2008 Congressional

On December 18, the first 2008 Democratic presidential candidate made the (soon to be) required pilgrimage to talk with Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show." The liberal comedian lavished considerable praise on Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack, while attacking President Bush with a vulgar expletive. Though Stewart tried to cast his comments in a humorous style, one has to ask if, in 2008, he’ll be a comedian or simply a high profile booster of the Democratic crop? The Comedy Central host began the interview with typical softballs and then shifted into his standard attack on President Bush:

Jon Stewart: "Are you excited? Is it- Is it a whirlwind so far? Have you been on any bigger shows than this?"

Tom Vilsack: "No. This is it. This is the first show."

Stewart: "You're going to get crushed. [Cheers and applause ] Give me a sense of the Vilsack doctrine, if you would. What is– What do you feel like– You know, we've had a president who was the governor of a state for eight years. The criticism was he didn't have a lot of experience outside of his state and not that he hasn't done a great job but what, what do you bring to the table that's different other than you're not, you know, seemingly an a–[bleeped]." [Cheers and applause ]

It is amusing to me that the South was always considered by Democrats as "the people", the salt of the Earth, and the so-called rank and file in the "solid South" when the they had a lock on their votes from 1820 all the way until 1980. The South was the all-American region and the Democrats loved them dearly. Yes, for over 160 years the Democrats counted the Southern states as stalwarts and they loved them like brothers. But, now that the Southern states more often vote GOP they are a "problem" and are filled with Bible- brainwashed racists who pine for a return to slavery as far as the left is concerned.

At least, so says Harold Meyerson of the Washington Post today in a screed titled "The GOP's Southern Exposure".

Maureen Dowd plays the false indignation card in her pay-per-view column of today, What’s in a Name, Barry?

The gist: those mean Republicans are trying to tar the rising star of the Democratic party [legally-mandated descriptor] by making malign associations with his moniker. The GOP's latest mischief - letting people know that the middle name of the junior senator from Illinois is "Hussein."

Bunk.  Any possible shock value in the Barack Hussein Obama handle has already largely faded.  And this being a nation that likes to see itself as open and accepting, I'd say that, should he stay in the race, by election time his name will be an absolute advantage.  Predicted opening line at the 2008 DNC Convention - if it comes to that - "I am an American. And my name is Barack Hussein Obama." Cue the wild cheering on the floor as Katie Couric gets all misty up in the booth.

It seems that one prominent member of the ultra-left in our country is starting to get the sinking feeling that he was duped by the Democrat bait and switch campaign strategy. Schlockumentartist and leading propagandist Michael Moore practically issued a fatwa at his website Wednesday demanding Democrats bring American troops home from Iraq immediately or suffer the consequences in the next elections (grateful hat tip to NB member “aero”, emphasis mine throughout):

The responsibility to end this war now falls upon the Democrats. Congress controls the purse strings and the Constitution says only Congress can declare war. Mr. Reid and Ms. Pelosi now hold the power to put an end to this madness. Failure to do so will bring the wrath of the voters. We aren't kidding around, Democrats, and if you don't believe us, just go ahead and continue this war another month. We will fight you harder than we did the Republicans. The opening page of my website has a photo of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, each made up by a collage of photos of the American soldiers who have died in Bush's War. But it is now about to become the Bush/Democratic Party War unless swift action is taken.

Moore followed with an outline that couldn’t be any clearer:

Barbra Streisand not yet having weighed in with her advice to the Republican party as to how it might regain power, we'll have to settle for the counsel that WaPo columnist E.J. Dionne, Jr. generously offers in his column of today, Can the GOP Find Its Center?

His advice boils down to a two-part program: forget about conservatism already, and Be Like Bill.

Dionne begins by proclaiming that "this fall's election defeat . . . revealed that the Barry Goldwater-Ronald Reagan political settlement has expired," by which he apparently means that conservatism as a winning political philosophy has gone the way of the parrot in A Fish Called Wanda. E.J. thus goes on to deride Republican leaders such as John Boehner and Mike Pence who in the wake of the GOP's defeat call for a return to traditional conservatives principles, chief among them that of limited government.

In the wake of absurd media assertions that the 2006 elections represent the end of conservatism as reported here and here, “The Chris Matthews Show” Sunday depicted a much more rational and well-reasoned analysis of what happened last Tuesday. And, the sanity came from some surprising sources, the first being Dan Rather:

What killed the big tent was the war. You can overanalyze this. The war was the issue. Come 2008, this breakdown may be completely different again. But, this time, it was the war, the war, the war.

Matthews then asked: “So, once the war is over, they can be back together, the big crowd?” Rather elaborated:

In the aftermath of the 2006 elections, Time magazine's Joe Klein has declared that the Democrat takeover of Congress may signal "the end of the conservative pendulum swing that began with Ronald Reagan's revolution."

Certainly, we expect this kind of errant speculation without the use of facts or historical reference from a shameless shill like New York Times’ propagandist Paul Krugman as reported by NewsBusters on Saturday. However, for Joe Klein to make such early prognostications, and for Time magazine to make this its cover story, bordered on total irresponsibility and yellow journalism.

But there it was in an article titled “The Realists Take Charge; The election whupping marked the end of George W. Bush's radical experiment in partisan government - and a plea for politicians to get serious about solving problems” (subscription required, CNN.com summary here, hat tip to NB reader Allanf, and emphasis mine throughout):

CNN anchor Soledad O’Brien talked with former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay on Wednesday and displayed a snide attitude over the Republicans’ midterm losses. She even tried to goad DeLay into bashing Karl Rove:

O’Brien: "Think Karl Rove is still a genius?"

Delay: "Oh, yes. Just because you lose one ball game doesn't remove your genius."

O’Brien: "Really, you think that -- this is kind of a big ball game to lose. Some people might say, yes, but if you lose the big one, it actually could chip away at your title."

Apparently victories in 2000, 2002 and 2004 don’t mean anything.

Newsweek published an article at its website Saturday about last week’s John Kerry foot-in-mouth debacle. One couldn’t immediately tell the motives behind the piece from the title: “Botched; Assessing the damage done to Democrats—and his own chances in ’08—by John Kerry’s epically flubbed joke.” Nor could one glean the significance of the authors involved: Susannah Meadows with Howard Fineman and Eleanor Clift. However, in the end, when taken in its entirety, it appears fairly obvious that this was the beginning of the assassination, and John Kerry’s chances of making a second run for president have been officially kyboshed.

The hit job started innocently: “Chuck Schumer got right to the point. On Thursday afternoon, the New York Senator, who’s leading the Democrats’ efforts to win back the Senate, called John Kerry and let him have it.”

Clift et al gathered steam:

Referring to an RNC ad as the "Mehlman cesspool," Chris Matthews was being non-partisan. Really - he told us so!

On this afternoon's Hardball, Matthews interviewed Rep. Harold Ford, Jr., Dem candidate for senator from Tennessee. The first topic up was an ad the RNC is currently running using actors to tweak Ford on his positions on a variety of issues, from taxes to gun control to North Korea. The ad also alludes to the fact that Ford attended a Playboy party at the Super Bowl in Jacksonville in 2005.

At the ad's end, an alluring woman saying she met Harold at a Playboy party whispers "Harold, call me!"

Democrats have been quick to cry that the use of a white woman is an insidious appeal to racism. Matthews wasted no time sounding the Dems' battle cry:

It goes without saying that HBO’s Bill Maher is no journalist. However, it doesn’t seem to be asking too much of the comedian turned political pundit in his own mind to exhibit some degree of impartiality when interviewing current members of Congress and former presidential candidates, especially four weeks before a major election. Sadly, that appears not to be important to Maher, who like his compatriot on MSNBC, has become an unashamed, predictable hatchet-man for the left.

As a result, his program disingenuously titled “Real Time” has degenerated into a safe harbor for Democrats to get free reign over the cable-waves to make any statements they want – regardless of accuracy or validity – without the risk of being challenged by the host.

Such was certainly the case Friday when Maher demonstrated an almost unbelievable lack of integrity and impartiality while interviewing Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.). The questions couldn’t have been better positioned for the former presidential candidate if they had been posed by Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, or left-wing operatives Paul Begala and James Carville. In fact, this conceivably was even a new low for Maher, which for him is approaching abyss-like depths that would require liquid oxygen to be inhaled to prevent lung implosion.

In reality, there is so much that is disturbing about this interview that identifying lowlights would be as time-consuming as listing all the obscenities in a rap video. As such, what follows is the full transcript of this abomination (video link here) with a strong recommendation to have a bucket nearby just in case the virulence upsets your stomach beyond your expectations.

'Wishin' and hopin' and
'Thinkin' and prayin',
'Plannin' and dreamin'
'Each night of his charms,
'That won't get you into his arms.' - Dusty Springfield, 'Wishing & Hoping'

If E.J. Dionne's wishes were horses, Democrats would ride them to the White House. In his WaPo column of today, The End Of the Right?, the liberal pundit foresees the fall of conservatism. The immediate springboard for his prediction was yesterday's failed vote for an increase in the minimum wage. According to Dionne:

"The most obvious, outrageous and unprincipled [conservative] spasm occurred last night when the Senate voted on a bill that would have simultaneously raised the minimum wage and slashed taxes on inherited wealth.

Al Franken's thinly disguised campaign for the U.S. Senate came through in a Greg Gordon piece I saw in the Minneapolis Star Tribune on vacation: his Midwest Values PAC is already plunking some impressive bucks for Democratic House challengers in the Gopher State, starting with the opponent of conservative Congressman Gil Gutknecht in the state's southeast corner:

Democrat Tim Walz's biggest donor has been Franken, a likely 2008 Minnesota Senate candidate who is distributing money to Midwestern Democrats through his own PAC. Besides a $10,000 PAC check, Franken and his wife each gave Walz the maximum $4,200.

Franken's PAC also gave 10 grand to former Time magazine Person of the Year /retired FBI agent Colleen Rowley, who's running against GOP Rep. John Kline. But the PAC isn't all Franken's money. AP noted a number of celebs gave money to FrankenPAC. Franken's not even alone among famous Minnesota liberals.

For the second day running, Chris Matthews has run a Hardball segment entitled "Does Hill Fit the Bill?" It's his way of asking whether Hillary Clinton would make a good presidential candidate, and, presumably, by play-on-words, whether she's up to the political standard set by Bill.

While Matthews hasn't squarely answered his own question, he clearly seems skeptical about Hillary's personal and political qualities.

His first guest on the topic this evening was the urbane Roger Altman, Hillary adviser and a Deputy Treasury Secretary in the Clinton administration. Matthews grilled Altman on Hillary's hawkishness.

Matthews: "A lot of people in her party, maybe four out of five Democrats, especially New York Democrats, are against this war. Think we never should have gone into Iraq. Hillary on the other hand OK'd the president's authority to go to Iraq and has subsequently stuck to that position, that that was a decision that she still honors, believes in, is by most standards a hawk. How can she lead a doveish party as a hawk?"

When Ellen Ratner went a couple weeks without any major liberal loopiness, one wondered whether perhaps Jim Pinkerton was having a salubrious effect on her. But things got back to normal this morning when Ratner let Pinkerton goad her into boasting that she supports "open immigration."

The opening topic on today's 'Long & the Short of It' segment on Fox & Friends Weekend dealt with Howard Dean's recent claim that job # 1 in his view is tougher border security.

In the Promoting 2008 Democratic Presidential Hopefuls category, the Washington Post carried a goopy story promoting outgoing Gov. Mark Warner, hailed by some as the Southern-fried moderate alternative to Hillary "I Love New York So Much I Adopted It" Clinton. George Will used to scour Reagan by disdaining his "Morning in America goo." What the Post gave us today is "Morning in Virginia goo."

Michael D. Shear's article was headlined "Warner's Triumphant Legacy No Easy Feat: Bipartisan-Minded Governor Broke Tax Vow But Revived Va." It began:

Mark Robert Warner, the businessman-turned-politician, faced an immense budget gap, a steep learning curve and a legislature happy to see him fail when he was inaugurated as Virginia's 69th governor in 2002.

Over the next four years, he slashed the state's budget, stumbled repeatedly, proposed two tax increases -- and wound up as one of the most popular governors in the commonwealth's history. In November, Virginians chose a successor who campaigned as the second coming of Mark Warner.

And: