Thursday, November 19, 2009

Is Dan Riehl sufficiently cynical?

by Smitty

While I wouldn't go so far as to think ACORN flat-out stole the 2008 election (conspiracies scale poorly) I'm wondering if we should maybe chip in for a new tinfoil hat for Dan. His analysis in McCain/Palin: What Really Went Wrong? seems to think the McCain campaign was as clean and un-rigged as the stock market.

McCain was "Dead Man Walking" in 2007. Then he "magically" came back from the abyss in 2008, just as Michigan and Florida were magically removed from the Democratic primary equation,
and both John Sydney and Hillary step aside for the charismatic Chicagoan.

Other than Joe the Plumber, Sarah Palin was the only real shot of adrenalin for McCain. I'm speculating his coma was either:
  • The result of being left on the bus overnight one too many times, or
  • Sarah was his Jeremiah Denton moment, only truly un-scripted piece, where he could lay the foundation for a resurgence he was incapable of leading.
Dan posts:
The people who know the most about McCain/Palin 2008 aren't the people willing to go on record for the media. While the top political players have their respective careers, for better or worse - for most on the campaign, to talk now would be a career ender. So all we are getting is two of the most polarized views from the top. In my experience, that never is where the real story rests. But it's all that we've got. Make of it what you will, I'd suggest not too much.
Are the people within the beltway really so removed from the economic realities? Do they really think there is a career left to save amidst the economic disaster and ideological drift currently afoot? I've met some of these people, and they don't seem quite that stupid. At some point, doing the Right Thing becomes as much a matter of simple pragmatism as an appeal to Altruism.

Maybe Sarah's book tour will and increasing popularity will be a driver. At some inflection point, the career wonks will realize that, if they can't ingratiate themselves with the potential newcomer, they'd better grab their book deal.

A pile of cheap, tawdry, dirt laundry awaits.


  1. Smitty, Dan could be right in re developments and you also, both. Suggest keeping options open.

    Suggest the key developments are not first what happens in the opposition (Republicans, Conservatives, Libertarians) but rather first what happens because of the reality of the enemy's agenda. Identify that reality widely and dramatically and the rest follows of necessity.

    The deep truth of this enemy is that he seeks an artificial kill-off of world-wide and USA population in the name of "eco-sustainability." "Cap-and-trade," "health care" and their myriad back-door implementations via "czars" are legislative and policy enablers of that agenda.

    This enemy wants USA population no larger than 2M and ideally far smaller, rich only surviving and minimum necessary to serve them. 6B global human kill-off is desirable in their view. "They" is the rich/super-rich relying on "Science."

    That's what the boy in the WH was put there to do, by the rich, who love him for it and will continue to. They want the world to themselves and have means to make it happen, they estimate.

    This is the meta-reality of Soros, for example, who calls it "Open Society" (open for himself only), but really it is the meta-reality of his entire orbit of super-rich world-wide. c.f. Prince Charles for decades, utterly candid about it.

    What the rich don't understand is that they, in turn, are being played. Their boy has an even deeper agenda, which is Afro-Mohammedan Hegemony or Imperialism.

    That's what's really going on, the driver of the reaction to the act of war at Fort Hood and the decision to "try" KSM etc. for "crimes" everyone knows he/they are scheduled to be exonerated and set loose to have another go at it.

    Highlight that truth and these vile ogres doing it will be gone sooner than one might expect.

  2. I wouldn't argue against the McCain incompetence idea, but it's dangerous to ignore the ACORN/SEIU/WFP corruption. The fact that their corruption wasn't necessary for McCain to lose doesn't make them less corrupt. The fact that Obama and Holder protect ACORN's corruption would seem to indicate that they understand the value of a few stolen votes here and there.

    The Nixon campaign didn't need to commit the crimes of the 1972 campaign to beat McGovern, but that didn't stop them. Mostly the same thing. The difference is that ACORN/Democrat corruption has become institutionalized.

  3. 2008 was a perfect storm of Dem and media perfidy plus GOP buffoonery. Both factors have been present in some measure all along, and have combined to wreak similar seemingly inexplicable outcomes in the past.

    No da Vinci code required.

  4. Dan Riehl accuses David Frum of latent homosexuality.

    Mark Steyn suggests David Frum is channelling his inner Andrew Sullivan.

    I do not think David Frum is gay. I just think he is way too metrosexual and eatting too much tofu (it raises estrogen levels you know). So he gets bitchy.

  5. J.S. McCain is the nominee you get when you let democrats pick your nominee. J.S. McCain is the reasons republicasn need to abolish the open primary. (DavdL @ Bitsblog)