Archive for the ‘Republican Party’ Category

The Year Of The Women?

Wednesday, June 9th, 2010

Wow, what a night Tuesday night! This is shaping up to be the Year of the Women, finally. Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina took California, two women with tremendous resumes in the private sector. Nikki Haley won big in South Carolina, though she does have to have a run-off June 22nd. She is fully expected to win that election. Sharron Angle, the Tea Party pick, will face off against Harry Reid in Nevada. And Blanche Lincoln beat her Democratic challenger, Lt.Gov. Bill Halter.

Senator Lincoln is the one Democrat in this bunch, and I have to say, I am THRILLED she beat Halter. As you no doubt have heard, Halter was supported by MoveOn.org, and the big unions, which poured MILLIONS of dollars into Arkansas (around $10 million), so her win is a big push against the power of the unions, as well as the far left agenda. Here she is celebrating her win:

Watch the latest news video at video.foxnews.com

Lincoln isn’t done – she has a strong challenger in November, but beating the organized union and MoveOn.org backed candidate is huge, make no mistake. It can also be construed as a bit of a referendum on Bill Clinton v. Obama. Clinton endorsed Lincoln, and the Unions/MoveOn are Obama backers. Maybe the Old Dawg still has it…

Nikki Haley, with the backing of both Gov., Sarah Palin and First Lady (of SC) Jenny Sanford, won the vast majority of votes (49%) with her closest competitor, Gresham Barrett, at 22%. Here is Nikki Haley after the election:

Watch the latest news video at video.foxnews.com

Should Haley win come November, she will be the first woman governor in SC, and the second Indian American governor in the US (along with Bobby Jindal).

Meg Whitman talks about her win, and her upcoming race against Jerry Brown (or “Gov. Moonbeam,” as Karl Rove referred to him on “Fox & Friends Weds. morning). In her speech, Whitman gives a shout-out to Carly Fiorina on her win to face Barbara Boxer:

Watch the latest news video at video.foxnews.com

And speaking of Carly Fiorina, here she is in her speech following her win, a win which will pit her against long time senator, Barbara Boxer. She returns the favor to Whitman, with a “Holla” to her, too:

Watch the latest news video at video.foxnews.com

Sharron Angle, the Tea Party backed candidate, will be facing off again st Harry Reid in the Fall. Oh, I cannot begin to tell you how badly I want her to beat Reid. Even when I still considered myself a Democrat (before 5/31/08), I was not a fan of Reid’s, and my opinion of him has only gone down from there. Here’s Angle after her win:

Watch the latest news video at video.foxnews.com

Wow. Again, what a night. I might add, I have said a number of times, that after the Democratic Party eviscerated the best candidate they could have had to be the first woman president, I have no doubt that the first woman president will come from the Republican Party.

Honestly, it has been interesting to me to see how the Republican Party seems to support its women in positions of power far more than the Democrats do. You know, the party that claims to be the party for women. After the misogynistic treatment of Clinton by the DNC itself, compared to the treatment by the RNC with Palin, as well as other powerful women in the RNC, I just knew the Demos had blown their chance in a big, big, big way. Oh, sure, the Democrats have a few women senators and representatives, but none of them are on a par with Clinton. Hell, Obama is not on a par with Clinton, never will be (I think he knows that, too – that’s why he was always putting her down to try and build himself up).

When you look at a field like this, all of these powerful, successful women who are Republicans, you just know that our first woman president is going to come from this kind of group. That is assuming Hillary Clinton is telling the truth when she says she will not run for president again, though since Obama has made such a mess of things in such a short period of time, I am not sure she COULD win in this climate.

November will be must see with Boxer having a strong, accomplished woman like Fiorina facing her, Reid having Angle facing him, Whitman against “Gov. Moonbeam,” and Sheheen having the very popular Haley against him. Things don’t look great for Lincoln against her Republican opponent, though. Maybe Bill will show up for her again…

Stay tuned – November is not that far away!

American Idol

Thursday, February 11th, 2010

There’s a special genre of publication that caters exclusively to excitable, starstruck young women. “Tiger Beat”, “Bop” and “16? are fluffy magazines tailored to satisfy the swoony dreams of adolescents as they fantasize about the teen idol de jour.

The packaging of a fantasy is an art in and of itself cleverly crafted by publicists, ambitious stage parents and cynical editors. The formula is fairly simple. The performer must always be portrayed as single and wholesome. Marriage, homosexuality, bizarre personality quirks, poor grooming, violent tendencies, psychological issues, consumption of alcohol and/or drugs and smoking must be concealed at all costs lest the fantasy, and possibly a career, go up in smoke. Chastity rings a la Jonas Brothers are a big plus. The star has to be accessible but always slightly out of reach, cute but never sexual, perfectly behaved….and rather bland. Attracting and keeping the attention of young female fans, who tend to be fickle when it comes to the cuties they admire, is easier said than done.

But it’s impossible to put off the inevitable. The girls realize they’re at a puppet show when they see the strings. The star turns out to be a regular guy. After shedding a few tears and pouting a bit, the heartbroken and disappointed girls move on to the next object of their undying love.

During Campaign 2008, the American press corps hit a double by acting as both the editors of fluffy teenage magazines AND their audience: Weepy, starstruck young girls. The campaign coverage was breathless in its uncritical hero worship of candidate Obama while treating Hillary Clinton like the evil woman who comes between the adoring fan and the object of his/her adoration. The Yoko Ono of politics, if you will. The McCain camp spoofed this silly dynamic by putting out an ad drawing attention to the American Idol-like press coverage of the Obama campaign (the ad was removed from YouTube for copyright violations). And imagine how the press corps would have reacted if Bill Clinton had given his acceptance speech at the Democratic convention standing in front of a set bearing a distinct likeness to a Grecian temple.

Over a year has passed since Obama was sworn into office. Only now are the media beginning to ask whether the man they lost their heads over is the same guy from 2008. The jury’s still out with many in the press corps who continue to keep hope alive. For those who refuse to face the reality that Barack Obama is not the political Donny Osmond, the latest craze is blaming advisors for the Obama administration’s lack of legislative accomplishments. Never mind that Rahm Emanuel was not elected President and that it really doesn’t matter whether Valerie Jarrett chooses to hold court at a restaurant in Georgetown instead of pressing the flesh at an event (and you know things are getting dire when anyone in Obama’s circle is compared unfavorably to Bill Clinton, a man still reviled by the Washington press establishment). These people were appointed by the President to carry out his wishes. If Obama thought they were doing him a disservice they would be fired. The new narrative casting aspersions on the aides is a cop out. It advances the idea that these advisors fell out of the sky, formed a cabal and are now freelancing instead of following the orders of the First Boss. Nonsense.

Obama spent his first year holding a series of town halls, public meetings, press conferences and television interviews. But the bottom line is that legislatively the party has ground to a halt. The foolish narratives advanced by the media aren’t helping much. So the Republicans won an addition seat in Massachusetts? Yes, it’s a significant and important political story, but in a world populated by grown-ups going from a 60-40 supermajority in the Senate to 59-41 does not give the Democrats an out to fold their tents and go home. The Republicans haven’t achieved a supermajority in living memory but were still able to advance a controversial agenda during the tenure of George W. Bush. The fear and defeatism emanating from the Democratic caucus demonstrates an inability, or unwillingness, to lead. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s performance has been particularly timid. What ever happened to the Harry Reid who served as chairman of the Nevada Gaming Commission:

A man named Jack Gordon, who later married LaToya Jackson, tried to give Reid a $12,000 bribe. Reid let the FBI videotape Gordon offering him the bribe, and then, according to aLas Vegas Review-Journal account, he “put his hands around Gordon’s neck and said, ‘You son of a bitch, you tried to bribe me.’” That’s right, Senate Democrats are being led by a man who once tried to strangle LaToya Jackson’s future husband-manager.

The media have reached a crossroads. They can either do a group hug and cry over a dream deferred, an illusion they helped create, or they can stop searching for scapegoats and covering Obama as they would any other politician.

Will this happen? It’s hard to tell. It appears that the press have moved on to swoon over their next fascination: American Idol, er, Campaign 2012.


Cross Post from: ThePakistanUpdate.com

Palin Emerges as the Star of First National Tea Party Convention

Sunday, February 7th, 2010

All major news publications covered Sarah Palin’s speech yesterday, making sure to point out she collected a large fee for her work. She replied she is keeping none of it, but giving it to “the cause.” According to many sources, while she was greeted with cries of “Run, Sarah, Run,” she kept her political intentions to herself. Palin also addressed the importance of keeping the Tea Party Movement a grass roots effort and does not pretend to be its leader. From WaPo:

…the movement shuns any semblance of political elitism. And although many activists here embrace Palin as a spokeswoman, they are deeply divided over whether they want her as their leader — or whether they want any leader at all.
Palin understands this.

“I caution against allowing this movement to be defined by any one leader or any one politician,” she said Saturday night. “The tea party movement is not a top-down operation. It’s a ground-up call to action. . . . This is about the people, and it’s bigger than any king or queen of the tea party, and it’s a lot bigger than any charismatic guy with a teleprompter.”

Palin, by some accounts the standard-bearer of the Republican Party, in her speech took an unusual step of encouraging competitive party primary campaigns.

“Contested primaries aren’t civil war,” she said. “They’re democracy at work, and that’s beautiful.”

I appreciate her point about contested primaries. It’s time we shake up the political landscape and inject some new blood into the process.

According to The NY Times

…pressed about the relationship between the Republican Party and the Tea Party movement, and whether the latter should become a third party, Ms. Palin suggested the two should be compatible.

“The Republican Party would be really smart to start trying to absorb as much of the Tea Party movement as possible,” she said. “This is a beautiful movement because it is shaping the way politics are conducted. You’ve got both party machines running scared.”

I suppose she is pushing for Republicans to absorb the tea partiers since they adhere to somewhat more conservative principles, though I don’t know if I’m comfortable with this either. A third party has never been able to take hold in this country and the worry is in siphoning off votes that ulitmately wind up keeping a less than desirable representative in power.

The Republican Party, as it stands now, is just as big a problem as the Democratic Party. Too much entrenched interest plagues both. Her comments about both “party machines running scared” lends some comfort, however.

I would rather not see this movement co-opted by any organized group that is already toxic. My concern is not about small or large government but smart government. Unlike the false way in which the movement was first characterized, I don’t have any problem with paying taxes – I have a problem with waste. I don’t have a problem with health care reform. I have a problem with insurance giveaways, pork, cuts to Medicare that endanger seniors in this country and a lack of transparency. I don’t have a problem with either party as much as I have a problem with corruption in both.

It is also interesting that after the disgusting sexual slurs that greeted Tea Party protesters last year, being called “teabaggers” by everyone from Senator Chuck Schumer to newscasters Anderson Cooper, David Schuster, and pundits like Olbermann and Maddow, not to mention our POTUS making “teabagging” comments as well, now The New Yorker, Newsweek and more are referring a bit more respectfully to “The Tea Party Movement.” No matter how these news outlets tried to diminish the numbers of participants in rallies and protests last year, clearly, more than a few have figured out they would be wise to treat tea parties members with a little more respect. Quite a stunning turnaround. Palin’s “running scared” comment would seem to be accurate.

The greatest effect this movement can have is to scare officials in both parties into remembering how to do the people’s business, instead of their own or that of their cronies. Congress needs to emerge from its insulated bubble, drop the elitist attitude and be more respectful to the concerns of its constituents. To the extent that Sarah Palin can assist in drawing attention to ordinary Americans who want more attentive representation for their hard earned tax dollars and contributions, her “lightning rod” is most welcome.

What is your forecast for the Tea Party Movement? What effect would you like it to have? And is it something that will help or hurt in the long run.

Please tell us what you think…

The Lyin’ Tamer

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

A Republican political consultant and spin doctor once gave a young reporter a piece of advice. ”When dealing with a politician think like a lion tamer. Have you ever asked yourself why a lion tamer goes into the ring with a loaded gun at his side? That’s because he knows that even though he’s been around the same lion day after day – and may even have raised the creature since it was a cub – he realizes that at the end of the day the lion is still a lion.”

No doubt working with and around politicians is a risky business. Consider the tawdry, never-ending saga of John Edwards and his merry band of enablers, chief among whom is former Edwards aide Andrew Young, now out baying for blood.

Young and his wife appeared on ABC’s 20/20 recently to empty the X-rated clown car. To hear them tell the story, working for the Edwardses was a mixture of dark and light, Gaslight-meets-Almost Famous, a traveling ego and sex parade financed by eccentric heiress Bunny Mellon, who had held a grudge against Hillary Clinton ever since the then-First Lady allegedly refused to take Mellon’s advice pertaining to changes to a White House garden.

Given the fact that this story has been dragging its way in and out of the news for the better part of a year and a half, it’s fair to ask why it remains newsworthy. Why Young and his wife are so forthcoming now is no coincidence. As of this writing, the only people who will not have to worry about finances from now on are the Edwardses. Rielle Hunter and the Youngs will probably never be able to work again. Hunter will receive support payments from Edwards. The Youngs are finished in politics. All parties will rack up heavy legal bills while under investigation by the FEC and the IRS – but only the Edwardses can afford to shoulder this financial burden.

The issue is not how could John Edwards have been so reckless (because he thought he wouldn’t get caught) or whether it’s been decided who the victim is (hands down: the child. The rest of the adults, even the candidate’s cancer-stricken wife, all played along for the cameras. At least for a while).

The issue that continues to matter is image and illusion. Campaigns are like performances – how you interpret the action depends on whether you’re watching the actors on stage or backstage observing the crew frantically pulling the ropes and running around moving the backdrops. The repercussions of the great Shame of 2008 continues to play on the stage even though the Edwardses have been relegated to the sidelines for the most part.

Pulling off the John and Elizabeth 2008 Tour would have stretched the patience and imagination of even the most hardened rock and roll road manager. Imagine your boss ordering you and your spouse to make room for his pregnant mistress in your home. And then move you, your family and the woman from home to home. And expect you to claim paternity. And ask you to help fake a paternity test. And all during a presidential campaign, not while touring as the opening act for Van Halen. It would appear that Young finally decided to spill the beans because the job Edwards had promised him running a foundation for the poor (!) and financed by Mellon didn’t materialize.

While the Youngs justify their actions by saying they were caught up in the thrill of working for a man who could be president — you know, For The Good Of The Country — surely even they knew that Edwards’ candidacy was the proverbial pinless grenade. They also never articulate WHY they thought Edwards should be elected to the nation’s highest office – apart from their own person gain of course. Why else would two seemingly sane adults agree to have their lives taken over and turned upside down to benefit the career of a selfish, egotistical man?

The press is largely to blame for this fiasco. They missed a huge story that they chose to ignore despite the National Enquirer’s dogged coverage – including pictures – and the candidate’s grotesquely indiscreet behavior. They created the campaign’s archetypes – Son of a Mill Worker with Cancer-Stricken Wife Defying the Odds, First Lady-Turned-Senator Who Overcame Betrayal and Her Lothario Husband, Scrappy Surprise Pick Republican Vice Presidential Candidate and Her Colorfully-Named Family, Flinty Patriot and Vietnam War Hero Political Maverick (here’s an alternate view)….the problem was that once the script was written it didn’t change. The Clintons are racists? If you say so we’ll run with it. Elizabeth Edwards selflessly and bravely persuaded her husband to continue his campaign despite her grim cancer diagnosis? Great story. Let the presses role. Barack Obama’s value as a symbol of How Far We’ve Come is more important than determining whether he’s got what it takes to fix the wreckage left behind by 8 years of Bush-Cheney? Give that man a Nobel Prize. No wonder the media don’t know what to do now. The templates they created during the campaign are significantly at odds with the reality that played out afterwards. Crafting these narratives is easy and ultimately serves to drive conventional wisdom for good or ill. But if the traveling press corps – especially the media assigned to the Edwards campaign – could have missed a story so obvious that it may as well have jumped up and down waving its arms yelling “look over here! I’m a story!”, who knows what other facts the voters were kept in the dark about?

One inevitable result of press missteps of this nature is the creation of a ripe atmosphere for conspiracy theory, which only serves to disinform and encourage cynicism and irrational fear.

As the fallout resulting from the media’s carelessness is surveyed, here’s one thing you’re unlikely to see from the reporters and editors responsible for the coverage: An apology.

Back to the lion tamer. He managed to escape relatively unscathed. The lion is back in its cage and will probably be sent to the lion equivalent of the glue factory. The crowd watching the show narrowly avoided being eaten. And no refunds will be granted at the door.


Cross Post from The Pakistan Update

The GoverNuts

Tuesday, December 1st, 2009

cd_cover400-sMy friends over at the GoverNuts Headquarters have asked me to help them share a little holiday cheer with the unregulated media monitors – you – on this blog. They, The Nuts, enjoy the writers and the ever-clever POTUS (Oh, be still. That’s PEOPLE Of The United States) who add colonoscopic, penetrating insight to real world opinions and news, through the comment sections here. Though they lost their protocol director during the transition to their new digs the Nuts did find their near iconic, street-level guide to art of unraveling modern political cryptography. While they were Hoping to just Change the locks they Opened a large simi-Transparent box and found the lost promises volumes of their debut CD, The GoverNuts – Political Graffiti, and they want to share the wealth.

Actually I think they are a bunch of socialized capitalists because they want you to buy this CD for your friends, family and self so they can donate $4.00 from each CD to the NoQauarter spam-killer for mandatory, voluntary reeducation. Actually it will go towards this website’s operating costs, and that’s good for the Nuts because they are counting on NQ people to provide them fodder for their 2010 release, tentatively titled “ “ to accurately depict all of the great DC accomplishments of late.

elephant donkey

The debut CD was written around political and governmental shenanigans that seem to be repeated every cycle by the parties in power. So, instead of burning the few electron-producing chemicals that remain in my head trying to tell you more about the GoverNuts, I will just drop in a few lyrics from the CD.

Hide your wallet. Politika Rock

The polilitika rock is a pile of crock
But I guess we like the rhythm of the blues
Everybody’s swaying to political sayings
And turning on the late night news

Now the GoverNuts got a brand new band
And they think it’ll go all the way
But when they put your hands in your pockets
You can almost hear them say

Politika roll (big money) politika rock
Well we vote ‘em in because we think it’s a sin
To see a politician work a real job


Many blog regulars will remember the fantastic filmmaker, Flineo. He produced the below embedded video last fall and many formerly respected luminaries said: “Naw! They won’t bring Chicago Politics to Washington. Would they? No way!”


Chicago Politics, most interesting politics
The circus is coming to your town
With jerks, buffoons and elephants
From the House of Delegates
And certified administrative clowns


This is one aptly titled “Hail to the Mob.”

The big boys put a contract out on capitol hill
Well here’s the deal. Why don’t you all just go home!
We’ll take over. We won’t write no bills
There’ll be no more debates under the capitol dome

Balanced budget. Who do we owe this money to anyhow
Who was dumb enough to loan us this much in the first place

Hail, hail to the mob – We’re going to get it right
- No more parlimentary gobligook
- Peace. Not democracy
- Our way is your way
Hail, hail to the mob –

It’s the Chicago Way.


And now a word from the Sinclair Congressional Campaign Committee (If he were The Law Man) Hey. It was on the front page of the Globe, so it has to be true – right?

And evening with me could be the thrill of your life
My shift is almost over let me give you a ride
I got a suitcase full of goodies that I saved form a bust
And the local bar is part of my security trust


I really think I heard this next one was the transition team theme song. With all the issue-naked Hollywood stars and booty-slappin’ rappers hanging out with the boyz at the Frat House on 1600 this Nuts’ tune, Pornographic Pit, seems to fit nicely.

We’ll..Turn this whole damn town
Into a pornographic pit
Run out all the preachers
And bring in all the pimps

Put a banner on the interstate
Saying: “Welcome Everyone”
To the world’s largest
Pornographic pit

..they’ve given a whole new meaning
To home town U.S.A.


With all the Poultry Committees popping up everywhere telling us how we can look at people, issues and ideas, being UnPC may be the new PC. Overheard coming from the Left Lawn: Chicken Liveration

Come one – Gather all. Now is the time for the Chicken Liveration. Chicken’s Rights!
Brak bak ba ..

Over on the hill by the chicken house
The chicks were having a ball
With pigs at the door, a real live band
And corn from wall to wall

Well everything was going fine
Till off in the distance they heard
A band of people (people!) people
Speaking those people words

It was a very good year because we ate a lot of chicken

Well Clara McClacker said: “Stop the ball!”
Now’s come a time for one and for all
To gather together in the Chicken Liveration


What? Think the Right is off the hook? There’s even an oldie on the CD that was penned after the 1994 revolution.

We woke up and saw what they’d done
They’d given us no place to run
The moral minority is now the majority
“Let’s pray” is the priority.

It’s balanced.

The GOP holds a party
And puts a gorilla with religion at the door
While the democrats gather down at the river
And pass around the hat for more.


Well. There’s the introduction to The GoverNuts – Political Graffiti. Go order your copies so you can wrap them up and send them to your former friends. Also, please remember.. and this is very important. I’ve sold this thing (my After-Death Voting Rights) many times, and my kids need the residuals.

Chicago Death Ballot

When I’m dead please bury me in downtown Chicago
So I can still keep casting my vote!

How Rahm Is Reviving the GOP

Tuesday, August 25th, 2009

Editor: This op-ed was first published at The Daily Beast and is reprinted with the express permission of John Batchelor.

Suddenly the disgraced and demoralized Republican Congress has an unearned future, thanks to the superhuman clumsiness of a man who has made himself indispensable to the Obama administration and insufferable to the Democratic Congress, chief of staff Rahm Emanuel.

The GOP always knew that Emanuel was a problem that could not be solved and could only be endured while he served three tempestuous terms in the House. But now the beleaguered Democratic majority is learning painfully that Emanuel’s talents for bullying, whimsical favoritism, cheerful power-grabbing, and self-congratulatory earthiness have transformed the first hundred days of the Obama administration’s seamless accomplishment into a second hundred days of blame and gloom.

First, Emanuel used frontman Senator Max Baucus (D-Mont.), the Finance Committee chair, to ditch the health-care public option, while sending President Obama to speak softly at dinner at the home of prickly Senator Charles Grassley (R-Grant Wood). The latest Emanuel co-authored ploy—forcing health-care legislation through in the fall with Democratic-only votes—underlines that the White House has become as deaf, daring, and driven as the fabled Democratic machines of Tammany Hall or Emanuel’s own Cook County, where he was a once and future fundraiser for the Daleys.“We suck,” a blunt Republican partisan reports, “but they suck more right now.”

Polling supports this cynical summary. The still lifeless Republicans, who have avoided any credible renovation or even contrition for their decades of swinishness, now enjoy their largest generic lead over the Democrats in years. Trusted touts like Charlie Cook speak of a Democratic loss of at least 20 seats in the House. Republican Party fundraising is up, Republican recruitment is up—even in blue New Hampshire, where a potential loss of Judd Gregg’s U.S. Senate seat is now a likely win with the recruiting of the popular Attorney General Kelly Ayotte—and the GOP’s cheeks have a glow not related to shame.

“It’s Rahm,” a Republican partisan tells me. “The cowardly, brain-dead Republicans are claiming they’ve done something. But it’s Rahm. If Rahm goes, the Dems will not do worse. But it might be hard to undo the damage.”

Like the gifted and overwrought Maximilien de Robespierre once upon a time, Rahm Emanuel has taken control of a revolutionary movement he did not help create nor much contribute to while it was gathering strength under the oppression of the ancien régime of George W. Bush. And just like Robespierre, Emanuel has turned the president’s kitchen cabinet of trusted ex-campaign workers, led by David Axelrod (whose ex-PR firm has enjoyed $12 million in fees so far from fronts controlled by the administration-directed Democratic National Committee), Mark Lippert, and Denis McDonough (a dynamic duo of hatchetmen on the National Security Council), into a Committee for Public Safety that terrorizes Washington’s royals willy-nilly.

The victims are everywhere, and the Republicans know best how brilliantly brutal Emanuel’s methods can be. “Rahm puts people on a string,” a cautious Republican told me. “He did it to Dennis [Hastert, former speaker of the House]. We always knew Rahm had something on him. Maybe it was earmarks. Maybe it was something like classic car-flipping. Dennis never went after Rahm and never allowed us to go after him.”

Emanuel’s methods in the House are now writ large throughout the government. Not one of the House Democrats is suicidal enough to push back in public against what amounts to his extortion and protection racket for each successive piece of partisan legislation—witness the 219 beaten-up votes for cap and trade in the House, or the pummeled Blue Dogs during the health-care brouhaha during recess. One Democratic wag comments that Rahm Emanuel is to the Blue Dogs what Michael Vick was to pit bulls. In the beginning he feeds them steak, then they get torn apart.
However, the Republicans are not as gun-shy—though none is unwise enough to reveal his own name—since they have no financing to have ripped from them; and some Republicans point to the strange quiet of GOP House Minority Whip Eric Cantor as evidence that he may be a victim of Emanuel’s Black Hand style.

After his TARP-supporting apostasy under the Bush ancien régime, Cantor begged forgiveness of his caucus to win the Whip job and was excited to oppose the aggressive White House in its first hundred days, taking pride of place in the Party of No against the stimulus package and the budget. But then Cantor rolled over, advocating to the Republican caucus that it avoid direct attacks on the administration and embrace the fashion of bipartisanship and compromise. In May, Cantor even tried a laughable bipartisan tour with Republican has-beens like Jeb Bush and Newt Gingrich (no Democrats showed up) called the National Council for a New America.

What happened? “We think it’s Rahm,” says one Republican who watched the whodunit. “Cantor backed off right after articles ran in his district about Cantor’s wife working for a TARP bank.”
Cantor went so far as to vote for the wild legislation punishing AIG and TARP-bank bonuses with confiscatory taxes that few other Republicans regarded as sane. “We couldn’t understand that vote,” was one comment, “unless it was Rahm.”

Emanuel’s ambitious Committee for Public Safety in the White House, tightly disciplined, indifferent to all Cabinet secretaries including State and Defense, is not limited to sowing fear on Capitol Hill. There are multiple, detailed reports of Rahm Emanuel-authored or -delivered threats to the Netanyahu government in Jerusalem, to the Maliki government in Baghdad, to the Brown government at 10 Downing Street, and now to the Karzai government in Kabul that is entangled in massive voting fraud. A fresh report of a “profanity-laced screaming match” at the White House involving the formerly mild-mannered CIA director Leon Panetta, an Emanuel appointee (as a reward for protecting Emanuel as Clinton chief of staff after Emanuel’s multiple screw-ups in the Clinton White House), points directly to the Emanuel style of extreme persuasion even in national security policy—though Emanuel’s bona fides in diplomacy are a 1991 vacation camp program in Israel volunteering to sing songs and stand around at Israel Defense Force bases with teenagers when he was 31 years old.

Emanuel’s other claim to critical national policy is based on how he got rich in a few dozen months’ work with Bruce Wasserstein in the Chicago office of Wasserstein Perella & Co. as it was being acquired by Deutsche Bank, putting together a merger involving the Chicago-based Exelon Corporation that was also one of Axelrod’s biggest PR accounts and financed Obama’s political career. Emanuel is said to be thrillingly defensive about this episode between his time at the Clinton White House in 1999 and his win of the Democratic primary for the Illinois House seat to replace Rod Blagojevich, a former mentor, in 2002.

Recalled an entertained Republican, “I saw one [Democratic] member walk up to him and ask, ‘So how did you make $18 million in an afternoon sitting at a table in Chicago?’ And Rahm just turned and walked away. It gets to him.”

Just now, Emanuel’s unusually good fortune in Chicago in making $18 million in a very short time may be the only thing on the planet that gets to him. A twist of fate is that as Emanuel’s authority and ambition grow, reaching for swift closure to foreign commitments, staging bipartisan fantasy cruises, then reaching to construct Democratic-only laws that turn the theory of checks and balances into an unlimited credit card on the Treasury, the polling points not only to a rising tide of facedown Republicans but also to a sinking approval rating for a president who entirely controls Emanuel’s fate. Is there a lesson in the detail that the French Revolution waited too long to turn on Robespierre’s ruthless genius, and by the time the guillotine fell, the ludicrously reactionary aristocracy had rallied throughout Europe and led a counterrevolution that swept liberty into the ditch for another lifetime?

John Batchelor is radio host of the John Batchelor Show in New York, Washington, D.C., San Francisco, and Los Angeles.

Stop the Presses! Frank Rich Wonders If Obama is Punking Him!

Monday, August 10th, 2009

Normally I would never quote Frank Rich. Endless copy excoriating Hillary Clinton in favor of Barack Obama during the primaries rendered his columns unreadable. Imagine my surprise to see Mr. Rich put down the Kool-Aid jug for a moment in his NY Times offering, Is Obama Punking Us. Let me start by pointing to Rich’s conclusion – which he buries in the last paragraph of his piece:

The larger fear is that Obama might be just another corporatist, punking voters much as the Republicans do when they claim to be all for the common guy.

Congratulations, Mr. Rich. With all your education, it has taken you two years longer than most of the people on this site to arrive at this conclusion. Obama is a corporatist. Or, as noted on HillaryIs44, an opportunist. He doesn’t care about the little guy or gal. Further, by his use of signing statements, a disturbing echo of the Bush Administration, he is on the road to becoming a “Unitary Executive.” I wonder if Mr. Rich feels ‘punked’ over that as well.

Let’s take a look at some of Mr. Rich’s observations leading him down disillusionment alley:

… [T]here is real reason for longer-term worry in the form of a persistent, anecdotal drift toward disillusionment among some of the president’s supporters. And not merely those on the left. This concern was perhaps best articulated by an Obama voter, a real estate agent in Virginia, featured on the front page of The Washington Post last week. “Nothing’s changed for the common guy,” she said. “I feel like I’ve been punked.” She cited in particular the billions of dollars in bailouts given to banks that still “act like they’re broke.”

But this mood isn’t just about the banks, Public Enemy No. 1. What the Great Recession has crystallized is a larger syndrome that Obama tapped into during the campaign. It’s the sinking sensation that the American game is rigged — that, as the president typically put it a month after his inauguration, the system is in hock to “the interests of powerful lobbyists or the wealthiest few” who have “run Washington far too long.” He promised to smite them.

…What disturbs Americans of all ideological persuasions is the fear that almost everything, not just government, is fixed or manipulated by some powerful hidden hand, from commercial transactions as trivial as the sales of prime concert tickets to cultural forces as pervasive as the news media.

Come on, Mr. Rich, it’s not such a long walk to realize why Wall Street has been protected with endless bailouts. Mr. Obama got more money from Wall St. than any other candidate. Rich must give Obama credit that he is doing some of the “rigging.” Rich still tries to pretend that Obama just can’t fight ‘the man.’ loathe to acknowledge that Obama is ‘the man.’ Certainly, he was elected by ‘the man.’

Where Rich tries halfheartedly to assail Republicans for disruptive town hall meetings, he must admit Democrats have unclean hands as well:

As Democrats have pointed out, the angry hecklers disrupting town-hall meetings convened by members of Congress are not always ordinary citizens engaging in spontaneous grass-roots protests or even G.O.P. operatives, but proxies for corporate lobbyists. (snip)

But the Democratic members of Congress those hecklers assailed can hardly claim the moral high ground. Their ties to health care interests are merely more discreet and insidious. As Congressional Quarterly reported last week, industry groups contributed almost $1.8 million in the first six months of 2009 alone to the 18 House members of both parties supervising health care reform, Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer among them.

Then there are the 52 conservative Blue Dog Democrats, who have balked at the public option for health insurance. Their cash intake from insurers and drug companies outpaces their Democratic peers by an average of 25 percent, according to The Post. And let’s not forget the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee, which has raked in nearly $500,000 from a single doctor-owned hospital in McAllen, Tex. — the very one that Obama has cited as a symbol of runaway medical costs ever since it was profiled in The New Yorker this spring.

Finally, Rich has a hallelujah moment when he points out that (D) or (R) after one’s name means less and less. It’s the character, stupid!

In this maze of powerful moneyed interests, it’s not clear who any American in either party should or could root for. The bipartisan nature of the beast can be encapsulated by the remarkable progress of Billy Tauzin, the former Louisiana congressman. Tauzin was a founding member of the Blue Dog Democrats in 1994. A year later, he bolted to the Republicans. Now he is chief of PhRMA, the biggest pharmaceutical trade group. In the 2008 campaign, Obama ran a television ad pillorying Tauzin for his role in preventing Medicare from negotiating for lower drug prices. Last week The Los Angeles Times reported — and The New York Times confirmed — that Tauzin, an active player in White House health care negotiations, had secured a behind-closed-doors flip-flop, enlisting the administration to push for continued protection of drug prices. Now we know why the president has ducked his campaign pledge to broadcast such negotiations on C-Span.

The making of legislative sausage is never pretty. The White House has to give to get. But the cynicism being whipped up among voters is justified. Unlike Hillary Clinton, whose chief presidential campaign strategist unapologetically did double duty as a high-powered corporate flack, Obama promised change we could actually believe in.

Rich cannot miss an opportunity to trash Hillary Clinton to the bargain. I was waiting for him to find some inane reason to drag her name into this, even though Obama has proven himself to be in bed with corporate interests ten times over. We’d be lucky to have her as President right now. No matter what, I can assure you he would not feel ‘punked.’

Still, Mr. Rich cannot hide from the truth although he does try to soft pedal it:

[Obama’s] first questionable post-victory step was to assemble an old boys’ club of Robert Rubin protégés and Goldman-Citi alumni as the White House economic team, including a Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, who failed in his watchdog role at the New York Fed as Wall Street’s latest bubble first inflated and then burst. The questions about Geithner’s role in adjudicating the subsequent bailouts aren’t going away, and neither is the angry public sense that the fix is still in. We just learned that nine of those bailed-out banks — which in total received $175 billion of taxpayers’ money, but as yet have repaid only $50 billion — are awarding a total of $32.6 billion in bonuses for 2009.

It’s in this context that Obama can’t afford a defeat on health care. A bill will pass in a Democrat-controlled Congress. What matters is what’s in it. The final result will be a CAT scan of those powerful Washington interests he campaigned against, revealing which have been removed from the body politic (or at least reduced) and which continue to metastasize. The Wall Street regulatory reform package Obama pushes through, or doesn’t, may render even more of a verdict on his success in changing the system he sought the White House to reform.

President Obama has shown no signs that he wants corporate control to stop metastasizing. The advisors and moneyed interests with whom he surrounds himself offer ample evidence of that, which even Mr. Rich now admits.

Despite this Administration’s expending significant resources on smoke and mirrors, the realities that Mr. Rich alludes to are getting more and more attention. Change We Can Believe In has now been substituted with The Fix Is In.

Some of us knew that a long time ago.

“As The Stomach Turns”

Thursday, June 25th, 2009

Well, as you have probably seen by now, Governor Sanford has admitted before everyone that he was unfaithful to his wife. In fact, that is the big, huge headline across the front of The Post and Courier: “I’ve Been Unfaithful.” Oh, yeah.

And it has gotten worse with The State printing a whole bunch of emails sent between Sanford and his paramour. Emails that they have had in their possession for FIVE MONTHS. That’s kind of curious, isn’t it? They claim they were trying to “authenticate” them. Amazingly, they seemed to have done that in just a few days. Huh - that’s not the least bit coincidental, is it? Ahem.

Here is a good overview of the whole situation, including some of those emails:



Wow. It is astonishing how people can just implode, destroying their families, their careers, and their integrity, all in one fell swoop. Shocking.

And one of those people most affected is his wife, Jenny Sanford. The video above briefly alluded to her statement about the situation in the video above. I think given what she has gone through over the past 5 months, she deserves the space to have her version told in her own voice, “I Believe Mark Has Earned A Chance To Resurrect Our Marriage,” and here it is: South Carolina first lady Jenny Sanford issued the following statement Wednesday:

I would like to start by saying I love my husband and I believe I have put forth every effort possible to be the best wife I can be during our almost twenty years of marriage. As well, for the last fifteen years my husband has been fully engaged in public service to the citizens and taxpayers of this state and I have faithfully supported him in those efforts to the best of my ability. I have been and remain proud of his accomplishments and his service to this state.

I personally believe that the greatest legacy I will leave behind in this world is not the job I held on Wall Street, or the campaigns I managed for Mark, or the work I have done as First Lady or even the philanthropic activities in which I have been routinely engaged. Instead, the greatest legacy I will leave in this world is the character of the children I, or we, leave behind. It is for that reason that I deeply regret the recent actions of my husband Mark, and their potential damage to our children.

I believe wholeheartedly in the sanctity, dignity and importance of the institution of marriage. I believe that has been consistently reflected in my actions. When I found out about my husbands infidelity I worked immediately to first seek reconciliation through forgiveness, and then to work diligently to repair our marriage. We reached a point where I felt it was important to look my sons in the eyes and maintain my dignity, self-respect, and my basic sense of right and wrong. I therefore asked my husband to leave two weeks ago.

This trial separation was agreed to with the goal of ultimately strengthening our marriage. During this short separation it was agreed that Mark would not contact us. I kept this separation quiet out of respect of his public office and reputation, and in hopes of keeping our children from just this type of public exposure. Because of this separation, I did not know where he was in the past week.

I believe enduring love is primarily a commitment and an act of will, and for a marriage to be successful, that commitment must be reciprocal. I believe Mark has earned a chance to resurrect our marriage.

Psalm 127 states that sons are a gift from the Lord and children a reward from Him. I will continue to pour my energy into raising our sons to be honorable young men. I remain willing to forgive Mark completely for his indiscretions and to welcome him back, in time, if he continues to work toward reconciliation with a true spirit of humility and repentance.

This is a very painful time for us and I would humbly request now that members of the media respect the privacy of my boys and me as we struggle together to continue on with our lives and as I seek the wisdom of Solomon, the strength and patience of Job and the grace of God in helping to heal my family.

The pain the First Lady is in just pours off the page. How sad, for her, and for her family, especially to have their personal issues played out across the screen and page all across the nation. Unfortunately, Jenny Sanford has joined an exclusive club, one which includes members Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Edwards. Her personal pain has been writ large. She, like the others, is handling it with grace. She, like the others, was successful in her own right, and helped her husand to be successful, as well And like the others, it seems she is willing to give her husband another chance, which is her CHOICE. As much as it might upset some of us that people stay with partners who cheat, the reality is that the women mentioned above are FAR from alone.

Bottom line, this is a sad situation insofar as this one man’s selfish actions have had a rippling affect far greater than the man himself, who is only a man after all (meaning he is just a human being), for himself, his family, his position, and his party. People are people, and sometimes, okay, a lot of times, that means they do stupid, short-sighted things, and think with a different part of their anatomy than their brains. Most, though, don’t have it played out on a national stage, nor do their wronged partners. THAT is the hard part, especially for those most closely affected: Jenny Sanford and her sons.

Bless your heart, First Lady Sanford, you didn’t deserve this public humiliation you are having to endure, nor do your children. Whatever your choice ends up being about your marriage, you have every right to make it, even if it is to “stand by your man.” Every relationship is different, and no one knows what the day-to-day nitty gritty aspects of that relationship are. So, no matter HOW it looks to us on the inside, WE are not the ones living it - you are. I hope you can discern what is truly best for you and your family without the clamoring voices influencing you too much. It is YOUR life, and your children’s lives. Do what’s best for y’all, and don’t let all of the nosey Nellies influence you. All the best to you as you and your family work this out, whatever the end results of that work may be…

A Principled Former Republican or Election Winning Democrat?

Wednesday, April 29th, 2009

The Democrats are celebrating, Republicans are lamenting and MSM are excitedly analyzing every nuanced angle of every political strategy imaginable over Arlen Specters decision to switch his nearly four decade affiliation as a Republican to that of a Democrat. An excerpt from his statement earlier today in the WSJ:

I am not making this decision because there are no important and interesting opportunities outside the Senate. I take on this complicated run for re-election because I am deeply concerned about the future of our country and I believe I have a significant contribution to make on many of the key issues of the day, especially medical research. NIH funding has saved or lengthened thousands of lives, including mine, and much more needs to be done. And my seniority is very important to continue to bring important projects vital to Pennsylvania’s economy.

I am taking this action now because there are fewer than thirteen months to the 2010 Pennsylvania Primary and there is much to be done in preparation for that election. Upon request, I will return campaign contributions contributed during this cycle.

While each member of the Senate caucuses with his Party, what each of us hopes to accomplish is distinct from his party affiliation. The American people do not care which Party solves the problems confronting our nation. And no Senator, no matter how loyal he is to his Party, should or would put party loyalty above his duty to the state and nation.

My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords’ switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.

Whatever my party affiliation, I will continue to be guided by President Kennedy’s statement that sometimes Party asks too much. When it does, I will continue my independent voting and follow my conscience on what I think is best for Pennsylvania and America.

So as Mr. Specter himself explains, his decision is about wanting to get reelected. I don’t doubt he has many worthwhile contributions he would still like to make. But as an independent, who has voted for Republicans as well as Democrats over the years, I have both admired Mr. Specter for many of his independent votes and stances, and decried his adherence to party loyalty.

For me, a more impressive time for Arlen Specter to make his principled stance forsaking the Republican party would have been when Bush and the Republican party were in power and traveling down so many avenues - Iraq, torture, FISA, financially starving much needed government agencies, manipulating government data - that I and many Americans found reprehensible.

Now after so many years, it seems like just another confirmation that our political parties have merged into one big corporate party with only the fringe Democrats pulling hard left and fringe Republicans pulling hard right.

Personally, I’m weary of the constant gamesmanship of politics. I’m frustrated by the unending election focus. I’m tired of feeling like the helpless passenger locked in the back seat and forced to watch two drunk drivers fighting to take control over the steering wheel. In the end, we are still trapped in the same car speeding down the same road and facing the same ditches and oncoming traffic hazard, while in the hands of an impaired driver.

Third party? Term limits? There has got to be a way for the american people to stop being crash test dummies for both political parties.

Ben Smith of Politico provides a great perspective on Specter once proposed limiting effect of party switches when Jim Jeffers defected in 2001.

____________________

And so while Mr. Specter’s party affiliation goes full circle - he originally was a democrat.

____________________

MSNBC goes around the usual political analysis circle.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

____________________

Anybody Want a Stuffed Unity Jackass? Anybody?

Saturday, August 30th, 2008

This election cycle has been an eye opener. Many of us long-time Democrats are turning away from the party, some vowing to vote for McCain, for a third party candidate, or not at all.

Why? What is at the bottom of this? No matter how much we like Hillary, we would have accepted her defeat - had the process been democratic.

I think many readers here at NQ instinctively realize that the Democratic party no longer exists in the way we understood it. Some saw this already; but for many of us, it only became clear when we watched the perversion of the primary process this year. Hillary was a great candidate, but she also became a lens through which we finally saw what the Democratic party was doing. And how it operates.
(more…)