|
|
|
August 09, 2006
What about Bob? And weave? (And Hillary?)
Will the Lieberman defeat help or hurt Hillary Clinton? Dick Morris (who knows her well) says it will definitely hurt her: "The big loser last night was Hillary Clinton," Morris said. "She has to go through the Democratic [presidential] primaries to win and it is an increasingly hostile place for someone who voted for the war and has not recanted." FrontPageMag's editor Ben Johnson describes her as embracing Lamont, and thinks she can count her her well-known leftist bona fides: Hillary is leading the embrace. Leftist blogs have reported HILLPAC will “cut a check” to Lamont ASAP.On the left, Media Matters (run by Hillary's favorite "former conservative," the very housebroken David Brock) is such a hardline pro-Hillary Clinton outfit that they even have a special category -- "Attacks on Hillary Clinton" devoted to defending her. Their latest pro-Hillary broadside takes the form of an attack on Hardball Politics' Chris Matthews, simply because he recently contrasted her style with that of Senator Lieberman: Chris Matthews accused Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of having employed a "bob and weave" with her position on the Iraq war, contrasting her with Sen. Joseph Lieberman, who Matthews said "hasn't cut and run."How dare Chris Matthews accuse Hillary of bobbing and weaving! How dare he! Well, at the risk of committing Chris Matthews style high treason (itself a bit perplexing), I think the best cut and run defense is a good bob and weave offense! Speaking of supposedly housebroken former conservatives, Media Matters singled out Andrew Sullivan for this treasonous outburst: Time columnist Andrew Sullivan asked, "Who is less authentic than Hillary? I mean, isn't she the least authentic person in America?"I like that! Maybe Sully isn't as housebroken as certain conservatives were assuming. (I hate it when names become verbs!) MORE: While it might not belong here (well, where does it "belong" anyway?), I want to second Andrew Sullivan's thoughts on Ann Coulter's latest outburst: Ann Coulter calls Al Gore "a total fag" on MSNBC. What do you think the impact would be if she called a public figure a "nigger" or a "kike"? So why the double standard?I've asked similar questions before. (Personally, I think the Hillary forces love nothing more than Republican practitioners of "kick-'em-out-of-the-tent" politics, as it makes bobbing and weaving easier. I mean, isn't it easier to be called a "fag lover" than to take a genuine position on same sex marriage?) UPDATE: Via Glenn Reynolds, a delightful rant from heretic hunter Michael Moore. After first declaring Kerry and Edwards "not fit for the job" (for having supported the war even though they've recanted) Moore finds much heresy in Hillary. Nonetheless, he declares her "our first best hope for a woman to become president" and issues a stern warning: I'm here to tell you that you will never make it through the Democratic primaries unless you start now by strongly opposing the war.Coming from him, that sounds like an endorsement. posted by Eric on 08.09.06 at 09:28 AM
Comments
I know I shouldn't, but the truth is, I hate Moore. Does anyone else see in his letter a bit of madness? Kerry and Edwards don't deserve to be elected to the Presidency because they were wrong about the war. But, if Hillary changes her mind in the future, he'll accept her. Sounds sexist to me. Jon Thompson · August 9, 2006 03:55 PM Can you believe this stuff.. greg · August 9, 2006 05:50 PM |
|
March 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• War For Profit
• How trying to prevent genocide becomes genocide • I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight • Wind Boom • Isaiah Washington, victim • Hippie Shirts • A cunning exercise in liberation linguistics? • Sometimes unprincipled demagogues are better than principled activists • PETA agrees -- with me! • The high pitched squeal of small carbon footprints
Links
Site Credits
|
|
RE: Coulter and 'fag' remarks: I tihnk I've said this before--both left and right will call each other 'fags' if they think it will annoy/bother/emasculate/piss-off-supporters/score points/whatever.
And unfortunately, unlike using other ethnic slurs, its still acceptable to use phrases like "that's so gay" etc. etc.
Now if Coulter had called Gore an "effete poseur" or an 'unmanly character' it wouldn't have the same impact. My vote would be for "foolish has-been politician", but that's just me.