Enough Already Blogenlust

Avedon and Digby are involved in an interesting discussion about the "freakish confidence" recently exhibited by Republicans. The question, first raised by Avedon, is why are they so confident about something that could very easily bite them in the ass at the voting booth? As Digby wrote, "It really does make you have to at least consider the possibility that they know they will not lose elections."

I recently had a conversation with Far East about this very same topic. What crossed my mind in that conversation was how much the Left's relationship with the Right mirrors an abusive relationship. The posturing, policies, and false bravado, in conjunction with the electoral success of this Administration and its political Party is having an adverse effect on the emotional mindset of the Left. Like the abused in an abusive relationship, the Left's first reaction is to buy into the false power and intelligence of the Right, which causes us to cower and freak out about what might come next. The best example of this is the talk about past rigged elections, and the prospects of future rigged elections.

My own opinion is that the Right loves our worries and conspiracies about vote rigging because it reinforces our perception of their dominance and our self-awareness of our feebleness.  Whether we know it or not, talking about rigged elections or wondering whether the Republicans are too confident because they know they're going to win only reinforces our problems and does nothing to rectify the lack of our Party's political power. 

Conservatives have been waging a political psy-op war against us for a generation, and until we realize that our reactions are reinforcing their strategy, nothing will change.  Now I don't have a lot of answers for how to break this cycle, but a good start would be to cease all discussion about how the Republicans control our destiny, and start talking and thinking about how we can establish a political identity that is not a reaction to the Republican Party.

                   Lawyers, Guns and Money

I'm not the sort that reads Powerline with any regularity, but this caught my attention:

It's great to see someone standing up for colonialism, especially British colonialism. I agree wholeheartedly with this observation, for example:

Had Britain had the courage to face down Gandhi and his rabble a few years longer, the tragedy that was the partititon of India might have been avoided.

My own opinion is that the Right loves our worries and conspiracies about vote rigging because it reinforces our perception of their dominance and our self-awareness of our feebleness. Whether we know it or not, talking about rigged elections or wondering whether the Republicans are too confident because they know they're going to win only reinforces our problems and does nothing to rectify the lack of our Party's political power.

Conservatives have been waging a political psy-op war against us for a generation, and until we realize that our reactions are reinforcing their strategy, nothing will change. Now I don't have a lot of answers for how to break this cycle, but a good start would be to cease all discussion about how the Republicans control our destiny, and start talking and thinking about how we can establish a political identity that is not a reaction to the Republican Party.

Lawyers, Guns and Money

I'm not the sort that reads Powerline with any regularity, but this caught my attention:

It's great to see someone standing up for colonialism, especially British colonialism. I agree wholeheartedly with this observation, for example:

Had Britain had the courage to face down Gandhi and his rabble a few years longer, the tragedy that was the partititon of India might have been avoided.

I don't know what to say.

I'm hardly a reflexive defender of Gandhi, or of the pacifist approach to politics. However, to suggest that "Gandhi and his rabble" were responsible for the horrors of partition, when in fact both the policy of partition and the Muslim-Hindu tensions that created the need for partition are direct consequences of British imperial policy, really goes beyond the pale.

Hmm. Let me restate that, because Assrocket likes to go beyond the pale. . Read on

WTF?         The Immoral Minority

And do absolutely nothing concerning these stories.

I don't know what to say.

I'm hardly a reflexive defender of Gandhi, or of the pacifist approach to politics. However, to suggest that "Gandhi and his rabble" were responsible for the horrors of partition, when in fact both the policy of partition and the Muslim-Hindu tensions that created the need for partition are direct consequences of British imperial policy, really goes beyond the pale.

Hmm. Let me restate that, because Assrocket likes to go beyond the pale. . Read on

Quote of the Day American Blog Party    

"Nations, like men, often march to the beat of different drummers, and the precise solutions of the United States can neither be dictated nor transplanted to others."
Robert F. Kennedy

Making Up Stories    Rox Populi

Now that the gang at Powerline and Michelle Malkin have been proven again to be the the lying tools that they are (uh, and blaming Tom Harkin or looking for another scapegoat sorta goes against the whole Republican "personal responsibility" thing, doesn't it?), they'll need to find, as Atrios and Hilzoy suggest, a new scandalous untruth to spread to their drooling minions.

In the interest of bi-partisanship, I think we should help them brainstorm some ideas.

What shall it be, then? Illegal immigrants sneak into San Diego homes to drink the blood of unsuspecting white babies? Jimmy Carter performed a human sacrifice in the Lincoln Bedroom back in '78 and that's why he's not going to the Pope's funeral? Hillary Clinton conspired to have a guy murdered and then covered it up? John Kerry shot his entire squad in Vietnam and replaced them with hippie look-a-likes he found partying with Hanoi Jane in Ho Chi Min City?

"Nations, like men, often march to the beat of different drummers, and the precise solutions of the United States can neither be dictated nor transplanted to others."
Robert F. Kennedy

Making Up Stories Rox Populi

Now that the gang at Powerline and Michelle Malkin have been proven again to be the the lying tools that they are (uh, and blaming Tom Harkin or looking for another scapegoat sorta goes against the whole Republican "personal responsibility" thing, doesn't it?), they'll need to find, as Atrios and Hilzoy suggest, a new scandalous untruth to spread to their drooling minions.

In the interest of bi-partisanship, I think we should help them brainstorm some ideas.

What shall it be, then? Illegal immigrants sneak into San Diego homes to drink the blood of unsuspecting white babies? Jimmy Carter performed a human sacrifice in the Lincoln Bedroom back in '78 and that's why he's not going to the Pope's funeral? Hillary Clinton conspired to have a guy murdered and then covered it up? John Kerry shot his entire squad in Vietnam and replaced them with hippie look-a-likes he found partying with Hanoi Jane in Ho Chi Min City?
Obviously, I'm not in my best "creative zone" this morning. So, help me out by leaving your suggestions in comments below.
",0]);D(["ce"]);D(["ms","2f64"]);//-->

Obviously, I'm not in my best "creative zone" this morning. So, help me out by leaving your suggestions in comments below.

Weird wingnuttery

or (A little Powerline bashing is always a good thing)

via Ezra Klein

Powerline's Hindrocket has a strange post about an apparent error that the NYTimes made in posting its article about the pope's death. They seem to have accidentally published it before it was finished, and so it read as follows: go to the article

I don't think I understand what the big deal is. The NYTimes article is very fair ("he defied easy definition: For all his conservatism on social and theological issues, he was decidedly forward-looking"), and Powerline's statement that they had their criticism ready to go, but had to go looking for a good quote is speculative at best. The only thing, in fact, that is clear is that the NYTimes intended to present more than one side. In the context of Heather's post below about the Washington Times' one-sidedness below, Hindrocket just looks like he's trying to pick a fight.

Michelle Malkin cites it as an example of how

The death of the Pope just couldn't stop the libs in the media from showing their true colors.

What are their true colors? That they wanted to make sure they had a quote from a supporter? Those crazy liberals, always trying to be fair...

. Powerline: The Great Unraveling

Powerline :A Sad Day

"What I don't understand is why this tragic case should be an occasion for the partisan hatred which currently bedevils our public life.

" I don't know how to account for it, unless one concludes that for some liberals, politics is about hate, period."

A picture of right wing zealots calling for Jeb Bush's head, yet it's liberals who hate.

Powerline again:

Why? Maybe they have "fallen half in love with death," as Noonan suggests? Or maybe they are just frustrated by losing elections, seeing the tide turn in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East (must Terri die for Bush's "sins"?), etc. Whatever the case, it makes for a sad and sorry spectacle.

A Christian conservative judge (with a price on his head) backed by the Conservative lead Supreme Court is ruling on this case, yet it's Bush hating liberals that are some how calling the shots. They should take a look in the mirror to find where the real hate is coming from.

DOWNLOADS: (883)

PLAYS: (2127)

Embed

Sean Hannity still wants Kevin Jennings' scalp so he can keep up with Glenn Beck.

But since his smear has been debunked about as thoroughly as a right-wing smear job ever can be, he's getting a bit, ah, desperate.

Last night he not only was still clinging desperately to the false notion that Jennings should have reported a teenager's sexual affair to authorities, but he came up with a new line of attack -- borrowed directly from the fine fools at Powerline -- claiming that Jennings, in "a 1977 speech," had praised "one of the founders of NAMBLA," a gay-rights pioneer named Harry Hay. Hannity calls him a "big supporter of NAMBLA."

As usual, the fine researchers at Media Matters have the whole story:

Power Line's Hinderaker cited Jennings' speech, NAMBLA. In an October 1 post, Power Line's John Hinderaker noted Jennings' 1997 speech and wrote: "Obama nominee Kevin Jennings actually said that the founder of NAMBLA -- the North American Man-Boy Love Association -- Harry Hay, is '[o]ne of the people that's always inspired me,' " ... Hinderaker's claim that Hay founded NAMBLA is false. As the Associated Press noted in 2002, Hay "in 1950 founded the secret network of support groups for gays known as the Mattachine Society." Hay wrote in the Gay Community News (retrieved from Nexis) in 1994, "I am not a member of NAMBLA, nor would it ever have been my inclination to be one."

Moreover, as the piece explains, Jennings' speech was part of a eulogy to Hay upon the occasion of his death, and specifically praised him for his work in the 1950s in organizing gay activists -- not for any of his later views.

Hannity must really be looking over his shoulder these days to be getting this desperate. Hey Sean, how are those ratings looking these days?

Wow, the right wing bloggers are really cracking up over Obama's victory. You don't believe me? Check this post out by John Hinderaker. I know he adores President Bush and thinks he's a genius and all, but this is a remarkable post.

The Importance of Being Careful

Obama thinks he is a good talker, but he is often undisciplined when he speaks. He needs to understand that as President, his words will be scrutinized and will have impact whether he intends it or not. In this regard, President Bush is an excellent model; Obama should take a lesson from his example. Bush never gets sloppy when he is speaking publicly.

He chooses his words with care and precision, which is why his style sometimes seems halting. In the eight years he has been President, it is remarkable how few gaffes or verbal blunders he has committed. If Obama doesn't raise his standards, he will exceed Bush's total before he is inaugurated.

Hinderaker actually believes this. It's weird because most Conservatives do believe that Obama's communication skills served him quite well during the election process. I guess he also missed this latest polling data that says Bush is leaving office more unpopular than Richard Nixon.

And they wonder why America has turned their backs on Conservatism.

They only support the troops when it suits them...

The NRO had a glowing op-ed to Pat on 05/04/04: "Courage and Honor." Pat and his family were treated with none of these. Yesterday---only silence because the propaganda was exposed. I wonder if Derbyshire will write a piece that says Tillman acted strangely when he tried to warn his "mates' that he was an American when he got shot and Derby only hopes that he would have done it differently if he were there....

Powerline weighs in and predictable says that there was no cover up at all:

There is no question that the initial misreporting of the circumstances of Tillman's death was stupid and improper. The claim of a government conspiracy to cover up the facts, however, is ludicrous.

Does he mean the rapper? They also painted Kevin Tillman as “an antiwar activist who has posted on far-left web sites...Well there you have it....He posted on some websites. Didn't he actually fight in Iraq? I guess they must have missed a few stories about the excellent way the military handled Pat Tillman's death...

Mahablog catches Rick Moran carrying out a fraud against the left..Moran says:

If it was good enough for your daddy/granddaddy’s war it’s good enough for yours,” seems to be what the Pentagon is saying with regards to trying to hype the accomplishments of Pat Tillman - whose character assassination by the left continues to this day - and Jessica Lynch, the young woman whose convoy was ambushed resulting in severe injuries and her capture by the Iraqis.

Barbara debunks his myth by checking out the posts he uses and says: I know it’s as common as ticks in Arkansas, but whenever I see this kind of depraved dishonesty from rightie bloggers I am disgusted anew.

Glenn Greenwald follows through also: The Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch frauds

Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks has been having an ongoing debate with John Hinderaker of Powerline on the subject of Jose Padilla. It's been a fascinating exercise in realizing how little one can debate with the classic conservative authoritarian mindset. Especially one that doesn't require facts to assert his side of the debate. The back and forth has left Cenk with just one question: Is John Hinderaker Ignorant or Purposefully Misleading?

I know which side I fall on, but I'm interested in hearing your take.