The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

In Fairness to Ace …

Posted on | August 28, 2011 | 63 Comments

. . . having decided to side with Pamela Geller in her dispute with Ace over Rick Perry, I am nevertheless obliged to say Pamela struck a low blow in blogging about her allegation that Ace publicly referred to her (offline and in person) as “Atlas Juggs.”

Ace strenuously denies this.

In general, ladies: Don’t ever do that to a guy. And by “that,” I mean casually slinging accusations of sexual harassment. You can file a lawsuit or call the cops or have your boyfriend punch somebody in the nose, but whatever you do, don’t use such accusations as a weapon of personal revenge. I very much empathize with Ace’s indignation at having his character impugned. No argument over mere politics is worth that kind of bad mojo.

It’s bad enough to have my friends at war with one another. It’s worse when they make it personal. Nobody ever asks my advice about this stuff, and nobody ever listens to my advice when I volunteer it, so I cannot be blamed for anyone’s errors but my own.

As to the present unpleasantness, I blame Rick Perry.

Or maybe Grover Norquist.

UPDATE: But having said that . . . I talked to both Ace and Pamela about this fight, and don’t know what can be done to end it. The problem is that someone seems to have issued a Prime Directive: Destroy any conservative who criticizes Rick Perry.

I exaggerate only slightly. There is a lot of pressure being brought against Perry’s critics. The governor of Texas is being sold as All That and a Stack of Pancakes, and anyone who isn’t buying the product is automatically accused of disloyalty or bad judgment.

There have been only a comparative handful of people in the conservative blogosphere — Michelle Malkin’s name leads the list — who have criticized Perry, and you might think that Team Perry would be content to ignore the criticism. But they seem very defensive, and this defensiveness results in harsh attacks on Perry’s critics. I’m sure Malkin was understating matters when she said she’s “gotten heat for not falling in line with the latest GOP bandwagon.”

Judging by the blowback I’ve gotten, I know how viciously personal the attacks can be. Like I said: Nobody ever asks my advice, so it’s not my fault what other people do.

Question: Who’s working on Perry’s campaign? Who are his consultants and top operatives? Because somebody needs to tell them to back the hell off.

UPDATE II: Lisa Graas adds her two cents, offering as the solution to the problem — you guessed, didn’t you? — Rick Santorum. And in all fairness, if what you want in a GOP candidate is a tough stance against the Religion of Peace, Santorum’s worth a look.

Category: Ace of Spades, Atlas Shrugs, Rick Perry

Comments

63 Responses to “In Fairness to Ace …”

  1. Adjoran
    August 29th, 2011 @ 6:51 am

    Look, I’m not some Perry fanatic, nothing against him but he still has to make his case before I think about signing on.  And many of my comments at Ace’s place question his sexual preferences.  I got no dog in this fight.

    But Geller is painting Norquist with too broad a brush.  He was in the conservative movement from the time he could first grow pathetic facial hair, and mainly an anti-tax crusader.  He did marry a muslim and does have relationships with muslims of questionable status, IMO, but he’s been open about his muslim outreach crap and it’s all well known, he is still far more known for being the anti-tax guy.

    And when she alters quotes in ways that change their meaning to bolster her argument, it shows her argument is weak.  And when Spencer renders the exact opposite verdict on Aga Khan as he did less than a year ago – AFTER the guy met with Perry – when he held the man up as an example of “moderate muslim,” he comes off rather weak, too. 

    It’s like with the AGW “science”:  if you have to fake stuff and lie about it, your proposition probably isn’t true.

    ~~~~~~

    Malkin’s criticism of Perry over HPV vaccinations stem from her particular personal vendetta against mandatory vaccines.  She’s not against vaccines and has her kids vaccinated on schedule, but when one kid was little the school system made parents bring proof of immunization before their kids were admitted for the school year, if I remember right, and it inconvenienced her and a bunch of other people who lost a day and sometimes two of work, all to show proof the school in fact already had but had lost or something.  It never seemed rational to me, and neither does her critique of Perry.

    It was a bad idea because immunization policy is one of the few areas best taken care of nationally.  That should be decided at the level so everyone is on the same page. 

  2. Bob Belvedere
    August 29th, 2011 @ 11:49 am

    Very true and wise, but there’s such a thing as taking it too far.

    I think what we’re seeing from some in the Perry and Palin bleachers is the fanaticism and rigidity born of fear for the future of this country.  This minority believes, rightly, that this is probably the most important Presidential election since 1864 or the first one, but they do their candidate no good by acting like Stalinist prosecutors.

  3. Bob Belvedere
    August 29th, 2011 @ 12:15 pm

    Damn straight.  Let’s bring this to head — now is the time for choosing.

  4. Anonymous
    August 29th, 2011 @ 1:01 pm

    My guess is, is that there is a sense of “take no quarter” from the Perry people precisely because of the unfair criticism leveled at Palin over the years. “We’re not going to let THAT happen again”, so to speak.

    But seriously, this Aga Khan thing really is lame, and deserves pushback, whether or not you’re a Perry fan. It does none of us any good to let things like that slide just because it might help my primary (in both political senses of the word) candidate.

    The last thing we need is a weakened coalition when it comes to the general campaign season because we tore each other up over something like this.

  5. Shawn Gillogly
    August 29th, 2011 @ 1:16 pm

    The thing on the immunization issue is, Perry ‘admitted’ he made a mistake and moved on. Heck, Reagan made a mistake with abortion, and he’s still the conservative icon.

    If we 1 issue ban everyone for any mistake, then we have no conservatives left. I’d rather have a candidate like Perry, who admitted he made a mistake and won’t repeat it. To a candidate like Romney, who’s convinced he did the right thing even when the opposition uses it as their model.

    On the Norquist issue, it’s a non-starter. Period. Unless you want Jon Huntsman as your candidate, you have to accept that signing the no-tax pledge has ZERO to do with anything Muslim related.

  6. DaveO
    August 29th, 2011 @ 2:20 pm

    This little blogbattle is good: keeps our side sharp!

    Ms. Gellar and Mr. Spencer are focused on one thing and one thing only: the islamization of America. If they say so-&-so isn’t clean, then it’s a good idea to have them present their evidence – Bloggers Due Process.

    And if their evidence checks out, even if its The Golden Child – drop him or her like s/he’s nuclear waste.

    Ace covers the gamut of politics, but he’s hasn’t specialized like Gellar & Spencer. Ace, and by extension Jeff over at Protein Wisdom, do a great job of keeping bloggers sharp, focused, and ready for the worst the other side can sling. 

  7. alwaysfiredup
    August 29th, 2011 @ 11:40 pm

    Gotta call BS.  Palin’s weakness is most certainly not that she let criticism slide.  The solution to lame criticism of Perry is to stand up, defend yourself and call the criticism lame, not to try to silence the critics.  And the minute the Perrykrishnas (love it!) stand up and defend Palin from the reality-show-celebutician slams (“in the name of party unity!”) is the moment I will stand up and defend Perry, and not one second earlier.  

  8. Anonymous
    August 30th, 2011 @ 12:06 am

    “Ace comes off as a huge whiner after that rediculous post last night.”

    Whiner?  Maybe, but he nailed her ass.  “rediculous”?  In your opinion.  OK, Ace does have a tendency to be thin skinned, go to DefCon4, use a sledge hammer to drive a tack.  BUT.  Gellar had already been totally beclowned/exposed, in two previous blogs, not Ace, and neither w/ a particular ax to grind.

    You’re most likely a rabid Palinista, but I repeat myself.  Like Gellar & and to a somewhat lesser extent MM.  Scorched Earth, baby.  Me?  I’m on record.  I’ll vote for anyone BUT scrHuntsman.  Also, w/i the only viable option (GOP) – keep it to the issues.  Save the hyperbole/smears/slander for the Donks.

  9. Anonymous
    August 30th, 2011 @ 12:14 am

    Isn’t that what Ace is doing? Calling this “criticism” lame? It’s not trying to silence the critics, but to show that their issues have little merit. the “silencing” is purely on Geller and Spencer – and I thought that behavior better than that of them.

    And the “Perrykrishnas” of which you speak have stood up and defended Palin all this time. Really, NOW is the time to play PUMA for our side? Since when is defending Perry automatically a sign that they NEVER defended Palin, or have stopped? Listen, I’m a Perry fan, but I won’t and haven’t turned to slam her with the same old BS I defended her against just last month. I will continue to stand up for the truth of all candidates, declared or not. If Palin gets yet another unfair hit, I’ll be the first in line to call BS. It does us no good to play this game, and threaten to take our ball home if we don’t get our way.

     

  10. alwaysfiredup
    August 30th, 2011 @ 12:43 am

    Sharing a dais and making small talk =/= signing his pledge.  One is manners.  The other is idiocy.

  11. alwaysfiredup
    August 30th, 2011 @ 12:50 am

    I do not fault Ace for trying to “silence” Perry critics.  I fault other past-its-prime center-right sites for that.  Ace has been far from a Palin defender, though, and he should expect to receive what he dishes out.  That’s just life.  If you can’t take the heat, don’t keep a blog.

    Further, now is not the time for party unity.  Now is the time to investigate the candidates, their personalities, positions and histories, so that we can make an educated decision for our nominee.  Perrykrishnas (love that word!) seem like they would rather we just dispense with the vetting and join Perry’s banner in the name of party unity.  If that’s the attitude, then PUMA hell yeah.  I don’t join bandwagons and I’ve been investigating and researching every detail about my preferred candidate for three years.  I haven’t written off Perry yet, not at all.  But I am quite sick of the way many of his supporters refuse to engage in debate.  And yes, I have the short-term memory needed to recognize that about half the Perry stable (in terms of online usernames) has despised and mocked Palin for a long time.  The other half are the Tea Partiers and they’re my homies even if they aren’t all in for Palin.

  12. Garym
    August 30th, 2011 @ 3:37 pm

    I’m not a rabid Palinista, just pragmatic. And it is true that Geller flies off the handle at silly things such as her six degrees of seperation in this case, but Ace didn’t have to take this bait. Ace is just defensive because some people don’t buy into his Palin can’t win rants. Now he and others in the sphere have jumped on the Perry bandwagon and can’t take some of the vetting he is receiving (gee sounds familiar). As Rush says: i’ll vote for Elmer Fudd over Oblamhole, but I want someone who will pull a 180 on this mess in Washington. I like Perry, but some of his cronyism is a flag that he may only slow it down instead of  stopping it cold.

  13. Anonymous
    August 31st, 2011 @ 1:51 am

    “And it is true that Geller flies off the handle at silly things ”

    That describes Ace too.  I’m chuckling because he’s known for getting a burr under his saddle, and …………  He’s hard to figure.  One day something/words/language/phrases are OK.  He’d just used them hinself.  The next day – out comes the banhammer.  Those rants are classic.