ChiTown for Good Old Rahm. I can’t imagine anyone even remotely cognizant of what a raging fustercluck Fannie Mae truned into not being tempted to ask Rahm how he liked earning several million dollars as a managing director of that august organization.
Karma owes Rahm Emanuel. Payback may well come with full interest. Yet sadly, the world we live in has no such finely-honed sense of justice. Rahm will simply be parked there, in charge of his own urban Bulgaria. Let him stare at his portrait of Dorian Grey as he rots in peace. It’s better that than having that evil basilisk of a human being in charge of anything of national import or significance. Enjoy your retirement you vile son of a Rottweiler.
So, why the mad dash away from this column by the leftist elites? It’s bashing Sarah Palin, so one would think that they would love it. Well, without much ado and mincing any words, I can tell you the four major reasons why liberals can’t seem to distance themselves from this column fast enough.
1.) Michael Gross, the author of this column, sounds like a blithering idiot, his column is dripping with hatred, and he manages to prove Sarah Palin correct about the “lamestream media”.
First of all, Gross’ column is a poorly written, non-flowing, rambling mess mess consisting of too long paragraphs, run-on sentences, dangling modifiers and non sequiturs. Second of all, his column is completely unsourced–everyone he quotes is either “some say”, “others say”, “someone who knows Levi Johnston says”, and some unnamed woman who says that Sarah Palin used to be her babysitter. (Mr. Gross explains that the reason why nobody will go on the record with him in Alaska is that the Palins are like “the mafia”, and that everyone’s afraid of them. He refers to Wasilla as “a city of fear” that is “populated entirely by abuse survivors”. I’m not kidding–you can read all of his insane fantasies about Sarah Palin cracking kneecaps in his long and crappy article.)
Furthermore, the one person that Gross did name, Shannyn Moore (a well known Sarah Palin hater), wrote him a nasty email where she basically tore him apart for misconstruing her words and taking her out of context. Her entire email is printed below–
Mr. Michael Gross,
You just “Sarah Palined” people here.
I’m going through a list doing damage control and telling people I’m so sorry I gave you their contacts and vouched for your professionalism and credibility.
You have neither.
I don’t give a rip what you said about me – though it was so completely wrong, and put me in such a completely inaccurate and unfavorable light people are mad on my behalf.
Fine thanks for Alaskan hospitality. I have extended the Alaska Spirit to dozens of journalists and visitors, and I will continue to do so. It’s on YOU, not me, as you are the only one who has broken agreements with sources you promised complete anonymity.
I’m sure you’re thrilled to be on TV now. Just know, like Sarah, Alaskans paid a price for it. Specifically, a 79-year old woman, with failing health, who spoke to you under anonymity who hopes her adult children will speak to her again.
Shame on you. You’re not a writer…you’re a climber.
With no respect,
Shannyn Moore
Second of all, Michael Gross’ column was loaded with half-truths, innuendos and out-right lies, all not-so-cleverly disguised as facts. For example, Gross began his column with the following quote–
“Erratic behavior and a pattern of lying matter little.”
Now, you would think that if Gross was going to come out swinging like that, then he must have some serious evidence to back up such powerful assertions such as those–that he, again, makes on Hardball. (See the embed below where Chris Matthews cuts Gross off on goes to Norah O’Donnell, because he realizes that Gross sounds a little nutty and unhealthily obsessed with Sarah Palin.)
However, it turns out that his column is rich in over the top rhetoric, but deeply lacking in facts or evidence. For instance, his smoking gun that Sarah Palin is a crazed liar is that she once said that she didn’t have a lot of experience with special needs children before her son Trig was born, but at a later time mentioned that she has an autistic nephew. (Mr. Gross makes no mention of how much time Palin has spent with her autistic nephew.) Oh, and his airtight evidence that Sarah Palin is a crazy woman with a violent temper who needs to be on “psychiatric medications”, is a story from an “unnamed source” about her and Todd Palin getting in a fight and throwing canned food at the refrigerator–and the fact that one of her teenage kids was supposedly embarrassed by her praying in public and called her a “phony”.
["Coming up on Live News at Five, married couples sometimes fight and teenagers are embarrassed by their parents. Next up--dog bites man."]
However, CNN reporter, Peter Hamby, has since contradicted Michael Gross with the following Tweet where he states–
I was w/ Palin for entire VP bid. never got a hint that she “lashed out at the slightest provocation”
So, another one of Michael Gross’ accusations bites the dust.
And finally, the most embarrassing part about Michael Gross’ article is that it has two serious factual errors in it.
One major mistake Michael Gross made in his column is he referred to Dr. Gina Loudon as Trig’s nanny, when she was actual the mother of Samuel, another special needs child with Down Syndrome that was backstage at a fundraiser with the Palins. Here is an exert of Gross’ column below–
“When …Piper Palin turns around, she sees her parents thronged by admirers, and the crowd rolling toward her and the baby, her brother Trig, born with Down syndrome in 2008. Sarah Palin and her husband, Todd, bend down and give a moment to the children; a woman, perhaps a nanny, whisks the boy away; and Todd hands Sarah her speech and walks her to the stage.”
Now, here are some exerts from Dr. Gina Loudon’s column rebutting the above statement by Michael Gross (be sure to click on the link to her column to see an adorable picture of Piper)–
“Unfortunately for Mr. Gross, it happens that I shared the stage with Sarah Palin at that event.”
“As I stood backstage with the Palins I remember a reporter asking me if I were “Trig’s Nanny” with a hint of something I didn’t trust in his eyes. I coldly retorted, “no, I am Samuel’s mother.” He looked confused, and had more questions to follow. In his VF story, he said that no one is willing to speak about Sarah “on the record” unless they are paid by her, or afraid. I was one of the people you interviewed Mr. Gross. I am not paid, or afraid. But since you opted not to print what I told you, here is the rest of the story:Since the first time the Governor saw my son Samuel (who also has Down syndrome), she bolts across the room to greet him every time she sees him. She nuzzles him like a mother who loves children with Down syndrome does. I remember commenting to my husband that she always “does the mama smell” of Samuel, that only moms understand.
All of the Palin children circle around Samuel the moment they can get close, but Piper, in particular, cannot seem to get enough of him. She literally plays with him (Gross does say she played with “the children” in his story) from the moment she sees him, until the moment she is pressed to let go of him. It is so sweet, and it speaks to the parenting in her life. She has obviously been taught a real, tangible love for “special children” by her parents, and it shines when she lights up at the sight of a baby with Down syndrome. This is not an ordinary reaction in children. Most children step away, look curious, or frightened, or confused. Not the Palin children, and especially not little Piper.
After an event in Nashville, the Governor went to the trouble of making a special call to me to thank me and tell me how much Piper enjoyed “loving on” my Samuel.
One more thing among your errors: “the boy” in the excerpted quote above, was not Trig Palin. That was my Samuel, also a beautiful boy with Down syndrome. No “nanny whisk(ed) the boy away.” I am his mother. I took my son, Samuel from Sarah before she went on stage. I told Mr. Gross that fact, but he didn’t let that divert him from his pathetic narrative.
That is not journalism. That is just gross.”
Ouch–that’s gotta sting a bit. I mean, Dr. Gina Loudon makes Mr. Gross look like he was so busy with his witch hunt on Sarah Palin, that he couldn’t even bother to get his facts straight–you know, like who the child in question really was, or who his mother was (however, he probably thinks that all Down’s Syndrome children look alike).
Now, the second major mistake in Michael Gross’ column is that repeats a rumor about Sarah Palin supposedly wanting a shotgun wedding for her daughter Bristol and Levi Johnston, that everyone who’s anyone in the media and blogs knows is total bunk. Both Ben Smith and Dave Weigel call Gross to the carpet on printing this known fabrication. To be specific, Michael Gross wrote the following with regard to the supposed plans that Sarah Palin had for a shotgun wedding for Bristol and Levi–
“Soon after her nomination, she brought up with McCain aides the subject of Bristol’s out-of-wedlock pregnancy by Levi Johnston: “Would it be good for the campaign if they got married before the election?” she asked, and went on to wonder whether one weekend or another would be more advantageous for media coverage.”
Dave Weigel responds to this unsubstantiated rumor in Gross’ column by writing the following–
“Smith explains that the quote came from a wild yarn in a UK Times story, passed on by a McCain campaign source, even though “the idea was never brought to Palin, much less seriously considered.” I can confirm that because I heard it from the same source, albeit after the campaign was over. It was, as I understand it, a goof, and it went to print because, basically, UK papers have more lax standards on what they print than American papers. Of course, it’s not like American papers have covered themselves in glory when “analyzing” Palin’s family based on rumors.
Point is, this anecdote is bunk, and it makes me wonder about the rest of the story.”
Dave Weigel just took the words right out of my mouth–I couldn’t have said it better myself. In a nutshell, what it looks like, is that, at best, Michael Gross was so obsessed with his witchhunt to paint Sarah Palin as Lucifer, that he engaged in some really sloppy journalism–and at worst, that he was outright lying (I vote for all of the above).
Now, on to the second reason why liberals are running scared from Michael Gross’ disgusting column.
2.) Michael Gross’ hit piece on Sarah Palin was just dripping with blatant sexism.
Gross goes out of his way to paint Sarah Palin as a bad mother, which everyone knows is classic sexism 101. One example that he gave was that she missed her children on the campaign trail, so when they were with her, she hung out with them too much and didn’t insist that they do their homework (someone needs to call child protective services…rolls eyes). Oh, and she insisted that her little girl get the pink and purple markers that she wanted to sign autographs with, and that a hairdresser do hair and make-up for another daughter. Please, allow me to put this another way. Could any of you imagine if someone wrote a column implying that Barack Obama was a bad father because he wasn’t around his daughters much during the 2008 campaign, and because he got them some pink markers to sign autographs?! Liberals would be screaming at the top of their lungs that the column was ridiculous garbage–and they would be right.
However, Gross’ disgusting sexism doesn’t stop at attacking Sarah Palin’s parenting skills. He goes on to say that “someone” (his favorite source) told him that an aide asked if Sarah Palin needed psychiatric medication–again, a classic and very transparent sexist technique implying that she’s some unstable “harridan” with raging hormones. Furthermore, Gross even goes so far as to write that “some say” that Todd Palin is “henpecked”. (I’m not kidding–he actually wrote the word “henpecked”.) Progressive Newsweek columnist, Julia Baird (who is certainly no Sarah Palin fan), wrote a column titled, Will Feminists Rally Around Sarah Palin?, where she did an excellent job defending Sarah Palin from these pathetic attacks. The excerpts below from her column pretty much say it all–
“It’s just about the lamest card in the pack of criticisms leveled at powerful women: you must be a Bad Mother. Just when you think we’ve accepted that a woman can have a job and still love her children, along comes another piece of reporting to remind us that some people still think it’s fair to judge a female public figure on the basis of what kind of parent—and wife—she is. This is something male politicians, who have long perfected the role of absent father, deal with very, very rarely.
While all politicians are vulnerable to personal attacks, some attacks are particularly shameful. So what is the substance of these allegations?
First, Palin may have something representing a modern marriage, which has prompted some locals to speculate that Todd may be “henpecked.” Fancy that charge being leveled at the husband of a woman with opinions. It’s striking that while the husbands of successful women are frequently portrayed as emasculated by their wives’ success, the women who marry powerful men are usually seen to benefit from their greater status.
Second, Palin’s work has affected her closeness to her kids: we are told that “at least since the start of the 2008 campaign, Todd has been shouldering the bulk of the parenting and that Sarah’s relationship with her children has grown more distant.” And yet a few sentences later we also learn that when she grew lonely on the campaign trail, Palin wanted her kids to travel with her because she “seemed comforted” by having them around. But instead of empathizing—who wouldn’t hate to be separated from their kids?—the implication is that she is selfish: the kids came, but not much homework was done. What choice would you make?
The third allegation is that she was a sloppy parent when her kids traveled with her, and she failed to discipline them adequately, at least in the eyes of some observers: “On the road, aides say, Sarah spared the rod.” She reportedly demanded one child use the pink and purple Sharpies the youngster wanted to sign autographs with (not the black one that was provided) and insisted another have hair and makeup done by a campaign stylist. She was hardly being cruel; it’s stupid to judge such trivial incidents without context.”
“One Obama supporter and political operative blogged, “In picking an unknown, untested half-a-term governor from Alaska . . . John McCain is following in a long line of reckless men who have rolled the dice for a beauty queen.”
Do we really have to do this again?
No sooner was Hillary Rodham Clinton out of the race, and a new woman is in the cross hairs.
On CNN, during a discussion about whether it was appropriate for Palin to accept this job when she has a baby, Dana Bash pointed out it’s unlikely anyone would ask this of a male candidate.
I can’t help wondering if this is a trap. The McCain camp watched and learned as Obama supporters offended Hillary supporters by their treatment of her. The McCainiacs had to know that this group is incapable of behaving, that Palin would bring out their worst instincts.
One top Republican said to me: “Just wait until she is debating Joe Biden and he starts attacking or condescending to her. Hillary voters are going to say, ‘Oh yeah, I remember this.’ “
Ironically, two feminist, leftist bloggers recently wrote an op-ed in The New York Times titled, A Palin of Our Own where they lament the rise of Sarah Palin as a feminist icon. However, what is so ironic about this column is that liberals helped to create the superstar that is Sarah Palin by sending moderate, suburban women (some of them former Hillary Clinton supporters) running into her arms with their obnoxious, misogynistic behavior (for example, Keith Olbermann hoping that someone would beat up Hillary Clinton). And, deep down inside, they know that this is true–which is why they are running like heck from this recent vicious, sexist hit-piece on Sarah Palin.
Now, on to the third reason why liberals are throwing Michael Gross under the bus with gusto.
3.) When Michael Gross is not attacking Sarah Palin in his column, he is attacking her supporters–who are his fellow Americans.
Gross paints Sarah Palin’s supporters at her rallies as a bunch of incurious simpletons who “cling to their guns and their religion”. To be specific, Gross writes the following about the people who attend Sarah Palin’s rallies–
“People who admire her believe she is just like them, and this conviction seems to satisfy their curiosity about the objective facts of her life.”
Whoa. If that’s not a round about way of calling Sarah Palin’s supporters a bunch incurious, uneducated dumb dumbs who don’t understand “the objective facts of life”, then I don’t know what is.
Moreover, Gross writes in his column about how Palin is sending out a “dog whistle” to Evangelical Christians in her speeches when she uses the phrase, “Leading with a servant’s heart”, and then prattles on about how she gets emails from Evangelical Christians who pray for her and call themselves “prayer warriors”. Mr. Gross is clearly bothered by the prayer warriors and thinks that they are a bunch of dangerous crazies–it is painfully obvious when he writes the following–
“The term “prayer warrior” describes a person who offers a specific kind of supplication: asking God to direct an unseen battle between forces of light and darkness—literal angels and demons—that some Christians believe is occurring all around us.”
Yeah, those Christians have always been a delusional, dangerous bunch. Remember how they were personally responsible for ending the African slave trade? They’ve always been unpredictable and crazy like that. You never know what they’re going to do next (rolls eyes).
Now, do I really need to explain to anyone why attacking and mocking random American citizens is a big no-no for a journalist? This really should be common sense. It is one thing to attack a politician, a journalist, a blogger, or any other public figure. It is quite another thing to show such disdain–as well as religious bigotry–towards your fellow Americans. In other words, private citizens who are minding their own business should be able to attend a Sarah Palin rally, or attend any church that they want to, without some know nothing, liberal elitist journalist mocking them in Vanity Fair.
And finally, on to the fourth reason why liberals are high-tailing it in the the opposite direction of Micheal Gross.
4.) Franky speaking, Michael Gross sounds like a pervert who is way too interested in Sarah Palin’s undergarments, as well as her sex life.
For starters, Gross writes about how “this person” told him that Sarah and Todd Palin don’t always sleep in the same bed and that Todd once supposedly said, “I don’t know how she even gets pregnant”. Yuck. I feel like I need to take a shower now. I mean, could any of you imagine if some right wing journalist started asking local people in Chicago about the Obama’s sex life?! I rest my case.
Furthermore, Mr. Gross admits to having dinner with Joe McGinniss at his house–you know, the weirdo who moved in next door to the Palin family in order to stalk, I mean, report on them? Now, right away, Gross freely admits that McGinniss is lying about not being able to see into the Palin’s home. Gross writes that, when he was standing on McGinniss’ deck, “it was possible to see several of the Palins’ windows, a fair bit of the yard, and much of the lakefront edge of their property”. However, Gross then goes on to sympathize with Joe McGinniss and paint him as a victim who has received over 5000 hostile emails and has had one of his truck windows shot out. Oh, oh, I have an idea! Pick me Teacher, pick me. How about not stalking the Palin family, and then you won’t have to worry about receiving hostile emails by people calling you a “stalker”? But, I digress.
However, by far the creepiest part of Michael Gross’ column was when he not once, but twice referenced what kind of undergarments Sarah Palin wears. Specifically, Gross writes about how “a friend” of Sarah Palin supposedly told him–
“Once, while Sarah was preparing for a city-council meeting, she said, ‘I’m gonna put on one of my push-up bras so I can get what I want tonight.’ That’s how she rolls.”
OK–why would anyone who calls himself a journalist even bother to write down smut like this? But Mr. Gross was just getting warmed up. Further down in his column, Gross wrote that Sarah Palin spent $3000 on Spanx girdles during the 2008 campaign. Oh for crying out loud! It’s so obvious what Gross is trying to do here (besides acting like a real creep/weirdo)–he is clearly trying attack to Sarah Palin’s beauty and imply that her looks are just a mirage, and she’s really kind of fat. Yeah, that Sarah Palin–she’s a real uggo and a fatty. What is she? A size four? What a cow! (Rolls eyes.)
By the way, just an explanation here. You don’t have to be “fat” to wear Spanx or a girdle occasionally (especially after you’ve just had a baby). Every woman has that unforgiving dress that, on a “fat day” when you might be retaining some water, can make even the most svelt, toned woman look like she has a bulge. Full disclosure–I am a size two and even I have to sometimes use “help” when I wear an unforgiving dress on a bad day. If not, then even a very attractive, tall, slim woman with toned arms can wind up looking like this in a unforgiving dress–
However, let’s move on from this topic of conversation, because Michael Gross might be getting turned on–uh, I mean some of the guys might be getting bored.
So, in conclusion, Michael Gross not only not only made a flaming ass out of himself, but he also totally humiliated the liberal mainstream media. He managed to bring every caricature of an elitist, egotistical, out of touch, liberal journalist to life. And the worst part was that he was incredibly sloppy with many of the facts–which in turn, discredits his entire piece. Credible leftist/progressive journalists and columnists can’t flee from his disaster of a column fast enough–and I don’t blame them.
But now, Vanity Fair’s chickens have come home to roost. They have gotten away with writing unsourced hit pieces for so long, that they got over-confident. This time, they gave Michael Gross carte blanche to pretty much write what ever he damn well pleased–muddled facts, sexism, stalkers, underwear and all. To tell the truth, I’m not at all surprised that some columnist, somewhere, would write something like this; however, I am surprised that any editor would actually go through with publishing it. Basically, Vanity Fair unintentionally gave Michael Gross just enough rope to hang himself, and Vanity Fair’s credibility in the process. Michael Gross’ column should serve as a cautionary tale for progressive journalists everywhere. Don’t let your love of all things Obama and your hatred of Sarah Palin get the best of you–or you will wind up proving Sarah Palin correct about the “lamestream media”.
Update: Michael Gross has now come out and admitted that he was wrong about “the nanny whisking Trig away”, and he has now admitted that he wrote about the wrong baby–and the wrong mother. However, the fact that he would make this kind of ridiculous “mistake” in the first place, tells me that he really didn’t go to Alaska to find out the facts about Sarah Palin. Gross obviously went there to try to dig up dirt–and he failed miserably and made fool out of himself in the process.
Americans talk the smack better than any other culture on the planet. I think we invented it, patented it, and elevated it to an art form that transcends all race, ideology and social class boundaries. We see it clearly when pollsters ask voters of either party about their political enemies. The question becomes what happens when all these smack-talkers forget that it can be carried too far. I think we discovered that recently when James Jay Lee took over the Discovery Channel building and held hostages.
Unlike the pitiable Environmentalist Whack-Job James Jay Lee, people don’t really speak from their hearts on these surveys. They just slag down the people they would never consider voting for. The unspoken assumption is that it’s all just a game.
Sadly, in the case of James Jay Lee, we just met someone with very strong, opinions, and no particular understanding of a lot of the political speech around him. He really didn’t know that Al Gore, a father of four children and the owner of a palatial estate himself, was talking smack to the activists about overpopulation and resource overconsumption.
A recent Daily Kos Poll suggests those Right Wingers, the ones Kos doesn’t exactly send Christmas and Hanukah Cards every year, have bizarre and irrational beliefs. Can you imagine a Daily Kos poll getting that result? Did you know that President Obama was a secret Muslim? Or that 36% of those whack-job Republicans believed he was born abroad and not really a US citizen? Show us the birf-surtifikate, President ObaMao! But that just describes our side’s sick puppies.
In 2008, James Zogby discovered that Liberals were nearly twice as likely as Conservatives to believe they should have the right to succeed from the United States. It’s as if that whole State Contract vs State Compact Thingy was all just Bush’s fault! Perhaps the Democrats didn’t lose the last American Civil War badly enough….
No, the real truth here is that Zogby’s poll result is a predictable result of Liberal politics of racist pandering. The highest pro-succession results come from Black and Hispanic respondents who coincidentally tend to hold liberal beliefs. This skews the statistic for liberals and thereby produces the “gotcha” result that got Zogby all the web hits and blog citations. Zogby reports his racial crosstab below.
Broken down by race, the highest percentage agreeing with the right to secede was among Hispanics (43%) and African-Americans (40%). Among white respondents, 17% said states or regions should have the right to peaceably secede.
This result can be looked at in two ways. Russ Douthat describes it as a symbolic belief. People claim that George W. Bush either prefers LIHOP or MIHOP; and we’re not talking about pancakes. But they perhaps claim to hold this belief to make a political statement. Douthat describes these symbolic beliefs below.
For all but the hardest-core conspiracy theorizers, they may express what Sanchez calls “symbolic beliefs.” These are “propositions you profess publicly” but would never follow through on, because they’re adopted as a kind of political and cultural statement rather than out of deep conviction.
Now I’m willing to concede that most Americans have stayed awake through enough US History to accurately understand how successful Pickett’s Charge was. Popular Mechanics Magazine has written the definitive smack-down of all stupid 9-11 Conspiracy theories. The Hawai’i an Certificate of Live Birth for Barack Obama states that his familial religion is Islam. It also offers evidence that he was born in the US and is constitutionally eligible to misrule the United States of America for yet another two years of ignominious and arrogant enstupidation. These are all three bodies of fact that are not in serious intellectual dispute.
So why do people still say these things? For the same reason that the chicken pooped after she crossed the road: to insult the other side. Everybody alive has probably called at least one individual with an IQ greater than 130 an idiot over some point of intellectual contention. People say things that they know well are not accurate about people for whom they bear great antipathy. Most of us get that and aren’t really aligning our beliefs to statements such as “There is no need for red-hot pokers – Hell is other people!”
Yet every so often, we get a Sirhan Sirhan or a James Jay Lee. We meet somebody who just doesn’t get Al Gore’s shtick. The leading Environmentalists repeat the discredited lies of Thomas Malthus or Paul Ehrlich who predicted mass starvation by the mid 1980’s if we didn’t quit procreating. The authors of these screeds usually assume that Earth has some fixed biotic carrying capacity for human population that in no way accounts for technological advances in medicine, food production, community planning or energy.
The ideas in Erlich’s work make a certain rudimentary sense if you only examine only a minimal data set. It’s the modern scientific equivalent of the Geo-Centric Theory. You can hand-pick data and torture the numbers until they support Malthusian Doctrine; but you can’t keep making chicken salad out of such an obviously wrong conclusion. We mostly all know this, – except for James Jay Lee.
Maybe what we all learned from the Discovery Channel debacle and James Jay Lee’s condign, yet untimely death, is that really funny jokes like George W. Bush committing LIHOP, or Barack Obama having a secret Kenyan Birth Certificate, aren’t particularly funny. It’s all fun and games until someone puts an eye out, or carries one of these mistaken beliefs so far that they strap explosives on and take hostages over a stupid, dishonest and wrong-headed ideological screed.
The aforementioned Sirhan Sirhan was a dedicated true-believer as well. That doesn’t make you feel any better in the morning if your last name happens to be Kennedy. One of these days the cute political conspiracy theories that we use to trump the bad guys could get an awful lot of us killed by someone who doesn’t understand it’s not serious.
Labor Day is traditionally when the regular folks start to become interested in the upcoming elections. The larger than usual turnout in the GOP primaries makes me think this interest about the upcoming elections started earlier this year. We can’t get complacent and let the enthusiasm wane before November 2. There are no foregone conclusions, and nothing is really won or lost until after the votes are tallied on Nov. 2. We also have to do things in the right sequence. Before we work on changing the leadership of the GOP establishment Republican candidates need to win in the General Election. You are really putting a GOP candidate in an untenable spot when you demand of him to denounce the current GOP leadership. Please wait until December to talk about any of that stuff. The Democrat incumbents are going to fight to hold on to the reins of power, and they are going to try to project themselves as outstanding servants to their constituents. Do not allow them to lie about their voting records. Show people the grade each of them received from Liberty Central.
Liberty Central just completed a video contest, Get Your Liberty On, on Sept. 1. Below are the grand prize winner and runnerup. Below that is an awesome video by C&W duo, Tichenor Clark. So enjoy Labor Day, don’t be complacent, and get your liberty on.
Liberty Central grand prize winner was submitted by AJ Roach, of Pleasant Grove, Alabama:
Are you inspired yet? If not, check out this moving reflection from a veteran, and resident of Liberty Nebraska, Ralph Bodie.
One more video created by Jamie Teachenor and Ben Clark for a new song, Never Gonna Stand For This:
I love the Liberty Central website as an excellent place for me to use for political research. I especially like the legislative scorecards they did for the 111th Congress. All 535 members of the US House and US Senate received a grade from A to F. They based the grades on 12 House votes and 14 Senate votes that they decided had the most effect on their five principles of liberty. These grades make so much more sense to me than any scorecard I have seen by ACU, CFG, or NTU. I like it so much that I crunched some numbers from it to create this diary. I took the results for 5 incumbent Dem Senators and 27 incumbent Dems in the US House that the experts are calling toss-ups. The grades they have received do not provide a reason to call these races toss-ups for anyone except possibly Bobby Bright. We need to remember these important votes, and not allow anyone to distract us from the fact that the votes are really what matters most. When a Susan Estrich opines that that there are fissures and divisions in the Republican Party what she is actually saying is that she will be less bummed about a Democrat losing to a liberal Republican. I say let her be bummed. Let's nominate and elect Republicans who can earn an A from Liberty Central instead of an F. We can do this as long as we GOTV and don't allow our enemies to distract us. They will be trying. They are very trying.
Liberty Central compiled scores for all Senators, in order to determine which Senators have the most respect for five principles: limited government, individual liberty, personalresponsibility, free enterprise, and national security.
The 14 Senate votes measured
Dodd-Frank Conference Report*
Murkowski Resolution*
Border Fence*
Financial Reform*
Earmark Moratorium*
Health Care*
SERVE/Americorps*
Stimulus*
Sanctuary Cities*
Terrorist Trials in Civilian Courts*
Lilly Ledbetter*
Repeal DC Gun Ban*
TARP Rescission*
School Choice*
Scores were calculated as follows.
1 point for each vote that contradicted our five principles (e.g., growing the size of government, weakening our national defense, or taking measures against the free market).
1 additional point for sponsoring or co-sponsoring one of the aforementioned bills, since the Senator proudly attached his or her name to that measure.
1 point for opposing legislation that supports the five principles.
In other words, the higher the score, the worse the Senator. Tallied points for each Senator and assigned grades based on the following scale: A=0 to 1 points, B=2-3 points, C=4-6 points, D=7-8 points, F=9 and above.
Incumbent Grade Score
Bennett, Michael (D-CO) F 12
Boxer, Barbara (D-CA) F 15
Feingold, Russ (D-WI) F 15
Murray, Patty (D-WA) F 15
Reid, Harry (D-NV) F 15
Liberty Central compiled scores for all Representatives, in order to determine whichRepresentatives have the most respect for five principles: limited government, individual liberty, personal responsibility, free enterprise, and national security.
The 12 House votes measured
Don't Ask Don't Tell*
Financial Reform*
Student Loan Takeover*
Cap and Trade*
Health Care*
Stimulus*
SERVE/Americorps*
Lilly Ledbetter*
Hate Crimes*
DISCLOSE*
TARP Rescission*
Missile Defense*
Scores were calculated as follows.
1 point for each vote that contradicted the five principles (e.g., growing the size of government, weakening our national defense, or taking measures against the free market).
1 additional point for sponsoring or co-sponsoring one of the aforementioned bills, since the Representative proudly attached his or her name to that measure.
1 point for opposing legislation that supports the five principles.
In other words, the higher the score, the worse the Representative. Tallied points for each Representative and assigned grades based on the following scale: A=0 to 1 points, B=2-3 points, C=4-6 points, D=7-8 points, F=9 and above.
Incumbent Grade Score
Arcuri, Mike (D-NY24) F 12
Bishop, Timothy (D-NY01) F 15
Boucher, Rick (D-VA09) D 8
Bright, Bobby (D-AL02) B 2
Carney, Christopher P. (D-PA10) D 8
Connolly, Gerald E. "Gerry" (D-VA11) F 14
Foster, Bill (D-IL14) F 12
Giffords, Gabrielle (D-AZ08) F 15
Hall, John (D-NY19) F 15
Heinrich, Martin T. (D-NM01) F 15
Hill, Baron (D-IN09) F 9
Kagen, Steve (D-WI08) F 13
Kirkpatrick, Ann (D-AZ01) F 9
Klein, Ron (D-FL22) F 14
Marshall, James (D-GA08) D 8
McMahon, Mike (D-NY13) F 11
McNerney, Jerry (D-CA11) F 12
Mitchell, Harry (D-AZ05) F 9
Murphy, Patrick J. (D-PA08) F 16
Nye, Glenn C. (D-VA02) F 9
Rodriguez, Ciro (D-TX23) F 12
Schrader, Kurt (D-OR05) F 12
Shuler, Heath (D-NC11) D 8
Skelton, Ike (D-MO04) F 11
Space, Zachary T. (D-OH18) F 10
Spratt, John (D-SC05) F 12
Sutton, Betty (D-OH13) F 15
Ok so it’s 11:00pm here in Las Vegas and I’ve been at the office working on Liberty.com since 7:00am in order to get everything ready for tomorrow mornings launch and Press Conference. I t goes without saying I’m beat tired and as much as I’d like to explain to you all the goings on here I think, at this point, it’s better if I just let the press release do the talking… good night and I hope to see you all on Liberty.com.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT Yates Walker 210 381 8692
Vegas-based Liberty.com to launch tomorrow!
Conservative news-activist hybrid site to launch with 70,000 members nationally,
Intends to rival the left-wing Moveon.org!
Press conference at 10 AM at Nevada Department of Employment
LAS VEGAS – At 10 AM tomorrow, a key organizer in the 2009 Tax Day Tea Party and “Don’t Go” movement pioneer Eric Odom will join a national coalition of conservative movement activists in launching Liberty.com, a right-of-center news and national activism website with the intention of eclipsing the left’s Moveon.org. A press conference will be held by the Vegas-based Liberty.com at 10 AM in front of the Nevada Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation.
“The employment office is the appropriate location because Nevada is suffering from the worst unemployment in the nation, despite trillions of dollars spent by Harry Reid and his liberal ilk,” says Liberty.com Communications Director Yates Walker, who will be speaking at the Sept. 1st press conference. “At over 14% unemployment, Nevada, more than any other state, knows that Washington’s spending is not working, and that it’s past time that we elect leadership that will create a business friendly environment that will promote job growth.”
“For years, Moveon.org has directed millions of activist dollars to influence races and to defame targets like General David Petraeus,” observes Liberty.com editor-chief Eric Odom. “With Liberty.com, the conservative grassroots will be able to fight back.”
Organized along with Americans for New Leadership as an unconnected and unauthorized political committee that will conduct only independent expenditures, Liberty.com will begin operation having already raised $700,000 from individual donors and with over 70,000 members transferred from Odom’s existing networks, American Liberty Alliance and The Patriot Caucus. A January, 2010 Supreme Court decision has made the new organization possible. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/us/politics/22scotus.html
“In January, the Supreme Court surprised us all by ruling in favor of free speech,” said Liberty.com Communications Director Yates Walker. “That decision and Eric’s vision have led to the creation of a new weapon in the conservative arsenal: Liberty.com.”
The website will offer exclusive new content in the form of webcasts, blog entries, and podcasts from contributors across the country, while also allowing cross-posting from many established conservative sites like Redstate, Hotair and others. Beyond news, Liberty.com will be focused on supporting and driving conservative activism throughout the country.
“One of the most important and unique aspects of Liberty.com will be its coalitions network,” adds Odom. “If you’re having an event anywhere in the country, chances are that Liberty.com can help make your event stronger and larger.”
Over twenty partnering networks will be listed as coalition members when the site launches on September 1st. Eric Odom expects that number to grow.
Liberty.com will seek to influence state and federal elections immediately. Their first target is the US Senate Majority Leader, Democrat Harry Reid of Nevada.
“Nevada may have been purple in 2008,” observes Odom. “But the last two years have moved them to the right. Harry Reid may be the last to learn that his policies have helped turn his home state red.”
Liberty.com’s parent organization Americans for New Leadership has already purchased a $250,000 ad against Reid.
“We’re going to be a thorn in the left’s side right away,” grins Steven Foley, Liberty.com’s Director of New Media. “This is going to be fun.”
Liberty.com’s September 1st press conference will begin at 10 AM in front of the Nevada Department of Employment. The address is 2800 E. St. Louis Ave, Las Vegas, NV, 89104. Liberty.com’s Communications Director Yates Walker will make a brief statement, then take questions from the media.
Read Liberty.com’s Mission Statement
Liberty.com Mission Statement
To keep the right honest, the press nervous and the left unpopular and out of power. We will accomplish our mission by engaging a national grassroots network of hundreds of thousands of activists, arming them with the knowledge they need to hold their local, state and federal representatives to account for their votes and actions.
The founders of Liberty.com believe that America is a center-right nation. Since America’s founding, our people have sought to limit their government’s role in the lives of the individual citizen. Americans have rightly distrusted their government, and that distrust has been well-earned.
Though, issue by issue, the majority of Americans of every creed and color believe in low taxes, strong national defense and limited government, three shifting variables have allowed the power-seekers in Washington to creep into nearly every aspect of American life and commerce and expand their influence through the federal government.
The first variable is the two party system. Both the Republicans and the Democrats will claim to be champions of freedom and individual liberty. Both parties insist that they are acting in the interests of the American people. The reality is that both parties overstep their mandates and, by omission or commission, tread on individual liberty. In their efforts to serve factions and special interests, each party has at various times forgotten that the duty of government is to protect and preserve our inalienable individual rights. Liberty.com will strive to keep the political parties on the straight and narrow path of limited government stewardship.
The second variable is the media. The mainstream media has been infiltrated by the activist left. Through apologies, rationalizations and journalistic malpractice, the fourth estate has become an accomplice to the progressive left’s assault on individual liberty. Liberty.com will provide a check on the activist left in the media by crying foul on bias and by providing an outlet for news that the mainstream press won’t cover.
The final variable is what has often been referred to as the silent majority in America. For too long, Americans have taken for granted that our inalienable rights will endure undefended. For over two centuries, American soldiers have fought and died defending those freedoms abroad. But for the last fifty years, those same freedoms have been eroding while our citizenry slept. Over the last few years, there has been a great awakening of the silent majority. Liberty.com will strive to keep the American electorate informed and vigilantly guarding against the forces on the left who seek to redefine individual liberty, redistribute wealth, and remake America into a socialist, cradle-to-grave nanny state.
The founders of Liberty.com believe that the system has been rigged against individual liberty for far too long. By providing a forum for daily communication between hundreds of thousands of liberty-minded American citizens, Liberty.com will seek to engage and inform a nationwide network of bloggers and activists to fight the expansion of government and to promote America’s founding principles of individual liberty.
When James Howard Kuntsler gets hammered on Sunday night, it makes for great Monday morning blogging over at ClusterBleepNation.com. This morning he asks us if we would prefer “One Lump or Two?” From this ejection of vomit and venom, I learn that Mr. Kuntsler has a hilariously low opinion of Glenn Beck and his remarkably successful “Restoring Honor” Rally at the Lincoln Memorial. It was nice of Mr. Kuntsler to put the bottom line up front.
Here come the Corn Pone Nazis! Fox News entertainer, former drug addict, and professional weeper Glenn Beck took center stage at the Lincoln Memorial exactly forty-seven years to the day after Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech for a rally dedicated to “restoring honor,” which is tea party code for the otherwise unutterable idea: get that (Expletive deleted) out of the White House!
(HT for the comedy value: James Howard Kuntsler).
Personally, I don’t think Mr. Beck knows sheet from shingle about fixing modern America. He’s a demagogue playing a real man’s game and is in over his head as soon as he leaves the kiddie steps and lets go of his rubber ducky. Similar sentiments could be fairly leveled against Saint Joan of Arc back when things were rotten. She shouldn’t have been charge of an entire French Army either.
Beck took charge because eventually, someone had to report for duty and no one else was willing or able. He’s Bucky “Bleeping” Dent at bat in Fenway Park. This morning, James Howard Kuntsler sounds like a Red Sox fan. Beck may not be my ideal of a leader, but he correctly identified an evil state of affairs and attacked it.
For the better part of the last forty-five years, the bulk of governmental action has been in response to special pleadings. Well-organized special interests roll the majority of the population. They get special deals, special exemptions, and special carve-outs. Average, working Americans pay all the taxes, while the Goldman Sachs, the AIGs and the Senator Kerrys always know which strings to pull and where to park the yachts.
Glenn Beck has figured out that a critical mass of these hard-working Americans is not composed of mindless drones. They get tired of being told to pony-up for others who they don’t exactly see pulling too hard on the oars. When he went to The Lincoln Memorial and cynically co-opted decades’ worth of Civil Rights imagery, he was sending the message that the America that pays for this BS equalitarian fantasy has rights as well. The America that makes America work will not continue to be guilt-tripped into letting charlatan’s use their ass-holes as an ATM without a withdrawal limit.
Brett Stevens of Amerika.org describes the frustrations that Beck has tapped into.
Beck has tapped into the outrage of middle class white America by pointing out the obvious: for the last 40 years we’ve been on a manic quest to take care of every non-majority group — blacks, Asians, gays, Hispanics, potheads, Muslims, polygamists — while doing so at the expense of white suburban middle-class America, which we assume will just keep trucking along and footing the bill.
Now these people are waking up, and people do wake up very slowly, to find America transformed. It’s no longer the happy world of the 1950s. It’s a crime-ridden, third world state with corruption, devalued currency, a crazed Nanny State kicking down doors, constant combat in its cities.
Sarah Palin began to sense this smoldering anger in 2008, but couldn’t take control of the ticket from the VEEP slot and run on populist rage. Jacksonian America does not want to be used as a mule. They’ll give you the 40 acres, but they’ll be damned if they get thrown in as the mule. They seek and desperately need an avatar for that frustration. They need the spokespeople to join their point of view to the national political conversation.
But they keep on getting slapped down. James Howard Kuntsler, the only man alive who likes Sarah Palin less than Levi Johnson or Andrew Sullivan, gives voice to the “Progressive” hubris below.
Glenn Beck’s sidekick nowadays, Sarah Palin, is exactly the kind of corn pone Hitler that America deserves: a badly-educated, child-like, war-mongering opportunist easily manipulated by backstage extremist billionaires who think they don’t have enough money yet.
(HT: Kuntsler as previously cited)
What Kuntsler is too arrogant to understand, is that Glenn Back is doing America a favor. He’s not just doing his fans or his career one. Representative Democracy is only meta-stable at best if not all the people are represented. Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin stand between his White, Yuppie, Liberal Ass and the pitch-forks. Kuntsler is too busy arguing ad-Hitlerum to figure that out.
In a way, Beck’s choice of venue was condign for reasons beyond that of partisan sniping. Martin Luther King, Jr led a genuinely aggrieved minority to call on the government and receive attention. If you read any of the early speeches by Malcolm X, you know well that we are fortunate that Dr. King finally received a respectful hearing of his people’s grievances.
As the followers of Glenn Back grow poorer, less secure and more resentful towards those who govern our nation, maybe, just maybe the political leaders who actually represent the likes of James Howard Kuntsler should give some thought to inviting Mr. Beck or Mrs Palin to engage in a more rational conversation.
Somewhere between 87,000 to 300,000 people (depending upon the partisan affiliation of the crowd-counter) came out to cheer for the Corn-Pone Hitlerette. Perhaps the arrogant and dismissive Mr. Kuntsler could end up actually living in the world he wrote about in his dystopic World Made By Hand. That happened to a whole bunch of Russians once when the Boyars were too arrogant to heed the desires of the people in 1917.
The left lies so often that sometimes it is hard to know where to begin. One of their big lies has been that Republicans are racist, sexist, islamophobic homophobes who only want to make the rich folks happy. They say women and minorities are hardest hit, and so they can not be or vote for any Republicans. Why that would make them a traitor to their own. Democrats and their cheerleaders indulged in puffy analysis about how Republicans were demographically doomed because their base was old, white, and male. In this realignment narrative, Democrats were ascendant because they were the choice of women, gays, younger voters, Latinos and independents. Our holiday from history is over. The country faces threats, crippling government expansion at home and transnational Islamic extremism, that arouse conservative instincts and concentrate the conservative mind no matter what your gender or race is. Now the main reason I wrote this diary is for the photo selections that prove how much of a lie it is by the left about women and minorities being elected by Republicans. Actually the Republicans really stepped up in 2010 to compete in more contests than ever before, and the women and minority Republicans really stepped up. A record number of Republican women have sought federal office this year: 129 GOP women in House races and 17 in Senate races. There are still a lot of primaries left on Sept. 14th, and even more women and minority GOP candidates will be added to the November ballot then. So check out the photos, and if you click on a name it will take you to their website.
There are things in life that just make you say “Huh, FTW?” If Cramer’s latest column, “Bad Data Has a Silver Lining” was a desperate bid for attention, it worked! He leads off with a good, provocative question.
Has “bad” turned good? Are we now rooting for crummy housing numbers, miserable housing data, weaker consumer confidence, and, yes, unfathomably horrible employment numbers? Do we now secretly lust for negative numbers?
Cramer goes on to say that the investor class now roots against the short-term health of the economy so that Barack Obama and the Democratic Party will die a thousand deaths on Election Day. He openly claims that people who seek to earn long-term wealth through equity investments are happy to see any piece of news that makes Barack Obama’s continuation in power a more precarious circumstance.
But if you are an owner of stock, any stock, if you are using the stock market for retirement or for savings to put your kid through school or to augment your paycheck, I think you are now beginning to see the silver lining of the miserable economic news: change in Washington. In fact, every time we see a downtick in the popular polls for the administration or Congress the large stockholders I know secretly cheer.
This sentiment is radical. It is too radical for even crazed Right-Wingers like moi. When the economy is bad, people have a really hard time selling their home if they want to move. They are probably attempting to move so that they can find a job. I wish them luck, they will need it! David Rosenberg, for example, sees the distinct possibility of 4 to 5 million jobs being taken out if current trends continue.
I totally understand the desire to see Barack Obama fail. I wish he had failed to pass either healthcare reform or the stimulus package. Both are malinvestments tantamount to state-endorsed brigandage. Thus, I’ll admit that seeing die-hard left-wingers like Joe Weisenthal having to write the following political analysis of the latest InTrade numbers.
There’s really very little for Democrats to be hopeful about come November, and the party’s odds of holding the House (under Democratic control since the 2006 midterms) has fallen to 25% on InTrade.
Another interesting part of Cramer’s column regards the fear so many people in business seem to have of Barack Obama. When Jim Cramer compares our current president’s anger to the wrath of Richard Nixon, that says a lot coming from a man with Jim Cramer’s political beliefs and worldview.
Rich Karlgaard writes of his friends’ reaction to Jim Cramer’s assertion that people in business and finance feel a fear to speak out. Karlgaard was told the following.
Cramer is so right. And the only reason people will not speak out is because they fear [Obama] will hunt them down.
Barack Obama has lived the Populist dream of getting to shove around and intimidate Big Business. He clearly chortled while telling America’s most powerful banking executives that he was all that separated them from the pitchforks. His motto regarding his relations to corporate America could be similar to that of Caligula’s: oderint dum metuant.
Jim Cramer, who once endorsed Barack Obama with the catchphrase “Obama’s a recession, McCain’s a depression,” now seems to have buyer’s remorse. Better yet, he has shown the courage to speak out when others have cowered. Yep, Jim Cramer just done said it!
Expect the ever-reactionary Jon Stewart to lampoon and ridicule Jim Cramer some more. I’ve taken shots at the man myself, while blogging the current state of our economy. However, this time, I commend the man’s courage.
Tyranny is destroyed when honest men speak out. Cramer may be wrong more often than right, but he can no longer ever be accused of being a boot-licking coward. Perhaps, Cramer’s fresh acquisition of courage is the harbinger of the end for these “Progressive” neo-fascists. Only through raw intimidation does their horrendous stupidity withstand the light of day.
It hasn’t happened for a while, but every-so-often we get days when The DrudgeReport runs Richter Scale readings from tremors in Yellowstone Park. This makes for a better banner headline than “Slow Newsday Sparks Boredom Crisis. Internet Hits Unexpectedly Crater as Nothing Happens.” Amidst the Stygian Recovery Summer blast-furnace, the Dreaded Yellowstone Volcano is as good of a boogeyman to break out as any.
A similar paranoia may well be taking hold of the current intifada in charge of Washington, DC. Certain leading Democrats, and their surrogates as well, have begun to take the measure of current US President Barack Obama. When a President has a tenuous command of his own party, an old adage from Machiavelli gets called into question. Perhaps being feared by his opponents, within the Democratic Party; served Obama well in 2008 and 2009. As he told Senator Reid once, “Harry, I have this gift…” – The Gift of Mau-Mau.
But now the wheel turns, the plates begin to shift and internal discontent rises underneath the base of the Democratic Party, (not unlike the lava dome under the Yellowstone Caldera). A lot of very interesting things get said to the media by the formerly adoring Democratic Party.
When Jennifer Rubin wrote an article entitled “Howard Dean on Fire,” it wasn’t a scream of spontaneous self-immolation that occurred. It seems Howard Dean went on STATE OF THE UNION WITH CANDY CROWLEY and did something apostate to the fundamental religion of CNN. He told several egregious truths about our nation’s Feckless Leader, Barack Obama. Possible fratricidal transcript follows below.
CROWLEY: But what we found, Governor, in at least some of the races that we have had so far, is the fact that the president, while people still like him, they don’t approve of his policies and he doesn’t have coattails.
DEAN: That’s not a problem. Here is the deal. It’s not the coattails. We know he doesn’t have coattails from the ‘09 elections, the governor’s race.
(HT: Jennifer Rubin, Commentary Magazine)
Dean went on to play First Base with the manual dexterity of Bill Buckner in a World Series Game. It was probably Robert Gibbs, not Howard Dean, who felt like yelling “Yeeeeaaaarggghhhh!” when Howard Dean was invited to wager on Democratic Party electoral fortunes this November.
DEAN: I’d bet money on the Senate, for sure. The House is much tougher.
DEAN: I don’t like the health care bill. I would be one of the 56 percent who opposed it
Then also, we get treated to the occasional article from the voices of liberal conventional wisdom calling for Joe Biden’s relocation to a new job description not involving Vice-Presidential work. The utterly translucent Sally Quinn says these things the only way she knows how – in easy, monosyllabic words and pedestrian prose. Her article, “Hillary Clinton should be Obama’s vice president”, is a thinly-disguised salvo across the bow of the SS Obama.
This becomes particularly obnoxious to His Oneness when it comes in concert with the latest and greatest from Dana “Blaze Orange” Milbank. Milbank’s little love-note entitled Washington Sketch: Clinton finally ahead of Obama in popularity suggests that the media no longer willingly prays five times a day towards the direction of The Obama Whitehouse.
It also makes it obvious that WaPo only thinks Hillary! Would make a good Veep in a scenario where Barack Obama remained politically viable in 2012. It wouldn’t take more than a capricious elimination of “Vice” to remodel the current Democratic Party organizational chart just a wee touch more.
Normally, this sort of political churning by a bored and increasingly unread newspaper staff would rate 2nd billing on Hot Air. However, this isn’t normal. Barack Obama used to be feared by other Democrats rather than loved. He is no longer feared, and nobody in the Democratic Party really wants his jet to land on one of their district’s tarmacs.
Reasonably smart, if not clinically sane, Liberal Blogger James Kuntsler describes a column written by Maureen Dowd during the 2008 Democratic Convention.
…this Democratic convention has a vibe so weird and jittery, so at odds with the early thrilling, fairy dust feel of the Obama revolution, that I had to consult Mike Murphy, the peppery Republican strategist and former McCain guru.
Submerged hate; what it keeps that stuff in a non-buoyant state? Fear and trembling does the trick. The question Barack Obama may well have to address in short order is why Democrats should still fear him enough not to take him down for the sake of settling old and bitter scores. If he doesn’t have a snappy comeback, pressure from the Lava Dome of Progressive Frustration may well lead to a series of tremors below Mt. Obama. Quiescence may well give way to an eruption of inter-party feuding between Jacksonian and Academic Democrats.
