That’s all. Whatever Republicans are making out of the photo of Barack Obama, I really do hope he was looking at her ass. If that’s the worst case scenario, it beats having your parents pay off your mistress or having anonymous gay sex in Minnesota airport bathrooms, Florida park bathrooms or chat sessions with teenage pages…. and then denying the whole thing.
And I gotta say, the picture plays on a couple standard-issue Republican points: a black man looking at a white girl’s ass and a European leader looking right along with him. No wonder this is the stuff of Drudge Reportage.
TalkingPointsMemo.com’s Sunday roundup is a great one this week, but I wanted to flag out one specific side of the issue of the president’s response to Iran: ownership.
Beyond the politics of the last thirty years of Iranian/American relations, American involvement in foreign affairs tends to suck all the oxygen out of the room for all other parties. Once it becomes a reality that the United States has decided to get involved in an issue, even the least interested parties tends to suddenly shift their focus to us rather than to the issue at hand.
So, once we own the Iranian revolution, what do we do next? Especially since even the most reform-minded Iranians is completely disinterested in our involvement? Do we send troops? Do we impose sanctions that will inevitably hurt the people we supposedly support more than the leadership? Do we fire a bunch of missiles and act like nothing happened? Or how about another toothless UN resolution?
Apart from using this issue to call the Democratic president a coward to score parochial points, I’m not seeing much in the way of ideas on this issue from the Right.
The Republican Party is fast becoming my favourite animated series.
via Twitter Users Heckle Hoekstra En Masse | TPMDC.
TahirDuckett @petehoekstra ran through the sprinklers this morning, claimed solidarity with victims of Hurricane Katrina
Again, just reacting to what I’m watching on TV this morning. Mitt Romney, the brain trust of the Republican Party, is on This Week. He repeats what so many other Republicans say when posed the question, “you’re losing young people; you’re losing the Hispanic vote; you’re losing well-educated voters. What do you do to change all that?”
His canned response, “well, what you don’t do is change your principles.”
Well, actually, you do. If you’re losing Hispanic votes, you probably want to cool it on the xenophobe tip, encouraging minutemen and advocating for a huge, ugly wall along the border. If you’re losing young voters, you probably want to ease up on attacking their gay friends with whom they grew up. If you’re losing educated voters, you may want to adopt a more rigorous standard for scientific principles and party platform than the current standard, “what does the bible say?”
Seriously. You change your principles.
Wait. Let me get this straight: in the midst of a debate over how to provide affordable health care to all Americans, is the objection of the majority of Republican politicians that the so called “public option,” might be too affordable?
I’m inclined to support Judge Sotomayor for Supreme Court, so far. Nothing the Right has brought up has been terribly interesting – in fact, the Connecticut firefighter case is so esoterically legal, it’s amusing watching the Republicans try to make it a nice sound bite like they like to exploit.
But I know jack-shit about her, and I suspect those of you reading this are probably in the same boat. We need a hearing to know anything much about her; I don’t think there’s even been a public interview of the woman so far.
So why is the media polling Americans about their support for the Judge? How could we possibly know what our support level actually is, and of what value is our opinion in that case? Polling about something like abortion, a subject for which there’s lots of avenues of information, is appropriate. What we know or don’t know about the subject says as much about our opinion as does our opinion.
But in this case, the only thing we have to go on is either our level of support or lack thereof for Barack Obama; our racial prejudices; our sexual prejudices. What else is there? These things are almost completely static, absent any information, and don’t represent really usable data.
Once a hearing happens and Republicans and Democrats get to grandstand, then our public opinion polls will be of some value. Until then, cudgeling politicians with Sotomayor’s 80% approval rating is useless as anything other than a partisan sledgehammer.
This is some fantastic Photoshopping.
It occurs to me as I watch television news that Republicans spent trillions of dollars over decades to demonize phrases and words like “Liberal” and “The Hard Left.” Without a single member of the main stream media nor a single member of the political estabilishment actively doing anything to make it happen, we suddenly find ourselves in a political environment after two elections where “moving to The Right” is a phrase Republicans find themselves defending against. . . to members of their own party.
These are some strange times. . .
This woman is fucking nuts. I thought Minnesota was kind of a liberal place? And the woman running the show is worse than Bachman.
Just a word on the continuing insistence by every Right Wing pundit out there that they’re “very pleased” with just about everything Barack Obama is doing. I just saw a clip where some dumbass actually said, “this is almost like a Repubican transition. . .”
Well, no shit. That’s because it’s an American presidential transition. They’re all going to look basically alike. Did you expect a big blow up donkey to be erected over the White House? An all-transvestite Commerce Department? Wavy Gravy as Secretary of Health and Human Services and Paris Hilton at Treasury?
But I suspect buried somewhere deep in the Right Wing talking points is the idea that the new tactic is to “spoil the baby’s milk,” continuing to insist that they like Barack Obama’s moves – particularly on foreign policy, but elsewhere as well – in an attempt to fool our Leftie Senses into believing Obama’s turned on us. I think they’re trying to force a bit of buyer’s remorse out of our nation’s voters.
The trouble is that this “Republican” transition is missing two vital components of the last Republican transition: the cronyism and the utter lack of competence. So long as Obama maintains that sense of confidence and clarity, there will be no buyer’s remorse because it was exactly that which drew most voters in the middle to his tent.
Keep tryin’, guys.
Count Josh Marshall among the throngs of liberals who are agape at the idea that Republicans would want to run a presidential candidate like Sarah Palin in 2012. After the disasterous campaign of John McCain – much of whose demise was either accellerated by or fueled by Sarah Palin’s presence at the second bannana position – many of us would have thought her career ended at this point. At least, we certainly wouldn’t have expected to hear from her on the presidential level. But for many reasons, I find her potential nomination to be – if in concept while not necessarily in practice – to be an entirely predictable one. And for many reasons, I think that nomination is doomed as well.
Beginning with the most basic and short-term of reasons, Republicans lost the election. Now is not the time for rational thought or effective planning. Now is the time when we usually find ourselves clinging to the silliest of spars in the sea; to whit, Sarah Palin. I recall insisting that Al Gore and John Kerry would have made great presidents, even though I’d spent most of those two Presidential election seasons with a knot in my stomach because I really didn’t believe it. What the reality of the situation is does not matter. To what extent either of my two emotions towards the Dem tickets was justified is not germane to the discussion: what matters here is the contradiction that comes when you’re licking your wounds and wishing things were different.
But beyond that, there is a larger truth of Republican politics that cannot be ignored: the Republican power structure adores pretty, ineffectual figureheads in executive positions. From Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush (and notably skipping over George the Elder), what Republicans really want for a president is someone who looks good and evokes love from the general public to take center stage. They can then fill the void left by a basically clueless figurehead with lots of people behind the scenes whom the public rarely if ever gets to meet. Here in Rochester, I would in many ways count Maggie Brooks among the popular figureheads of Republican power politics.
Continue reading The Quayle Effect
Yeah, I know: Conservatives think other nation’s opinions are for pussies. Still, the last I knew, the bipedal creatures this world is largely populated by are for the most part humans. Knowing what they think and seeing how they interpret the election and the response of the loonies in the McCain concession speech audience is probably not entirely without merit.
And I say it again: none of the people so disaffected by McCain’s loss were people who voted for McCain in the primaries. In fact, they will soon be spitting vitrol about McCain’s pussy-ass bipartisanship as often as they spit vitrol about Obama’s family. Good for them.