Dear Angry Gay Democrats

I used to be like you -- which is to say, I was once an angry Democrat, too.

"Born that way," you might say. Well, I wasn't born angry, but I was born a Democrat. Hard-core yellow-dog Democrat, too. I voted for Mondale, for crying out loud.

The Democrats paid me back the same way they always pay back their most loyal constituents: Those two-faced weasels stabbed me in the back. (I mean, really, what part of "From My Cold Dead Hands" is so hard to understand?)

OK, so now you've been ripped off, sold out, and stabbed in the back by the Democrats. Join the club.

Did you know Ronald Reagan started out as a Democrat? By his own admission, the Gipper was once such a "bleeding heart" liberal that he unwittingly joined two Communist Party front groups in the 1940s.

So if this latest knife in the back from your Democratic "friends" is one betrayal too many, maybe you should consider becoming an ex-Democrat, too. I mean, if you want to raise millions of dollars for untrustworthy politicians who oppose gay marriage, the Republican Party would certainly welcome your support.

I'm just sayin' . . .

UPDATE: Some of you angry gay Democrats are probably asking, "But what's in it for me?" Just because Republicans are never going to support your identity-politics agenda doesn't mean they don't have anything to offer you.

For example, think of the delicious fun of payback politics, evening the score with those Democrat bastards who sold you out. How do you think Cynthia Yockey became Ann Coulter's favorite lesbian?

UPDATE II: Welcome once more, Instapundit readers! Just to clarify: I'm a married father of six with 20 years of monogamy to my credit, so the only person feeling my pain for the past two decades is Mrs. Other McCain. And despite the Speedo-filling studliness, don't believe those porn-star rumors . . . LIES! ALL LIES!

On the other hand, some traits are hereditary and who knows what Other McCain Jr. has been up to . . .

UPDATE III: Little Miss Attila's right: The GOP's "incompetent half the time, but not truly evil." Hmmm. Exactly what Mrs. Other McCain says about me . . .

Thoughts on humor, in reply to Steven Crowder

by Smitty

Steven Crowder has done some excellent videos on PJTV and elsewhere. He has a blog post on Big Hollywood where he muses that Republicans Need to Grow a Sense of Humor.
Crowder specifically cites three incidents,

• BHO's Special Olympics comment on Leno
• Wanda Sykes’ Correspondence Dinner Shtick about Rush and kidney failure
• Letterman

He concludes:

I’m sorry “fellow Republicans”… But when will we get a clue? Before Reagan, we were seen as the party that couldn’t take a joke. The Gipper fixed that one for us. Now, however, because of silly Conservatives using political correctness as a fulcrum for political gain, we find ourselves right back at square one.
One of my goals in life is to watch political correctness shrivel up and die (as it should be for any true Conservative). I can’t do that however, if Republicans insist on resuscitating it back to life every time they want to act “offended.” Do we really want to be the person at the party around which everyone has to tiptoe around for fear of offending our sensibilities? Come on… We’re not supposed to be “that guy.” Leave that kind of crap to the Sean Penn pansies of the world.

I can track Crowder's point a short distance. There is a point about avoiding being a broken record, belaboring points, and majoring on minors.
Once upon a time I at a retreat, the attendees were assigned to create sketch comedy poking fun at the organizers. The wise old fellow in charge of my cabin laid down some ground rules about comedy that stuck:

• Bodily functions are not funny. We all have them, we know what they are.
• Real humor is not sarcasm ('to tear flesh'). Humor is positive. Sykes and Lettermain fail it.
• Humor is universal. If the humor isn't safe for work (grandma, school, house of worship), it's probably not funny.
• Humor educates, unifies, and triggers real communication between people. If you're raising hackles, it's not funny.
• Then there is the Monty Python with the slapstick:

So, Mr. Crowder, should we laugh at the examples you cite? I'll meet you halfway and allow the so-called comedians in question should be ignored. The shrill reactionary shtick may not be buying much. Finally, it is true that taking oneself too seriously isn't funny.

UPDATE (RSM): David Letterman disemboweled and beheaded on Broadway -- that would be funny!

Who will rid me of thisgap-toothed comedian?

The skies are raining Instalanches on bloggers who say David Letterman's apology is not enough. The swinish pervert is starting to sweat, as he beholds the vengeful rage emerging among conservative bloggers.

The sarcastic Hoosier must suffer real punishment for dissing Sarah Palin and her daughters. Therefore . . .

Avenge her! We will not be satisfied merely to have David Letterman fired. No, that is not enough.

A mob of enraged Republicans will descend on the Ed Sullivan Theatre, lay hold of the brute, and drag him into the middle of Broadway. There, for all the world to see, we shall disembowel Letterman and, after he has died a painful and well-deserved death, we'll lop off his head and parade it down to CBS headquarters.

Dogs shall lick his blood!

Who's with me?

UPDATE: Chris Wysocki is part of the Not One Red Cent rebellion against the GOP Beltway elite, and he's also down with the "Don't F*** With Us" Coalition. I've suggested that Chris collaborate with Ann Coulter's Favorite Lesbian to coordinate the bloodthirsty Republican mob attack on Letterman.

While it is always a mistake to signal a willingness to compromise in advance of a showdown, I think some of the squishy "moderates" in our midst might be satisfied with having Letterman shipped to Guantanamo for a few weeks of recreational waterboarding, administered by Todd Palin.

Conor Friedersdorf vs. Dan Riehl

Dan has a link to an hour-plus online discussion he had with Conor Friedersdorf. You can listen to it and try to figure out WTF Conor's problem is, besides the fact that he is young and had the bad judgment to (a) attend the Columbia University J-School and (b) hire on at Culture 11.

It's OK, I made bad judgments when I was young. Back in the day, there was less of a downside risk to being a young fool. There was no Internet then, so it wasn't like nowadays, where every 20-something who can type his own name gets the idea he's going to solve the world's problems with a blog.

To imagine what I would have been blogging about in 1986 . . . shudder.

UPDATE: I'm listening to the debate now and a big part the problem is, Conor wants to define conservatism as "what I like," or, "a philosophy espoused by writers I like." He cannot separate his admiration of, inter alia, Andrew Sullivan from his own self-conception as "conservative." It's fan-boy politics.

Sully is a student of Oakeshott, therefore Conor name-checks Oakeshott. Dreher constantly invokes Russell Kirk, therefore Conor name-checks Kirk. It's as if Conor has been studying his pledge book in preparation for initiation into a fraternity.

Why is it that none of these "dissident" conservatives can be bothered to read Hayek or Mises? Why do they never seem to take any interest in the basic questions of political economy and limited government? Why must they seek out this conservatism that, they assert, transcends mere politics -- a conservatism of "temperament," as Conor calls it?

Sigh. OK, let me go smoke a conservative cigarette and then I will return to my conservative laptop to listen to more of the debate.

UPDATE II: I'm back. That cigarette had a suspiciously neo-conservative flavor. ("The Jooooz!") So I'm going to eat a paleo ice cream sandwich while I listen to the next segment of the debate.

UPDATE III: A-ha, Friedersdorf! I just paused the audio at 19:14, as which point you have just accused unnamed others of having an "ahistorical definition of conservatism."

Q. How much history of conservatism does Conor Friedersdorf
know?
A. A helluva lot less than I do!

As they say in military tactics, your flank is "in the air," and I'll drive a goddamned division into that flank.

UPDATE IV: As the perspicacious Professor Donald Douglas points out in the comments, Friedersdorf has attained his life's goal, blogging at The Atlantic Monthly, just like his hero. As I have often said, the rule in D.C. is never to attribute to ideology that which can be adequately explained by ambition.

Friedersdorf is rarity at The Atlantic. Last time I checked, Megan McArdle was the only non-Harvardian at that notorious snob shop. Perhaps his stint at Columbia J-School was close enough for horseshoes.

UPDATE V: Over at Dan Riehl's, I congratulate Conor on his ascent to the ranks of The Republicans Who Really Matter. Well played, old sport!

ABC goes MSNBC?

The White House press tank corps:

On June 24, Drudge reports, the network will broadcast from inside the White House to air a propaganda special for Obamacare.
Opposing voices will reportedly be excluded. ABC News says “thoughtful” and “diverse” points of view will be allowed. In other words: Shills of all colors!

Why compete to become the most mindlessly pro-Obama network? That's not news, it's publicity.

UPDATE: Via Memeorandum, conservative bloggers go ballistic: Riehl World View, Right Wing Nut House, Macsmind, QandO, Atlas Shrugs, Babalú Blog and The Jawa Report.

Remember 2002-04, when the "progressive netroots community" went off on a media establishment they felt were too eager to parrot the Bush administration's line on Iraq? The problem with reverse-engineering that -- which is what conservative bloggers must try to do now -- is that during the Bush administration, liberal bloggers had the advantage that 90% of the D.C. press corps had voted for Al Gore and John Kerry.

The hopelessly lopsided partisan commitments of the journalistic elite -- try a show of hands in the WH press corps, who voted Republican? -- have always been the secret weapons of the liberal blogosphere.

How many MSM reporters (Associated Press, NY Times, CBS News, etc.) ever read Hot Air or Instapundit? And how many of them sympathize? The typical MSM reporter sympathizes with Media Matters, DKos and Crooks & Liars. The typical MSM reporter watches Olbermann every night. The typical MSM reporter thinks Letterman's jokes about Palin are ROTFLMAO funny.

Most D.C. reporters, editors and producers hate Republicans, and that hatred matters.

UPDATE II: Speaking of hatred -- and via Little Miss Attila -- Pundette highlights the "two-minute hate" technique of the pro-Obama media machine, which includes institutions as diverse as the New York Times and the Comedy Central network.

It's the uncanny coordination of the messaging that makes the Obama media such an engine of terror to its enemies. This harkens back to the JournoList revelation. Once you understand that there is an actual network Democratic political operatives, liberal policy advocates, progressive bloggers and major media journalists connected via a single communications link, suddenly the modus operandi is no longer mysterious.

Jon Henke figured this out three years ago, really, and employed a phrase, "the eyes of the influentials" to describe what is at stake. It is not in my interest to explain everything I've deduced in the past three years based on Henke's insight, but let me say this: Offline private communications that the public never sees are as important as the stuff headlined at Drudge.

Think about that. Think about it hard. Because you can't beat what you don't understand.

UPDATE III: RNC chief of staff Ken McKay sends a letter to ABC News, gets a lame, snarky response.

A suggestion for Mr. McKay: How about you kick whoever's ass needs to be kicked in order to get an actual live blog on the RNC Web site? It hasn't been updated in 32 days.

Personnel is policy, and this business of assigning important communications operations to clueless do-nothing losers has got to stop.

UPDATE IV: Speaking of kicking ass, Jimmie Bise bloggregates the story at NTCNews.com.

UPDATE V: Welcome (again) Instapundit readers! Maybe he's trying to make up for the Allah-hate, but if Professor Reynolds keeps this up, Dr. Helen might become suspicious. At any rate, speaking of elites . . .

UPDATE V: Be sure to read down to the comments for good stuff like this from a Methodist pastor:

Is ABC still owned by Disney? Do they still do Fantasy World?

Yes, and soon they'll be promoting their new ride, "ObamaCare," which involves a lot of standing in line . . . it's scary, but not exactly a thrill.

Corzine's Last Chance Power Drive

Bloggregating the N.J. election at NTCNews.com: Jersey's about to pass a $1 billion tax increase -- nice round number, one billion -- Republicans are hopeful and the White House is worried.

"It's a death trap, it's a suicide rap . . ."

On relentlessness

You can't beat a man who refuses to admit defeat. You can kill a man like that, but you cannot defeat him otherwise, because he has gotten it in his mind to keep fighting, whatever happens.

Sunday I had a phone conversation with Cynthia Yockey in which she calmly and cheerfully explained that she was going to get David Letterman fired. Republicans are too willing to take that kind of abuse, Cynthia said, but she comes out of the gay-rights movement, and they don't roll that way.

We talked a while, but the main thing I took away from the conversation was Cynthia's determination to fight a one-woman campaign against Letterman. Even if no one else joined her anti-Letterman crusade, she would fight on alone. As long as it takes, whatever it takes, she has envisioned her goal, and intends to achieve it.

Dave has pissed off the wrong lesbian.

The novelist Tito Perdue once said to me, "How many Spartans would it take to bring down America? Ten thousand? One thousand? One?"

What Tito was trying to express was the vast difference between the softness of modern decadence and the adamantine hardness of the ancients. Those Spartans who died at Thermopylae were so much tougher than the average American of 2009, it's almost like talking about two entirely separate species.

Nevertheless, there are those rare few who emulate the ancient virtues, who accomplish great things not because they are more talented or more intelligent or more fortunate, but simply because they are truly determined and pursue their aims relentlessly.

"One of the basic principles of military strategy is to reinforce success. If you see a man who fights and wins, give him reinforcements, and bid others to emulate his success."

It was hardly surprising when Cynthia said of Letterman's latest apology, "Too little, too late." She intends to make an example of him, so that others may learn from the example.

That is the basic relentlessness necessary to success. She will keep fighting however long it takes, and what Cynthia needs is reinforcements.

UPDATE: CBS has already lost an advertiser and FireDavidLetterman.com plans a protest rally today at 4 p.m. in New York. (H/T: Frugal Cafe.) And here's the part where I agree with Dan Collins that Letterman was engaged in "intentionalism" a la Goldstein.

Outrageous over-the-top humor -- been there, done that. But I've never done it on national TV with a multimillion-dollar contract, eh? And I actually like Dave Letterman.

This isn't about that. It's about "don't f*** with us."

UPDATE II: Heh. Seems like Instapundit's down with the Don't F*** With Us Coalition.

UPDATE III: Let's get medieval on him!

Panetta and Cheney on the spin cycle

by Smitty (h/t Memeorandum)

Stacy suggested a glance at the farce du jour flap between the CIA director, Leon Panetta, and (in)famous former VP, Dick Cheney. Jane Mayer in the New Yorker gives us The Secret History. We are instructed that

Dick Cheney delivered an extraordinary attack on the Obama Administration’s emerging national-security policies. Cheney, speaking at the American Enterprise Institute, accused the new Administration of making “the American people less safe” by banning brutal C.I.A. interrogations of terrorism suspects that had been sanctioned by the Bush Administration. Ruling out such interrogations “is unwise in the extreme,” Cheney charged. “It is recklessness cloaked in righteousness.”

Cut to Panetta's office:

Panetta, pouring a cup of coffee, responded to Cheney’s speech with surprising candor. “I think he smells some blood in the water on the national-security issue,” he told me. “It’s almost, a little bit, gallows politics. When you read behind it, it’s almost as if he’s wishing that this country would be attacked again, in order to make his point. I think that’s dangerous politics.”

Let's put down a few recent historical markers, and then explore the rest of the New Yorker article:

1. Princess Pelosi famously questioned the veracity of the CIA on 14May.
2. Cheney's "extraordinary attack" was delivered on 21May.
3. Frank Rich stirred the pot in the New York Times on 30May: "Who Is to Blame for the Next Attack?"
   (Um, Mr. Rich, the people who carry out the attack will be the responsible ones. Modern liberals are challenged by the concept of causality.
4. Mayer's piece is dated 22June.

Mayer's article serves as an overview of both the CIA and Panetta's career, from a modern liberal perspective, and affords a few chuckles.
The strain must be substantial for Panetta:

Since January, the C.I.A. has become the focus of almost daily struggle, as Obama attempts to restore the rule of law in America’s fight against terrorism without sacrificing safety or losing the support of conservative Democratic and independent voters.

Tip for Mr. Panetta: do not confuse leadership with running a popularity contest. If you sacrifice doing what is legal and necessary to do your job in order to curry favor with Jane Mayer, conservative Democratic, or independent voters, then you are a sorry piece of work. For example, consider the non-display of vertebrae in the case of the preceding nominee for CIA director, John Brennan:

...was pressured to withdraw. Critics accused Brennan, who had been a top agency official during the Bush years, of complicity with the torture program. (A friend of Brennan’s from his C.I.A. days complained to me, “After a few Cheeto-eating people in the basement working in their underwear who write blogs voiced objections to Brennan, the Obama Administration pulled his name at the first sign of smoke, and then ruled out a whole class of people: anyone who had been at the agency during the past ten years couldn’t pass the blogger test.”)

One is tempted to speculate on the half-life of a Jane Hamsher confronted with the responsibility of being CIA Director. (A mildly crazy speculation, until you consider occupants of other offices.)

The record of outsiders taking over the C.I.A. is mixed. John McCone, a California shipping magnate who ran the agency in the Kennedy and Johnson years, is often cited as being among the most successful directors; having been trained as a mechanical engineer, he was skilled at assessing threats posed by both conventional and nuclear weapons. But other outsiders have been met with intense hostility. James Schlesinger was named C.I.A. director by President Richard Nixon after heading the Atomic Energy Commission. Given instructions to “get rid of the clowns,” Schlesinger dismissed or forced into retirement more than five hundred analysts and a thousand clandestine officers. He faced death threats, and his tenure lasted six months. In 1995, President Clinton appointed John Deutch, who had previously served at the Pentagon. Deutch tried to improve the oversight of clandestine operatives after evidence surfaced that an agent in Guatemala had covered up two murders. Deutch was reviled by many operatives, and he left the agency after eighteen months.

I honestly don't know, but I wonder if this corresponds to reductions in HUMINT capabilities that are alluded to in recommendation #31 of the 9/11 Commission. But I don't wonder too much, as such speculations, they say, lead to ulcers.
Mayer relates a series of accusations of criminal activity (torture, misleading intelligence) as fact. If Mayer's facts are correct, then the CIA and both the Bush and Obama Administrations stand guilty of felonies and violations of international law for various degrees of complicity. Note to Mayer: confine all negative statements to the Bush Administration--no blue on blue!
Mayer does neglect to mention rendition, which the Obama Administration will employ, just so long as everyone gets cupcakes and stuff. In other words, as with all post-modern conversations, whoever owns the definitions owns the narrative.
The article briefly profiles other senior CIA officials, and delves into the torture memo controversy. Then, details of extraordinary rendition, and psychological torture based upon "learned helplessness". We are told that

Lawsuits against abusive contractors remain a possibility, and any one of them could expose a line of authorizations leading directly up the chain of command at the C.I.A., and into the Bush White House.

The article is well-written, if skinny on references to heavy accusations. Cheney figures lightly in the introduction to the New Yorker article. CNN nevertheless picked up the ball, and got Panetta to opine through a spokesman that he "does not believe the former Vice President wants an attack," but rather that Cheney was "expressing his profound disagreement with the assertion that President Obama's security policies have made our country less safe. Nor did he question anyone's motives."
Fox News worked to defuse the situation:

After the CIA director apparently told The New Yorker that he thinks the former vice president is crossing his fingers for another attack on America, Cheney said Monday he hopes his "old friend" didn't really say those words.

So, what can we learn from this?

1. Between Jane Mayer and Leon Panetta there has been a communication malfunction.
2. Communication malfunctions sure do drive news cycles.
3. Jane Mayer can:
   • Use the word "torture" 33 times in a 7,500 word piece
   • Call the CIA everything but an organization dedicated to defending the country, and
   • Avoid mentioning Princess Pelosi and her accusations of CIA duplicity a single time.

What a piece of work. One is reminded of something Dan Akroyd used to say to another Jane some decades ago.

Bill Kristol is wrong

And you ask, why is Bill Kristol wrong?

It is one thing to assume (at least, for the sake of argument) that a liberal like Obama desires what is good for America. It is another thing to assume that a liberal actually knows what is good for America, or that, knowing what is good, he will actually pursue the good competently and persistently. The history of liberalism disproves any such assumption. . . .

Stop Obama: Because He's Not Grover Cleveland. If conservatives need a slogan, I say that will do.

The Hot Redhead Is Right!

Today's Day-by-Day:

It's the Rule 5 Christina Hendricks Principle: Any argument is more persuasive when made by a hot chick. Just think if Friedrich Hayek had been a sexy dame with big gazongas . . .

UPDATE: Welcome Instapundit readers! Speaking of libertarian fantasies, imagine Jon Corzine crushed like a bug on a windshield on the Jersey Turnpike . . .

Health-care townhall goes green?Obama cultivates the plants!

The MSM is asleep at the switch as Barack Obama fields "spontaneous" health-care questions from . . . a former Democratic Party candidate for Congress:

This questioner can be seen in a CNN video covering the Green Bay event. The woman is identified as "Paulette Guerin" and labeled as an "attendee" of the meeting on the CNN segment. In fact CNN got the spelling of the woman's last name wrong, it's not Guerin, but Garin. . . .
Garin was a recent Democrat candidate for Wisconsin's 1st Congressional District. Not only that but Garin is a proponent of a single-payer plan, as Obama was when he was a Senator from Illinois. In fact, Garin says right on her webpage that Obama is a proponent of the single payer plan and she urges fellow Wisconsinites to flood Congress with calls to implement the single payer system . . .

Jeff Gannon could not be reached for comment.

The Blogger Whom Allah HatethGets No Credit for His Scoop

Allah hates me -- I own that Google-bomb -- and the complex algorithm of Allahpundit non-linkage contributes enormously to situations like this:

In October, a truck driver traveling through a low-income district of Jacksonville, Fla., saw a billboard advertising a program that offered free cell-phones for the poor. The truck driver tipped me, and I reported it on my blog.
Sunday, the New York Times finally did a feature story about Lifeline, a federally-subsidized, federally-mandated program.
The blogosphere is excited about this story. Do I get any credit for my scoop? Of course not. Because I suck.

People have asked me why I keep pointing out how much I suck, but it is Allah who -- by his eternal non-linkage -- continuously points this out. I merely note the fact, so that when my friends behold with sadness my poverty and obscurity, they need not wonder why.

UPDATE: Woe unto ye, Ed Driscoll, for it is a proverb among the wise that there is hatred sufficient to encompass all who link the blogger whom Allah hateth.

'Experts' Euthanize the U.S. Economy

What does the long-ago death of a matinee idol tell us about the likely results of Obamanomics? Glad you asked!

Actual science involves the ascertaining and application of facts, with the knowledge that there are more facts in the universe than any person can ever possibly know. The pseudo-religion of Science, by contrast, involves the belief that "experts" already know all the important facts, and that much of what we normally call "common sense" is contradicted by the facts most recently discovered by these experts, who constitute the high priesthood of the cult of Science. . . .
Think about how, when Timothy Geithner's nomination as Treasury secretary was before the Senate, we were told that Geithner -- who couldn't even correctly calculate his own income tax -- was nonetheless the only man in the country who could save our economic fortunes. Even Republicans praised Geithner, with Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah calling him "a person of great integrity." . . .
Last week, financial analyst James Quinn portrayed Geithner, President Obama and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke as the Larry, Curly and Moe of an economic slapstick routine that would be hysterically funny, if only the consequences weren't so predictably tragic. . . .
We should hardly be surprised that the journalistic priesthood sings the praises of the economic priesthood, even as Dr. Larry, Dr. Curly and Dr. Moe proceed to administer to the American economy the kind of Science that the surgeons provided to the late Jeff Chandler.

Read the whole thing.

UPDATE: The DJIA was down 200 points at noon. Maybe some "squirrels" are getting wise to the game.

UPDATE II: Somewhat related: Liberal mathematics.

Riots in Iran vs. Riots in L.A.

Michelle Malkin nails it:

Iranian youth risked their lives to protest election fraud.
L.A. youths set cars and buses on fire and took to the streets to riot . . . after their basketball team won.

Right. I'm thinking the dictators of the world should show coverage of the L.A. basketball riots on their government TV stations: "See? We told you democracy doesn't work!"

More riotous news at NTCNews.com.

Karl Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Rove?

Do the publishers of The Atlantic Monthly have no shame at all?

Ahmadinejad's bag of tricks is eerily like that of Karl Rove - the constant use of fear, the exploitation of religion, the demonization of liberals, the deployment of Potemkin symbolism like Sarah Palin . . .

Really, Sully? I mean, really? WTF goes through someone's mind when they dream up an idiotic comparison between (a) Karl Rove, a Republican political strategist, and (b) Mahmoud Ahmadinejed, a Jew-hating genocidal maniac?

You might as well compare Rove to Charles Manson or Pol Pot. Please note that Sullivan's comparison involves no hypotheticals. It does not appear to be any sort of parodic humor, except unintentionally. He evidently means to suggest in all seriousness that Ahmadinejad and Rove are similar in some meaningful way.

Whatever you think of Karl Rove -- and I am certainly not his biggest fan -- there is something absurdly puerile in the suggestion that his political strategies involve "the deployment of Potemkin symbolism like Sarah Palin" (???).

WTF? How did Palin become involved in this? It's as if Sully is merely reacting at some kind of Rorshach level of subconsciousness.

More from William Jacobson and Donald Douglas. Via Memeorandum.

UPDATE: I went outside, smoked a cigarette, then took a shower and ate a pizza and now, an hour later, I'm still agog at the wretchedness of Sully's phrase, "Potemkin symbolism like Sarah Palin." Sully attributes this to Rove -- as if the governor of Alaska were self-evidently a signature "Rovian" tactic -- and then says it is part of a "bag of tricks is eerily like that" of Ahmadinejad. Or vice-versa, actually, but the idea of moral equivalence is there.

How? Why? I'm scratching my head. Given that hyperbolic extremity of ad hominem is sort of a speciality of mine, and that I am a three-time nominee for Sully's "Malkin Award," you might think I'd have the kind of insight necessary to reverse-engineer a thing like this.

This morning, I ignored Frank Rich's column, in which he cited Shep Smith as having "tied the far-right loners who had gotten their guns out in Wichita and Washington to the mounting fury of Obama haters." A flimsy theory of causality -- a connection asserted rather than demonstrated -- and I thought to myself, "Well, other people will tear that to shreds. No need for me to get exercised over it."

So now I'm wondering why this particular excursion by Sullivan made me react, whereas Rich's idiotic column did not. Perhaps it is that Sully boils his slander down to a single sentence so transparently false.

Or perhaps it is that Sully decided to throw in the name of Sarah Palin. Remember, my Donkey Cons co-author is now collaborating on Palin's autobiography. I actually covered Palin during the 2008 campaign. So I have a concept of Palin as being an actual human being, rather than some kind of "Potemkin symbolism."

WTF? I look at phrase, and try to figure out exactly what Sully means by it. "Potemkin villages" were <>the cruel propaganda hoax by which the Soviets sought to convince naive foreign visitors that everything was hunky-dory in the worker's socialist paradise.* In what sense does Sarah Palin deserve the descriptor "Potemkin"? What is the meaning of "Potemkin" in this context? And exactly how does Karl Rove fit into this?

It is a meaning, and a connection, that exists only in Andrew Sullivan's febrile imaginings. He evidently aims to denounce a certain style of Republican political rhetoric, and grasps randomly to pluck the names of two pet bogeys -- Rove and Palin -- out of thin air. To him, these people are indeed merely symbols, and it doesn't occur to him that there might be anything offenisve in mixing them together in a comparison to Mahoud Ahmadinejad.

If a supposedly serious political commentator like Sullivan doesn't hesitate to say such things, why are we shocked when a late-night comic jokes about A-Rod having sex with Palin's 14-year-old daughter?

UPDATE II by Smitty:
I think a better title would have been: "If Sarah Palin is a Karl Rove production, does that mean Andrew Sullivan is Trig?"

UPDATE III: * Struck the incorrect sentence about "Potemkin villages," a concept which several historical-minded commenters tell me dates to the time of Catherine the Great, and not the Soviet era.

UPDATE IV: And welcome Instapundit readers. Insty links Ann Althouse working over Sully on the Palin front. I think Althouse misses the basic dynamic of what Sullivan (and others) are doing. It's as simple as this: "Bush sucked. Therefore, we can say anything we want to about any Republican."

Go back to that Frank Rich column I ignored Sunday morning. Everybody in the news business gets e-mails from cranks. Shep Smith reaches a television viewership of a million or so, and gets crank e-mails, whiich he mentions in relation to the Holocaust Museum shooting. This, says Frank Rich, is the smoking gun proving that Republican "Obama haters" have blood on their hands.

Well, no, it doesn't. Here's a little clue for the clueless: The Holocaust Museum shooter used to send crazy letters and e-mails to The Washington Times when I worked there. He probably sent the same kind of crap to lots of publications. That's what crackpots do. It has nothing to do with the Republican Party.

In the current political climate, the liberal media have some kind of Bush = Nixon = Hitler formulation in their minds that justifies them saying anything they want about Republicans. And do you know who I blame for that? Republicans.

The GOP's media operations are third-rate. Cynthia Yockey is running a one-woman campaign against Letterman. Where are the Republican Party media operatives lending her assistance and support? Nowhere.

If the Republican Party even has media operatives, that is. They certainly don't have good ones. And when you run a bad media operation, you get bad media.

UPDATE V: Also linked by Nice Deb, who notes that CBS compared Ahmadinejad to Bush on June 8.

UPDATE VI: Wow. Linked twice by Insty on the same post. George Carlin called it "vuja de": When you get the feeling that nothing like this has ever happened before. Did I mention that Bill Kristol is wrong?

Yes, Maher, this *is* that for which you voted

by Smitty (h/t Digg, THRFeed)

Self-described libertarian pundit Bill Maher ripped Barak Obama during a lengthy monologue on his HBO program Friday night, accusing the president of being obsessed with appearing on TV and failing to come through on pre-election promises.
"This is not what I voted for," Maher said. “I don’t want my president to be a TV star.”

Yes, Maher, you sorry sack of stuff, you're getting that for which you voted . If you watch the 5 entire minute clip, you see this invertebrate claim to have his panties in a bunch about the POTUS, and then blame all of the crappy policy for which he voted upon Republicans, banks, insurance companies, etc. Stacy and I missed Maher's roundup, about which we are formally miffed, of course.

Listen, ladies and gentlemen of the Left: vote thug, expect mugging. Hmm. I think I just came up with my Tea Party sign.

Yes, Left, you're in character for lacking introspection, for projecting your shortcomings and fears upon your opponents, for ignoring history and the Constitution, for attempting to bring to pass a Utopian fantasy.

Next time, vote for for a common sense implant.

It's not every day I quote Krugman

And more or less favorably at that!

In an interview with the British Observer, liberal economist Paul Krugman confronts the possibility that our current economic problems do not lend themselves to a quick fix:

The risk for long stagnation is really high . . .
The size of the shock to our systems is going to be much bigger than what happened to Japan in the 1990s. . . .

Most people seem to believe that the mess we're in is just an ordinary recession -- a few quarters of bad news, and then we'll be right back on our feet again. The problem with that belief is that the disastrous meltdown of housing values over the past three years is unprecedented in recent American history.

Not since the crash of 1929 has the U.S. economy sustained such a drastic loss of asset value. Recovering from that kind of catastrophe will not be easy or quick, and fully recovery will only be delayed by the kinds of neo-Keynesian approach being pursued by Pelosi, Reid and Obama.

The Fundamentals Still Suck, and The Worse Is Yet To Come.

UPDATE: How bad is it? Joe Biden admits they "guessed wrong" about the stimulus. Heh.

Rule 5 Sunday

by Smitty

Rule 5 Sunday, that weekly respite from everything else in favor of appreciation of beauty as such.
When you email Smitty with "Rule 5" in the Subject:, it gets in GMail for this roundup. Filter are cool. I then walk through chronologically and build this post, unless someone has flattered my pathetic ego sufficiently to claw their way to the top. To work.

• DSM at Reboot Congress suggests Dana Loesch, and we concur.
• Freakonomics heard about my Catharine Zeta-Jones problem, and played to my weakness
• Little Miss Attila had her Conservative Cuties roundup, to augment Melissa's. I'll take my omission as well-deserved punishment.
• Donald Douglas contributes Heidi Montag. <rant>One of the actual benefits of a full-on economic crash is that this completely stillborn practice of piercing, may, itself, get a stake in the heart. While I'm not so reactionary as to despise earrings, this whole business of shrapnel in odd places has got to go.</rant>
• Unexpected contributor Daniel Hannan had a shot of himself with the Iron Lady. Governor Palin: you know whom to emulate.
• Fisherville Mike artfully works Megan Fox into a post about the VA Democratic Party primary.
• The Skepticrats features a meditation upon the topic of hair. Follicly challenged as I am, I weep for baldness from one eye and beauty from the other.
• Freeberg may or may not have posted a picture of himself, for the ladies.
• rightofcourse, considering the ladies posts an Eastwood clip.
• Jeffords over at the Eye of Polyphemus has a Cameron Diaz moment. Let's up the ante, with some NSFW "Cougar Den", from SNL, with Cameron:

• Wyblog features Angelina Jolie in the rain. Slightly safer for work than a wet t-shirt contest.
• Paco remains a favorite contributor. These screen sirens make an important contribution to our argument that Rule 5 is a means of cultural enrichment. Thank you, sir.
• Lance contributes crucial research in the WTF CA? field:
  Here's the latest.
  And another.
  And another.
  And another
  And that is what we call selfless devotion to blogging in general, and Rule 5 in particular.
• Carol contributes a shot of Jeff Chandler. Read the whole post. Tragic end.
• The Seven Deadly Sins contributes a redhead discussing glowing monkeys. She mentions a YouTube channel. Hmmm.
• The Rule 5 Compliance Committee at The Camp of the Saints has selected Kim Novak for inclusion this week. Approved as submitted.
• That sly old Dustbury has committed Original Shin. Spot on, old boy!
• Pat down in Shreveport is getting Troggy on us with the input.
  • She noted the ouster of Carrie Prejean.
  • She also posted twice on Stormy Daniels, noting:

    she hosted the F.A.M.E. awards this week in Los Angeles. That's Fans of Adult Media. I mean, if that doesn't qualify you for a viable Senate run these days, what does?

  I dunno. At a glance, she appears to have had a lot of work done. However, looking at some Congresscritters, has Stormy had enough work done to qualify for the either house? Actually, I'm quite blissful in my ignorance on this one. Please leave that question unanswered.

---

That's all for now. Send updates/flames to Smitty, and hit the tip jar, ye ungrateful ones.

Bloggregating the Iran election

NTCNew.com has your Sunday morning round-up. The aggregation is still being updated, and linkage from other bloggers is most enthusiastically encouraged.

This round-up is a good example of the NTCNews.com approach to doing round-up coverage on major news stories. Top headlines with brief excerpts and links to news sources, blog reactions and video. Nothing fancy or elaborate, a formula so simple that even dumb bloggers (like me, Smitty and Jimmie Bise Jr.) can do it. Like the slogan says, "More News. Less Money. No Bow Tie."

Also, no opinion, no attitude and no snark. NTCNews.com offers a daily editorial (including guest contributions from bloggers) called "300 Hundred Words Or Less." Other than that, it's a Joe Friday "Just-the-facts-ma'am" approach to news blogging. The sidebars are filled with RSS feeds for news sources and bloggers so that, even when we're not online, the page is continually updated with fresh matterial.

We think it's pretty cool. Please check it out.

Amplifying 'Zo

by Smitty

Alonzo Rachel has a clip pointing out that Jon Stewart doesn't mind mentioning the military as an example of the federal government running something well, when it's useful as a pro-socialized medicine argument. The clip has a hilarious ending when 'Zo realizes he's starting to cross the Olbermann Horizon.
Now, set aside the vitriol spewed about the Bush Administration's handling of Iraq. As a service member, let me elaborate on points Even More Insidious than the ones 'Zo raises about the military and health care.

• The military screens out the unfit. This would be like practicing exposure of imperfect infants.
• The UCMJ makes it perfectly legal to control what you eat, how much you take exercise, take random urinalysis samples in case you had excessive fun last weekend, and so forth.
• The vast majority of people in military medicine are ousted after 30 years. VA medicine is more a commode than commodious example for Stewart to employ for his argument.

My personal tastes run to the dirt simple. I can tell you that the authoritarian system of the military in general, and military medicine in particular, will suit many people fine. Those 300 pound couch potato dudes are going to have an NCO calmly explain to them to put down the wii controller and fall in for a wee bit of exercise. We'll all get our American Idol on as we go on a formation run for some jodies. We'll have a blast. Maybe not Jane Fonda and Joan Baez, but the rest of us. Great team building.
So here is the point: people scale as effectively as politicians deliver on campaign promises. The reason military organizations and military medicine work to the degree they do is that they are grossly authoritarian systems. You may think you will, but you will quickly hate it when Nutrition is not a Private Matter.

Further Moronic Jackass Responses Anticipated [Bumped]

by Smitty

This week's Full Metal Jacket Reach Around goes out to a sad piece of work in New York City. Retire, Letterman: it's the most honorable thing you can do. As with the bulk of ancient war-horses, however, his descent into the bowels of self-parody shall likely be neither brief nor pleasant.
So let's talk linky-love instead. In order to keep the author engaged, we'll see if grouping links by subject affords any excitement.

Non fans of the twit who inspired this week's backronym:

• The Eye of Polyphemus
• Moralia, though I'm tired enough to be unsure whether I've guaged the snark correctly.
• The South Texian drawls some conclusions:

  But I'll just be damned if I'll ever give any respect to anyone who feels free to insult those "proles" who don't inhabit the rarefied echelons of academia or the old media. An academic I may be, but my father is a retired federal law enforcement officer and Marine Corps veteran, and my late brother was a construction worker. For anyone who thinks less of me because of that, I have your due deference right here.

Those who liked last Sunday's rebuttal of Playboor:

• Another Black Conservative weighed in on Bonnie Erbe.
• T-Pundit, who seems to think it would be a slow ride situation.
• The Blue Collar Republican picked up the AOL side of the story.
• Tangentially related, Nicedeb's hat tip to Ace of Spades. I mean, really: how can you not like a dude sharing a name, and dare I say, attitude, with classic Motörhead?

The pack who weighed in on the Publius publication:

• Trog-daddy
• Carolyn Tackett
• Pat at So it Goes in Shreveport
• Some blog namedget this: "Instapundit".
• The Christian Barbarian
• Patriot Room.
Also,
• Blogs for Victory weighed in.
• Thoughts from Macsmind.
• Southern Appeal chipped in, with about the coolest logo I've seen in some time, as well as some excellent background.

Tragedies at a clinic, a recruiting office, and a museum:

• The Daley Gator, not once but twice.
• Carolyn Tackett on Tiller and the Holocaust Museum
• The Conservative Political Report.
• Zoominac.
• We have a helpful reminder from Bits of Brain: Only White People Can Be Racist. Ah, it's all in focus now. Focus. The Conservatives Who Say: Focus!
• Wizwow noted that von Brunn was a journalism major. What does Janet Napolitano have to say about that?
• Transterrestrial says:

  You’d almost think that Jeremiah Wright was the guy who shot up the Holocaust Museum.

  Well, no. Employing the First Amendment in arguably tasteless ways is not the same thing as illegally abusing the Second Amendment. Let's eschew lefty moral equivalencies, Luke: that side of the Force was left in the toaster too long. (And that is about as close as I can get to 'defending' Wright.)
• Douglas mockingly calls for a Neocon Hate Crimes Prevention Act. Nothing short of beheading will halt my thought-crime spree.

Obamacare, soon to lighten a wallet very near you, and other economic seppuku:

• Obi's Sister singled out the Kennedy-Dodd bill for special attention in her Useful Idiots roundup.
• Dogfight at Bankstown liked the Whitehouse stenography pool.

Among the ones who dug theObama Job Saver post:

• The BlogProf.
• Also, the mean ol' meany.
• The Rhetorican enjoyed a laugh at Andrew Sullivan's consternation over 'That damn CBO chart'. Boo hoo, 'tard.
• Meanwhile, Scared Monkeys tackles hope and change-matics, that newer-than-new branch of 'rithmatic.
The Camp of the Saints also weighed in.

"Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a blogger of wealth and taste" section:

• Donald Douglas noted that Stacy didn't make the 30 best conservative columnists list.
• Fisherville Mike had sympathies, as well.
• The gracious Pat in Shreveport even posted a photo of the devil.
• As American Speedo Power notes, Melissa realized her mistake before she washed her hands of the topic and sealed Stacy's fate.
• Paco also picked up the Stacy sympathy meme.
• The Camp of the Saints: RSM does not suck...He trucks...
  Slaps the pucker/right off Tucker/the lame, insipid/rake-in-the-mucker/Burma Shave

Those who thought the Google riff was notable, and they should, as this was my jape:

• Ye Olde Troglopundit
• rightofcourse
• Whereas Paco picked up the regular Midway post.

Those who remembered us in the context of the Cairo "Everyone was as bad as everyone else, and 2 is morally equivalent to 3, since both are prime numbers" speech:

• The Trogadelic one.
• The Conservative Political Report.

Those who were willing to overlook a headful of sail fuel in the name of Rule 5 (translation: bothered to note Megan Fox, not that this implies wasting minute #1 on her silly flick)

• Again the Troggage
• The Daley Gator
• The Blog Prof.

The eminently tasteful who liked the Corleone Conservatives post:

• Trog-lips Lance

Little Green Footballs lavishes garish fruit, leaving groups frazzled:

• Obi's Sister drops a mention.
• Donald Douglas offered coverage of the Yid With Lid banning. Does Charles Johnson want to replace Letterman?

Ones who appreciated Southern by the Grace of God:

• rightofcourse

Those suffering from post-prejean-partum-pablum:

• rightofcourse
  

National Offend a Feminist Week linkage:

• The Daley Gator

The "Chris Matthews is arguably the biggest piece of work in the Country" section:

• The Daley Gator

Reservation Conservatives, and their most convenient disposal:

• Lead and Gold.
• The Camp of the Saints

Ones who enjoyed the ESR quotation:

• The Christian Barbarian

The Committee to Make Brooks Bashing an Olympic Sport:

• Vodkapundit, he of the atomic liver, liked the "do the opposite of Dave Brooks" advice.
• The Enterprising Paco.

The "Can Stacy get his picture taken with Deeds?" Dapartment:

• Tigerhawk points out how much we Virginians owe Stacy for bumping TMac. Now we just have to get McDonnell elected.
• Fisherville Mike is on board with the photo op.

Special mention:

• Obi's Sister increased the attractiveness of a photo containing Stacy McCain.
• Moralia's been blogging for a year.
• Steynian, who still shames my roundup-fu.
• Dustbury three word commentary. Like dieting haiku!
• Also, Paco: "A fine oration." So hire RSM for a speech, unless you prefer someone who'll help with your insomnia.
• Adirenne's Catholic Corner requests a Smitty. There has been some consultation on the topic, but my brother, while close, prefers his Harley to a web browser.
• The Political Castaway links us while listing Top 6 Questions for TOTUS. For rather large values of 6.
• Sarah at Blue Shelled thinks that Only Kindness Matters. Lady, kindness is founded upon reciprocity. Your attention is drawn to Game Theory. Kindness matters in an ultimate, theological sense. If you can't maintain the focus on this in the face of severe strain, things will not go well, I fear.
• No Runny Eggs lists Stacy for Rule 5 Czar, though all the power has been delegated to the Porch Manqué Czar.
• The Nashville Post on Pastor Wright: The hits just keep on comin'
• The Track-a-'Crat noted us while giving you some Greg Morton linkage, in case you missed that genius.
• Fisherville Mike understands the explosive demand for fireworks.

Previously...
NOTE FROM RSM: My colleague Smitty text-messages that this FMJ Saturday roundup is incomplete, due to real-life commitments which cannot be evaded. So if you didn't get the linky-love you were expecting, please link yourself up in the comment fields and we'll see if we can't make up the FMJRA Rule 2 factor at some future point.
Meanwhile, patriotic contributions to the Emergency Fireworks Fund are gratefully appreciated. Even a greedy capitalist blogger like me wouldn't want to be accused of selling linky-love, but . . .

---

AND NOW:
Porch Manqué Central thanks the dedicated readers of this blog for their indulgence and link-fu. Blessings and clicks for all my friends. Oh, and sorry if bumping this wiped out some replies to the original *gulp*. Didn't know! Forgive, forgive...

Blame Tigerhawk for this

I'm looking at SiteMeter and seeing more click-overs from Tigerhawk, but I don't see where he's got any new linkage to me. Ergo, he got some kind of big 'Lanche today, and I'm getting extra traffic from the blogroll or something.

But he's got good stuff, including this:

Marriage and housework: "Marriage is no longer a man's path to less housework."

The hell you say. If marriage doesn't decrease your housework, guys, you're doing something wrong. You do it right, you'll occasionally get breakfast in bed and never even have to think about the laundry.

Before you ladies start screaming "sexist patriarchal monster!" -- guilty as charged, ma'am -- you really need to think about the alternatives. I was completely autonomous as a bachelor. My mother worked, and she died when I was 16. There were just us three boys (no sisters), and I had plenty of experience with cooking, cleaning and laundry. So it wasn't as if I needed those services, but the package deal . . .

A free-market economist Thomas Sowell could explain all this. Think trade-offs, efficiencies of scale, stuff like that.

There is such a thing as a marriage market and, given current market conditions, there is a noticeable surplus of angry careerist bitches who consider domestic drudgery beneath their dignity as womyn. Therefore, if only as a marketing strategy, no matter how demeaning you consider it to scrub toilets or fold towels, try to pretend as if nothing else on earth could give you greater pleasure.

Honestly. You're already faking orgasms so . . .

The worst is yet to come

First, the not-entirely-pessimistic news from the chairwoman of the FDIC, Sheila Bair:

"There are still some troubled assets on the books and we still have an economy that's under significant stress," said Bair in a 90-minute interview with Forbes reporters and editors on Friday.
"We still don't know how deep the recession is going to be," she said . . .
Bair reminded, 21 insured institutions failed in the first three months of 2009, the most bank failures since 1992. The FDIC's list of problem banks grew to 305 from 252. Those 305 banks at risk of failure have some $220 billion in assets. . . .
"Hopefully there are no more events that create liquidity stresses on the banks," Bair said, knocking on a wooden conference room table, "and now we're having more good old-fashioned capital insolvencies."

I would submit that when the FDIC chair is in a knock-on-wood situation vis-a-vis a collapse of the banking industry, things are probably much worse than we imagine. And now for the truly scary stuff:

A housing rebound is a virtual impossibility. Homeowners currently have the least amount of equity in their homes on record. Overall, the number of borrowers underwater climbed to 20.4 million at the end of the first quarter, up from 16.3 million at the end of the fourth quarter. . . .
There are 75 million homes in the United States. One-third of homeowners have no mortgage, so that means that 41% of all homeowners with a mortgage are underwater. With prices destined for another 10% to 20% drop, the number of underwater borrowers will reach 25 million.
There are over 4 million homes for sale in the US today. This is about one year’s worth of inventory at current sales levels. You can be sure that another one million people would love to sell their homes, but have yet to put them on the market. And there’s a tsunami of Alt-A mortgage resets now approaching our shores. That will get under way in 2010, and won’t peak until 2013. These Alt-A mortgages are already defaulting at a 20% rate today. There are $2.4 trillion Alt-A loans outstanding. . . .
With the 30-year mortgage rate approaching 5.7%, mortgage refinancing activity has plunged about 60% in the last 2 months. Mortgage applications for new home purchases collapsed at a 20% annual rate in May, too. Normality in the mortgage market appears to be years away.

There's much more where that came from. Frightening. Both of those items via The Johnsville News. And now, via Instapundit, we find Megan McArdle confronted by unrealistic expectations in DC real estate., where a $4,000 reduction to $495,000 is a "NEW LOW PRICE" on a 1,000-square-foot townhouse that sold for $460,000 four years ago.

This is perhaps the most frightening news of all, that so many people still haven't adjusted their expectations to economic reality. Maybe they're under the influence of Kudlowism or, more likely, they're liberals who think that the Department of Unicorns and Rainbows has already fixed the economy.

People who haven't actually tried to sell their homes, and who haven't paid attention to the real-estate market, seem to imagine that the crash that hit last September was just a blip signaling a short-term recession and now we're in blue-sky territory. When the sheriff's auction becomes the primary venue for home sales, maybe people will start paying attention.

Andrew Sullivan is a 'conservative'in what sense of the word?

Sully accuses Glenn Reynolds of "partisan shenanigans":

[T]he huge deficits projected in the future have virtually nothing to do with Obama's proposals on healthcare or energy. They are a function of inherited entitlement spending, the legacy of two open-ended wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the revenue lost from the current depression (and the last). All of this was inherited by Obama . . .

Except that it wasn't. And Sully's argument is so astonishingly counterfactual that one scarcely knows where to begin debunking it.

First, huge deficits are not merely "projected in the future," they are already upon us. This year, the federal government will borrow 46 cents for every dollar it spends. Predictably -- well, I predicted it, anyway -- the bond market is getting jittery and inflation looms.

Second, the list of causes to which Sully attributes these deficits does not include either (a) the February 2008 stimulus, (b) the April 2008 stimulus, (c) the October 2008 TARP bailout, or (d) the $787 billion stimulus that Obama signed on Feb. 17 of this year.

Obama was not present for the February and April 2008 stimulus votes, but he certainly did not oppose those measures. He voted "yes" on the October 2008 TARP, and I clearly remember the Feb. 8 speech this year in which Obama demanded that the Senate pass the stimulus bill that had not gotten a single GOP vote in the House.

One can only estimate what these Obama-backed measures have added to the deficit. Whatever the total amount, it is not zero and therefore it is false to say that the deficit was entirely "inherited" by Obama.

Is Sullivan for or against massive deficits? If he opposes deficits, where are his criticisms of the neo-Keynesian schemes that have been successively implemented over the past 16 months? If blaming Obama for the deficits is "partisan shenanigans," then what shall we call Sullivan's attempt to exculpate Obama for the soaring deficits?

Moreover, is there any criticism of Obama that Sullivan considers legitimate? Or rather, is he now as worshipfully awestruck of Obama as he was of Bush 2001-03?

Eventually, Sully will be even more disappointed in his new hero than he was in his old hero. A year from now, after the sucker's rally ends, after the bottom falls out, interest rates and inflation skyrocket, and unemployment is somewhere north of 12 percent, Sully will be tut-tutting and will have forgotten his slams on "Insta-hack," Some of us, however, will be ready to remind him.

Ted Kennedy gets $2M for autobiography

Politico reports:

Sen. Ted Kennedy, the veteran Massachusetts Democrat who is battling brain cancer, was paid nearly $2 million last year for an author’s advance on a new autobiography, according to financial disclosure reports made public Friday.

Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment.

Massive New Deficit Spending!

They warned you if you voted for McCain, there would be huge new deficits, expanded arms programs, and an increase in our trade imbalance with China -- and they were right!

Yes, my fellow Americans, The Other McCain administration embarked upon a deficit-spending program to purchase fireworks for the Fourth of July. The retail value of this mighty arsenal (acquired from Granny's Fireworks in Watauga, Tenn.) is $800, although the actual purchase price is strictly classified. Why? Because if my wife finds out how much I've spent, she'll inflict tortures that will make waterboarding at Gitmo look mild by comparison.

Due to the recession -- we blame Bush! -- reader contributions to the Emergency Fireworks Fund have failed to meet FY09 projections of our administration's "fireworks czar" (a graduate of the prestigious Timothy Geither School of Mathematics). Therefore, we are now suffering a pyrotechnical deficit of crisis proportions.

Nevertheless, we have Hope that you will give generously because, like Joe Biden says, it's patriotic.

(GRAPHIC: No Sheeples Here.) BTW, everyone is invited to the Third Annual Camp FUBAR Fourth of July Fireworks & BBQ Blowout on the shores of Alabama's beautiful Lake Weiss. A Facebook page for this legendary event will be posted soon.

You may be asking yourself, "Why should I drive to Cherokee County, Alabama, to eat barbecue and watch a bunch of crazy rednecks shoot off fireworks?" Well, this ain't just any ol' barbecue. One of the South's leading BBQ chefs, Sasquatch, has agreed to provide the 'cue. Sasquatch's Carolina-style smoked pork shoulder is so good, it ought to be against the law. And ask anyone who's seen a McCain Family fireworks show: It's better than Disneyworld! Here's video of our historic 2005 finale:

So please give generously to the Emergency Fireworks Fund -- it's for the children!

My cousin, Mandy Gulledge

I've blogged about Cousin Mandy here before. She's a very talented singer and actress (as well as a wife and a mom) who lives in Alabama. Let me tell you a funny story.

Today I was checking my e-mail and noticed I had a bunch of notifications from Facebook: "So-and-so has commented on your note . . . ." Now, because my laptop is somewhat memory-impaired, I don't often check my Facebook (an unusually memory-intensive site) so if you're one of the 120 FB friend requests I haven't approved yet, it's not that I'm a snob, I'm just waaaaayy behind on my Facebooking.

Well, I kept seeing these notifications and got to wondering what it was that was being commented on so much. So I clicked over. My blog posts automatically feed into my Facebook profile via RSS, and here was this long thread of comments on my latest Glenn Greenwald-bashing post. Turns out, it was Dave C. from Point of a Gun and another conservative mixing it up with Cousin Mandy.

Mandy was more or less agreeing with Greenwald about "fearing" Republicans, and it started a regular donnybrook on Facebook, with Dave probably wondering, "Who's this wacko woman bashing on my buddy McCain?" Heh. Crazy runs in the family.

My late mother was first cousins with Mandy's mother Joanne, which makes us second cousins. In case you forgot the last time I blogged about my cousins from Montgomery, here's Mandy:

Crazy ain't all that runs in the family. So y'all be nice to cuz, y'hear? Mandy's married, but you ought to see her sister Lizzy, who moved out to Hollywood:

Whenever Yankees start making jokes about Southerners and their cousins, I always say, "Yeah, but you ain't seen my cousins!"

Klavan not keen on "preening self-righteousness"

by Smitty

Andrew Klavan scores again on PJTV. He hammers the nebulous bumper sticker "War is not the answer" in an amusing way for ~3 minutes. It's sort of the flip side of the larger-diameter coin Mike Judge is serving up as The Good Family, which is well worth a TiVo for casual viewing.
Fight the right fight, people.

Chris Matthews worries Palin 'talkinglanguage of far right . . of paranoia'

Via Newsbusters, which has transcript:

Wonder who gave him this idea? Joan Walsh or David Letterman?

Daughter of GOP politician seeks toavoid sexist humor from Letterman

The daughter of the late Rep. Sono Bono announces she'll become the Republican congressman's son:

Chastity Bono . . . is in the early stages of changing his gender -- transitioning from female to male. . . .
Bono, the child of legendary entertainers Sonny and Cher, began the process earlier this year, shortly after his 40th birthday.
"Yes, it's true -- Chaz, after many years of consideration, has made the courageous decision to honor his true identity," confirmed Bono's publicist, Howard Bragman.

No more misogyny from Letterman! Rumors that Chaz Bono will declare himself a Democrat could not be confirmed at press time.

VRWC Memo to Doctor Zero

Your advice to Sarah Palin is, I'm sure, much appreciated. Consider that her current problem does not appear to be a shortage of advice. Rather, it seems that she has hitherto lacked an experienced communications/strategy operative in whom she has complete trust.

Some months ago -- it was in February, to be exact, after the uproar over the governor's CPAC no-show -- it occurred to me that Gov. Palin was getting some bad advice from somewhere. Inquiries were made, and possible sources of bad advice were identified.

Perhaps further investigation is necessary. You should be patient, Doctor Zero. It is only mid-2009.

Does Jeff Goldstein hate Bristol Palin?

All is fair in love, war and comedy, He of the Massive Triceps seems to be saying:

Okay then. I justify it this way:
This is what comedians do -- particularly those who are charged with topical humor on a nightly basis. . . .
For good or ill, Bristol Palin’s pregnancy long ago became a public event, and it is part and parcel of the “Sarah Palin” construct Letterman was taking aim at.
What is interesting to me is that, ordinarily, teenage pregnancy — and tacit acceptance of same — is tied to the left. Which is to say, the left generally doesn’t snipe at teen pregnancy as a problematic moral condition.

Trust me, Jeff, I've been burned on this flame a time or two. At this point, it's reasonably safe hatin' on Levi Johnston, but ixnay on the Istolbray. (BTW, I came this close to trying some ironically nuanced OUTLAW humor here, but decided discretion was the better part of valor.)

'Extreme right-wing rhetoric'for Joan Walsh? Two words . . .

. . . and it ain't "thank you," ma'am:

I was on "Hardball" today talking about the climate of extreme right-wing rhetoric today, and whether it had anything to do with Wednesday's tragic shooting at Washington's Holocaust Museum, or the May 31 murder of Dr. George Tiller by an antiabortion crackpot. . . .
Still, it's hard not to think about the extreme right-wing rhetoric, especially about Barack Obama, and whether it could conceivably lead to more right-wing violence.

OK, sweetie, that's two "extremes" and three "right-wings" in two paragraphs, which is laying it on a bit thick, don't you think? As for the Tiller murder, I'll let Becky Banks speak for the pro-lifers. Having done a bit of sifting of the facts on James Von Brunn, exactly how does a neocon-hating 9/11 Truther (e.g., Rosie O'Donnell) qualify as "right-wing," extreme or otherwise?

There's a definitional problem here, and when you blame Rush Limbaugh, Ms. Walsh, you are trying to have your neocon-hating cake and eat it, too. (Via Memeorandum.)

UPDATE: Sorry, had to delete the video, which evidently contained some buggy script that was causing the page to malfunction. Speaking of buggy scripts, the fact that the Weekly Standard apparently was on the shooter's target list is kind of interesting, eh? I mean, OK, I didn't like Fred Barnes' last book too much but . . .

Wait a minute. Bill Kristol is a known associate . . . .

Just like Terry McAuliffe is a known associate . . . .

A conspiracy so immense! These "extremists" will next be gunning for . . . Jeff Goldstein?