And I LOVE the idea of Michael Steele as national chair of the RNC.  (Or Newt.)

Brooks says the failure of the “rescue package” (that’s an Obama-ism, BTW, and does nothing to endear me to the concept since I abhor victim mentalities of all kinds) means our political leaders have ”failed utterly Continue reading...]]> Well, we now have proof positive that hanging out at the New York Times will muddle up anyone’s brain.  David Brooks, once a semi reliable conservative thinker, has penned a lamentation (“Revolt of the Nihilists”) so full of hand-wringing angst that, as Laura Ingraham quipped this morning, “it makes my hair hurt.”

Brooks says the failure of the “rescue package” (that’s an Obama-ism, BTW, and does nothing to endear me to the concept since I abhor victim mentalities of all kinds) means our political leaders have ”failed utterly and catastrophically to project any sense of authority, to give the world any reason to believe that this country is being governed.”

Apparently for Brooks, defeat of this bill equals de facto anarchy in America.

Brooks then makes a few apt remarks (ok, so he has not completely lost it), but quickly disappoints again:

And let us recognize above all the 228 who voted no — the authors of this revolt of the nihilists. They showed the world how much they detest their own leaders and the collected expertise of the Treasury and Fed. They did the momentarily popular thing, and if the country slides into a deep recession, they will have the time and leisure to watch public opinion shift against them.

No:  they showed the world that they were willing to listen to the people who elected them, the constituents in their own districts, who bombarded their offices with variations of “vote no” via email and telephone because they (we) don’t trust the “leaders,” and the “experts” at the Treasury and the Fed.  And why the heck should we, after a colossal failure of social engineering the likes of which this nation has never seen…?!

House Republicans led the way and will get most of the blame. It has been interesting to watch them on their single-minded mission to destroy the Republican Party. Not long ago, they led an anti-immigration crusade that drove away Hispanic support. Then, too, they listened to the loudest and angriest voices in their party, oblivious to the complicated anxieties that lurk in most American minds.

Good freaking grief, Mr. Brooks!  These House Republicans (and the 95 Democrats who voted with them) are the ONLY people standing up for proper conservative principles, including taking a careful, pragmatic approach to complex problems rather than giving people like Paulson a blank check. 

And nobody on the right led an “anti-immigration crusade”:  they just asked the U.S. government to enforce its own laws (what nerve, ay?!)  As for your take on the ”complicated anxieties that lurk in most American minds,” stick with the op-eds because a gifted psychoanalyst you’re not.  The only anxiety we’re having is over whether this bill will really fix what’s wrong, and whether anyone in D.C. is willing to do the hard work of making sure it does.

Now they have once again confused talk radio with reality. If this economy slides, they will go down in history as the Smoot-Hawleys of the 21st century.

So now we’re all just mindless sheep who totter zombie-like after Rush and Laura who are themselves out of touch with real life?  Do you have any idea how elitist and left wing that sounds?  Perhaps you’d like to come out in favor of the Fairness Doctrine also so we can get a dose of “reality” and not be hypnotized by the likes of the evil Limbaugh?

I can’t quote the rest of your op-ed, because frankly, my hair hurts.  My advice to you is stop wringing your pretty little hands and give it some time.  A bill will be passed; the markets will not collapse; and all will be well, if a little dicey for a time. 

And please stop calling it a “rescue” because that’s one of the words that is turning us off out here in Sheepville.

DO YOU, MR. CANDIDATE, TAKE MS. VOTER…?

I ran into another [Nevada] Republican candidate today who has yet to sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.  His objection is one I hear quite often from candidates who simply don’t want to take a firm position on Continue reading...]]> I missed posting at noon-ish today; it’s been a long, hard sun cycle; and my creative juices are dry.  So, I’m going to do what all great bloggers do and post someone else’s clever riff in order to fill blogspace.  This is from Chuck Muth’s News & Views:

DO YOU, MR. CANDIDATE, TAKE MS. VOTER…?

I ran into another [Nevada] Republican candidate today who has yet to sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.  His objection is one I hear quite often from candidates who simply don’t want to take a firm position on a critically important philosophical, as well as fiscal, issue. “I’ve learned over the years never to say never,” this candidate told me this afternoon.

Really?  I wonder exactly when he learned that lesson?

I suppose it was sometime AFTER promising Mrs. Candidate on their wedding day that he was taking her “to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, forsaking all others, ’til death do us part.”

I mean, if your philosophy is to “never say never,” then shouldn’t those old marriage vows be made a bit more flexible?  I mean, shouldn’t we take out the part about “til death do us part” and insert some kind of escape clause which acknowledges that when it comes to being faithful, “everything is on the table”? I mean, it’s just not right to never say never, right?

You see, when you really, really, really, really, REALLY believe in something at the very core of your being, it’s not hard to say “never.”  Then again, if you really, really, really, really, really DON’T believe that raising taxes is a bad thing, then you come up with all kinds of excuses for not making such a firm promise.

So, Mr. & Mrs. Taxpayer, when a candidate who refuses to give you a firm promise not to raise your taxes comes to you asking for your vote, remember…it’s just a one-night stand.  There’s no commitment involved.  Just hope he or she at least leaves you enough money for cab fare home.

Paranoid much?   

I see that Rick Perlstein isn’t just under the impression that McCain’s “Celeb” ad is racist, but also that it’s a deliberate attempt to invoke comparisons between Obama and Hitler, and was even shot to look just like Triumph of the Will — “I actually wonder if the Republicans had a crew on the scene to capture just the right angles,” Continue reading...]]> Here’s a gem from Mark Hemingway, one of my faves @ NRO:

Paranoid much?   

I see that Rick Perlstein isn’t just under the impression that McCain’s “Celeb” ad is racist, but also that it’s a deliberate attempt to invoke comparisons between Obama and Hitler, and was even shot to look just like Triumph of the Will — “I actually wonder if the Republicans had a crew on the scene to capture just the right angles,” Perlstein says.

I would say something about how pathetic and silly this is, but Ross Douthat beat me to the punch:

Here’s a tip for liberals: If your candidate is going to stage enormous rallies in front of tens of thousands of chanting Germans (with monuments to Prussian military might in the background) in the middle of his Presidential campaign, it isn’t the GOP’s fault if the footage comes out looking a little like Hitler at Nuremberg.

The upshot?  As stated in the article:  “An analysis of federal election records shows that the amount of money journalists contributed so far this election cycle favors Democrats by a 15:1 margin over Republicans, with $225,563 going to Democrats, only $16,298 to Republicans.”

American Thinker goes on to list the exact amount of the political contributions by Continue reading...]]> I just love good old fashioned journalism (i.e. patiently researched stories that include sources and/or back-up info so readers don’t have to fact check).  Here’s a great example over at American Thinker.

The upshot?  As stated in the article:  “An analysis of federal election records shows that the amount of money journalists contributed so far this election cycle favors Democrats by a 15:1 margin over Republicans, with $225,563 going to Democrats, only $16,298 to Republicans.”

American Thinker goes on to list the exact amount of the political contributions by journalists at every main stream media outlet in America.  If you have any doubt about the existence of Media Bias, you need to read the whole article.  (Surprise:  note the numbers @ Fox News Channel – ?!)

Is Muth on the money with his analysis that Democrats are way ahead of the GOP with grassroots efforts in the great swing state of Nevada?  If you’ve been watching the local political and non-profit Want Ad pages (as Continue reading...]]> Today’s edition of Chuck Muth’s Nevada News and Views draws some interesting comparisons between Nevada and Colorado politics apropro of this piece by Fred Barnes @ The Weekly Standard.   Barnes breaks down the dynamics of the recent Democratic surge in Colorado; Muth cites similar examples from Nevada and says we may be headed in the same direction this November.

Is Muth on the money with his analysis that Democrats are way ahead of the GOP with grassroots efforts in the great swing state of Nevada?  If you’ve been watching the local political and non-profit Want Ad pages (as I have) you’d have to say Yes.  See here and here and here and here and here. All are “Hiring Now” ads for Democratic and/or Progressive campaign workers and/or canvassers in Las Vegas (where most of Nevada’s population resides).

I couldn’t find even ONE ad for/from the GOP.  What gives?!  (Please send me the link(s) if you can find any.  I’d love to be corrected!)