Treacher: Obama's Critics May Be Dumb But At Least They Know How Babies Are Made
— Ace

Andrew Sullivan asked why Obama's critics are so dumb on a Newsweek headline.

I skipped this, because he's irrelevant, but I need something to post.

From a live-tweet Sullivan did:

Comment From Mike D: Palin called you a “conspiracy kook” and blasted Newsweek for allowing you a cover. Do you ever worry that your more controversial views will overshadow your other writing?

Andrew: No. PalinÂ’s tweet made me come in my pants.

...

[Some other question]

I write what I think is true. I don’t give a damn about “reputation.” If I’m wrong I correct or re-think. Once a writer worries about these things, he’s like an actor watching the audience. In my opinion, far too many journalists worry about their reputation.

Treacher has his own joke on that. I like his joke and would just add a small variation on it.

"I gotta be me" has become the mantra for any asshole on reality tv acting like an asshole. The moment someone says "I gotta be me" you know you're listening to an asshole.

It's just egotism given the veneer of a justification: Honesty demands I be an asshole.

One last great thing about Treacher's post is that he reminded me of Sullivan's sexually-bent dream about Palin. Do you remember this? This is real. Treacher isn't making this up. Sullivan really dreamed this, and then posted it, without apparently worrying one bit about how it might look:

“I had a dream last night that I was lost in Sarah Palin’s garden. It was springtime, and there were bluebells everywhere. I suddenly realized where I was and tried to get out to the street. But there was just more garden …”

Some kind of oddball reverse sexual panic where a gay guy has a sudden weird feeling he might be straight. Ah, well.

I gotta be me, yo.

And what's up with the dude's Helter Skelter beard? "Bluebells" Sullivan needs to trim his mouth-bush.

Incidentally, Sullivan heartily endorsed Ron Paul for the Republican nomination, but of course he's in love with Obama.

Posted by: Ace at 08:09 AM | Comments (84)
Post contains 369 words, total size 2 kb.

ABC's Big Interview With The Ex Largely A Bust
— Ace

Interesting that nowhere in this report does Brian Ross make the connection that Marianne herself began an adulterous relationship with Gingrich while he was married to his first wife.

He mentions the first wife, and he mentions the beginning of Marianne's relationship with Gingrich; but aw shucks, he just forgot to mention or ask about that one bit.

She doesn't have any more allegations, if this is what she has. Even the "open marriage" thing sounds like it's her interpretation of something Gingrich said, rather than something he actually said.

Ross quickly dispenses with the little matter of a government informant alleging that Marianne sought $500,000 down, $10,000,000 total for "getting things done" in government. That part does sound a bit unlikely, but I'd sort of like to hear more.

Seems to me that if this is all she has, it's not enough, of itself, to do the job. But it has served her nicely to make it a big topic again Ross' pointed summary of Gingrich as a guy who left one cancer-struck wife and then an MS-struck one isn't going to help his numbers with women much. Or with men.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 07:00 AM | Comments (291)
Post contains 215 words, total size 3 kb.

Krauthammer: Hey No Fair Attacking Mitt! How Much Of The Establishment Conservative Media Protects Romney
— DrewM

Charles Krauthammer's Washington Post column is the latest entry in a genre common to a lot of big time conservative media types this primary: Attack those attacking Romney and ignore the same behavior by Romney.

Krauthammer goes after Gingrich and Perry for their attacks on Romney's time at Bain Capital as playing right into Obama's hands.

Then came the twist. Then came the most remarkable political surprise since the 2010 midterm: The struggling Democratic class-war narrative is suddenly given life and legitimacy by . . . Republicans! Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry make the case that private equity as practiced by RomneyÂ’s Bain Capital is nothing more than vulture capitalism looting companies and sucking them dry while casually destroying the lives of workers.

...

Suddenly RomneyÂ’s wealth, practices and taxes take center stage. And why not? If leading Republicans are denouncing rapacious capitalism that enriches the 1 percent while impoverishing everyone else, should this not be the paramount issue in a campaign occurring at a time of economic distress?

Now, economic inequality is an important issue, but the idea that it is the cause of America’s current economic troubles is absurd. Yet, in a stroke, the Republicans have succeeded in turning a Democratic talking point — a last-ditch attempt to salvage reelection by distracting from their record — into a central focus of the nation’s political discourse.

How quickly has the zeitgeist changed? Wednesday, the Republican House reconvened to reject ObamaÂ’s planned $1.2 trillion debt-ceiling increase. (Lacking Senate concurrence, the debt ceiling will be raised nonetheless.) Barely noticed. All eyes are on South Carolina and RomneyÂ’s taxes.

Let me say I'm not a fan of Gingrich's attacks on Romney and Bain but I don't think it's out of bounds for competing candidates to simply allow Romney's gloss on his record be the only word on the matter. As it is so much of Romney's actual record is supposedly out of bounds because "it was Massachusetts!". Romney and his supporters (in and out of the conservative media) already ask us to take a lot about his supposed conservatism on faith. Now we aren't supposed to kick the tires on issues that will certainly come up in a general election campaign? What exactly is so special about Mitt Romney that he gets all these breaks no one else is offered?

The underlying point Krauthammer seems to be making is, hey Romney is going to be the nominee so let's not make trouble for him. I'm sorry if it's inconvenient for both he and Romney but apparently other people aren't ready to attend Mitt's coronation. They seem to think one way of making sure these issues don't comeback to bite Romney and the GOP in the fall is to NOT nominate Mitt. That wild notion doesn't seem to be a consideration for Krauthammer.

That brings me to the second part of this media two-step. The next phase is to ignore the fact that Romney engages in exactly the kinds of attacks they have rule out of bounds when made against Mitt.

If it's illegitimate to attack Mitt on a core GOP belief such as "capitalism" surely it's illegitimate to attack from the left on entitlement reform. Clearly Obama and the Democrats are going to run against the Republican nominee by saying they want to throw old people into the streets and force them to eat out of dumpsters. It seems they would love some clips of a prominent Republican accusing the nominee of wanting to do just that and Mitt would have delivered them to Obama and the Democrats.

Quotes like this.

"I donÂ’t think the major problem is that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme," Romney said. "I think the problem is keeping it from becoming a Perry scheme."

Or this.

“Our nominee has to be someone who isn’t committed to abolishing Social Security, but who is committed to saving SocialSecurity.” – Mitt Romney... Governor Perry Believes Social Security Should Not Exist

Or finally, this.

"This is going to be a really big deal," said Lanhee Chan, Romney's policy director. "To make the argument that Social Security effectively has to be eliminated is a complete non starter."

"You've got millions of Americans who depend on Social Security," Chan added. "He's going to have a really tough time explaining why he wants to kill Social Security."

These attacks were made while Perry was still riding high and was just as likely to be the nominee as Mitt. Where was the outrage? Where was the simple acknowledgement from Krauthammer in today's column that as someone once said, "politics ain't beanbag"? No, Romney is always the victim who must be protected from his own past and from the same kind of attacks he is free to launch against others.

If Krauthammer or anyone wants to support Romney (Hi National Review!), have at it. Make your case as to why he's the best choice and let the chips fall where they may. But don't hide behind supposed impartial "analysis" as a way to shape the rules and debate to favor your guy.

*I originally posted this at my little blog since I'm trying to keep my anti-Romney stuff to a minimum here but this is just something that has irked me for months. So since I actually wanted people to see it, I'm posting it here as well.

Posted by: DrewM at 06:24 AM | Comments (214)
Post contains 920 words, total size 6 kb.

A Quick Thought on the Republican Debates
— Russ from Winterset

I didn't watch the debate last night. Truth be told, I haven't watched any of them since January third. Why? Because I've already voted (uhm, IOWA, remember), so it's not like any of this will influence my decision.

I am interested in the whole campaign strategy where Newt seems to think that Romney's past work for Bain Capital is newsworthy. Here's how I immediately respond to charges that Mitt Romney made "too much money" working for Bain Capital:

Mitt made millions working for Bain Capital. Bain Capital is still a going concern, making money for all its employees and business associates.

Newt made approximately $1.5 million consulting for Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac. Fannie & Freddie are giant, smoking holes in the ground that the Federal Government is still shoveling cash into to keep the fires burning.

Remind me again: Which candidate benefits from reminding Republicans about their prior work experience? This is like Jim Kelly criticizing Tom Brady for the fact that all his Super Bowl CHAMPIONSHIP rings look "too tacky".

(My vote in the caucus? Perry. That 'tard had a conservative record as governor of Texas, but after his "clown show" of going after Romney from the left on this issue I'm sort of hoping that he finds a Gila Monster in his urinal, IYKWIMAITTYD.)

Posted by: Russ from Winterset at 04:35 AM | Comments (205)
Post contains 231 words, total size 1 kb.

Top Headline Comments 1-20-12
— Gabriel Malor

FRIDAY!!!!!!

The U.S. made a major bust of one of the world's largest file-sharing sites yesterday, Mega Upload. The site was shut down and arrests were made . . . in New Zealand. The grand jury indictment makes interesting reading (PDF). In response, Anonymous crashed the DOJ webpage for about five minutes last night.

"Occupy Courts" will attempt to disrupt federal courthouses across the country today, as libtards protest the second anniversary of the Citizens United decision, which held that people do not give up their right to free speech when they exercise their right to free association.

"What a nice day to be killing jobs, eh?"

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 03:05 AM | Comments (257)
Post contains 115 words, total size 1 kb.

Overnight Open Thread
— CDR M

Ah, good evening morons. I'm filling in for Maet while he's off doing something somewhere. So get your tasty beverage and pull up a seat. It's time for the ONT.

Now, how many of you morons would've done the same damn thing as this guy? Jeopardy Contestant's Naughty Answer Sweeps The Web.

On Monday night's show, Jeopardy host Alex Trebek posed the question: 'A blow to the back of the neck is the punch named after this animal.'

A bespectacled and sweater-vested Mike immeditaely buzzed in: 'What is a donkey?' referring to a sexually graphic and violent act rather than the correct answer, 'What is a rabbit?' which refers to a punch often used in boxing.

Trebek tried to stifle his giggles as a stunned audience sat in silence until another contestant buzzed in with the right answer.

Video of this moment below the fold. more...

Posted by: CDR M at 06:00 PM | Comments (931)
Post contains 500 words, total size 5 kb.

Reminder: Archer on at Ten on FX
— Ace

Danger Zone!

Posted by: Ace at 05:10 PM | Comments (48)
Post contains 16 words, total size 1 kb.

The Finah in Carolina: Liveblogging the Final Four
— andy

It's March Madness in January as the freshly-winnowed field of four squares off against Gruntin' John King and whoever CNN can pull in from TNT and Cartoon Network.

Time: 8pm Eastern
Livestream: Somewhere in this vicinity
Minimum blood alcohol content requirement: 0.06

Standard reminder: Your comments do not automatically display. So don't ask "Why aren't my comments displaying?" They don't display.

They're not posted comments a la chat room. Instead they go to queue, which the producers (cobloggers) read, and we post them, by hand, if we think they make a good point.

Liveblog thingy below the fold. more...

Posted by: andy at 03:45 PM | Comments (633)
Post contains 124 words, total size 1 kb.

Romney to Occupy Heckler: "America's Right And You're Wrong"
— Ace

Ehh, I like it. Not earth shattering. It's nice to know he's on the conservative side of the "Is America worth emulating?" debate.

I got this from Daniel, but Allah just put it up too, with an older vid of Gingrich shutting up the hecklers, too.

Linked there is an article from Politico claiming that Romney is now fully "hawkish" on everything, which I doubt. He was not hawkish on the surge. He avoids taking hawkish stances.

Hawkish was Perry, who, frankly, was pretty much threatening to invade everyone at the end there.

BTW: Open thread/Open blog as I'm headed out to dinner. We'll be doing a liveblog tonight at 8. So, back then.

more...

Posted by: Ace at 01:46 PM | Comments (277)
Post contains 132 words, total size 2 kb.

Herman Cain Makes His "Unconventional Endorsement:" "The American people"
— Ace

Just a quick blog mention here, scroll down for it.

It's not crazy, really. It's a feel-good bit of pablum. It is the sweet, sweet populist music most of his supporters like hearing.

However, I don't get the point of announcing an "unconventional endorsement" only to make an endorsement which is so unconventional it's not an endorsement.

Why not just say, "I don't plan on endorsing anyone, I'll trust the wisdom of the American people"?

I gotta tell ya, any time you endorse someone, you piss someone off. Obviously other people disagree. But if your primary goal is to speak your peace and add your wisdom to the pile, you have to do that.

On the other hand, if your main goal is brand-promotion and brand-protection... they you refrain from pissing anyone off, don't you?

I see a lot of this.

Any opinion is going to be unpopular in some quarters. But that's the cost of it.

I guess six months back I should have spared myself and my readers a lot of sniping and bad feelings and simply endorsed You.

Or maybe endorsed three people, like NR. Spread the love around. Carefully balance out an endorsement among several key constittuencies, all politic-like.

Posted by: Ace at 01:14 PM | Comments (137)
Post contains 221 words, total size 1 kb.