The Other McCain

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

Oddly Satisfied-Looking Jackalope Spotted In Reagan Airport Vicinity

Posted on | September 9, 2010 | 12 Comments

by Smitty

Also, DaTechGuy loses some fresh cannoli. Coincidence? Abso-tively not!

Category: Da Tech Guy, Uncategorized

Meg Whitman’s November Landslide

Posted on | September 9, 2010 | 10 Comments

This is the safest political prediction of the year. Not because Meg Whitman is all that, you understand. But not even Californians are so stupidly liberal as to elect Jerry Brown, who recently announced his solution to the state’s fiscal catastrophe:

“I have a plan; I’ll tell you after the election.”

The California GOP could nominate Charles Manson for governor and still beat Jerry Brown. So if Meg Whitman goes on a mass-murder spree between now and Nov. 2, don’t sweat it.

Category: California, Election

Christine O’Donnell: Not A Bad Way To Wake Up

Posted on | September 9, 2010 | 11 Comments

by Smitty

The new hotness more than makes up for the old and tired Castle:

Stand up and fight! WOLVERINES!

CHRISTINE O’DONNELL for U.S. SENATE

Category: Christine O'Donnell, Uncategorized

If Meghan McCain Has Lost the Gays . . .

Posted on | September 9, 2010 | 22 Comments

. . . then the only people who still have to pretend to like her are liberals:

That’s a Tweet from Christopher Barron, chairman of the gay conservative organization GOProud, which is sponsoring the upcoming “Homocon” event with Ann Coulter in New York City. (John Hawkins has an interview with Barron at Right Wing News.) Here’s video of Cuz on the Rachel Maddow show:

Now, let me say this about MeggieMac’s outspoken pro-gay stance: It’s a bit too much.

Megan strikes me as a certain type: “Fag hag“ — a term denoting a woman who likes to hang around gay men, often to the point of making a nuisance of herself. Generalizing rather broadly, fag hags tend to be women who suffer from self-esteem issues, have few close female friends, and have difficulty forming successful longterm relationships with heterosexual men. 

A fag hag hangs around with gay guys because it gives her a vicarious frisson, as well as “safe” male relationships with a built-in excuse for why these guys don’t find her sexually attractive. Whereas, by comparison, hanging out with straight guys presents problems for such a woman: Either they hit on her (and make her vulnerable to the pain of future abandonment), or they don’t hit on her, in which case she feels rejected. And if she hangs out with women, she feels deeply shamed that her friens have husbands or boyfriends and she doesn’t.

That’s the unmistakable vibe whenever MeggieMac goes on TV to proclaim her pro-gay bona fides.

Like her infamous boob shot, Meghan’s extravagant look-at-me-I-love-gay-people gestures reek of insecurity to the point of desperation.

Kudos to Chris Barron for calling her out.

Category: Gays

A Smear Too Far

Posted on | September 8, 2010 | 12 Comments

In “How to Write an Anti-Palin Hit Piece,” I quoted a source who described the cheap-and-easy method by which reporters get those “anonymous sources” to provide them with fodder for their stories.

Vanity Fair‘s Michael Gross today lashed out at his critics and claimed, among other things, that Gina Loudon is lying about him.

That’s so unfair, isn’t it, Michael? You have a conversation with someone, then they tell their side of the story in a way that makes you look bad, and . . . well, it just feels kind of wrong, doesn’t it?

Anyway, Susanna Fleetwood has a long piece at Minority Report (cross-posted at NewsReal) examining why liberals have denounced Gross’s story:

Michael Gross not only not only made a flaming ass out of himself, but he also totally humiliated the liberal mainstream media. He managed to bring every caricature of an elitist, egotistical, out of touch, liberal journalist to life. And the worst part was that he was incredibly sloppy with many of the facts — which in turn, discredits his entire piece. Credible leftist/progressive journalists and columnists can’t flee from his disaster of a column fast enough — and I don’t blame them.

One point: It wasn’t a “column,” it was a 10,000-word feature article. And as someone who knows a thing or two about the publishing industry, let me point out that 10,000 words is a very good head-start on a book. If Gross isn’t already under contract for an anti-Palin book, this article certainly looks like it was intended as a pitch for such a book.

As I said before, every liberal journalist with any influence or ambition is either now writing an anti-Palin book or is trying to hustle a deal for an anti-Palin book. The fact that Sarah Palin isn’t cooperating with writers like Gross (i.e., she’s not helping him get paid to trash her) indicates that she’s not quite as stupid as he thinks she is.

Here’s some hard-to-watch video of Michael Gross on Hardball with Chris Matthews:

It’s hard to watch, I say, because even Chris Matthews seems embarrassed to have this idiot on his show.

UPDATE: Katrina Trinko at NRO responds to Gross’s defense:

The catch with anonymous sources has always been the lack of accountability. They face no repercussion for outright lies.

Well, not exactly. A source who burns a reporter by giving him “outright lies” has forfeited any claim to protection. But I’d like to make an important distinction here: To rely on anonymous sources in doing straight political reporting — e.g., the campaign manager giving you factual information he doesn’t want attributed to him by name — is different than relying on anonymous sources in doing the kind of “gotcha” stuff Gross did with the Palins.

A good source never burns a reporter, and a good reporter never burns a source — which is apparently what Gross did, as Trinko writes:

Gross hasn’t admitted that he was wrong to say Ivy Frye, Kristan Cole, and Meghan Stapleton were on “bad terms” or had “deteriorated” relationships with Palin. He hasn’t responded directly to Shannyn Moore, who says she was misrepresented in the article.

One of my sources particularly emphasized that Gross was wrong about Frye and Stapleton being on the outs with Palin (Cole’s name didn’t come up in our conversation, but I assume she’s still OK with Palin). All candidates and politicians shuffle their staffs from time to time, and contradictory rumors about behind-the-scenes maneuverings among staffers are commonplace.

Someone like Gross looking to do a takedown on Palin would obviously want to talk to any disgruntled ex-staffer, and he seems to have accepted second-hand gossip about Palin associates who were merely rumored to be disgruntled.

Category: Alaska, Sarah Palin

Groan: Murkowski as Write-In?

Posted on | September 8, 2010 | 19 Comments

There’s no chance she could actually win — how many voters can spell “Murkowski”? — so this would be a pure spoiler move:

Sen. Lisa Murkowski is strongly considering mounting a November write-in campaign to keep her seat and could make an announcement as soon as tomorrow, according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
Running as a write-in candidate appears to be Murkowski’s last remaining option. . . .
Another source familiar with Murkowski’s deliberations contends that she has definitely decided to remain in the race and challenge Miller and Democrat Scott McAdams in the general election. . . .

(Hat-tip: Dan Riehl.) Wow. I’m suddenly giving more credence to Thomas Knapp’s description of Murkowski’s strategy as “hook me up or I hand this seat to the Democrats.”

Murky and her advisers clearly don’t care about anything but themselves and are employing the same selfish scorched-earth approach as Charlie Crist. One of the commenters at AOSHQ had this reaction:

Good Lord, this is like trying to break up with the psycho-bitch of a girlfriend and she keeps calling all of your friends and relatives to beg them to help her make you take her back.

How long before Murky keys somebody’s car in the parking lot?

UPDATE: Murkowski campaign manager (and Palin-hater) John Bitney didn’t help his boss win over the LP with his comment about the Libertarians being “star-struck,” Doug Brady notes at C4P and adds:

The fact that Bitney would be running [Murkowski’s write-in] campaign means Joe Miller won’t have to worry about much.

UPDATE II: Allahpundit thinks this is a perfect time to take a cheap shot at Christine O’Donnell. Or maybe it’s a cheap shot at Libertarians. Six of one, half-dozen of the other.

PREVIOUSLY:

Category: Alaska, Election, Senate

Twittering Obama’s Speech

Posted on | September 8, 2010 | 13 Comments

Continuing my Book of Job-style woes — e.g., the antlered jihadi that destroyed my car — today our local Internet provider crashed just as President Obama was beginning his Ohio speech. Through the miracle of Twitter, however, I was able to offer commentary via cell phone:






Between having my car totalled — the insurance company today offered us only about $1,500, which is far less than we owe the finance company — and having to watch Obama give a speech, I’m in a particularly bleak mood now. What’s really depressing is the thought that some percentage of the adult population greater than zero is so intensely stupid as to believe a speech composed chiefly of self-glorification, blame-shifting, naked partisanship, false dilemmas, class warfare and Keynesian claptrap.

Category: Barack Obama, Economics, Ohio

I Am Bummed To Have Missed The Murray/Moran Debate

Posted on | September 8, 2010 | 14 Comments

by Smitty

This opening speech is made of solid gold awesome. It is an honor to support Col. Patrick Murray a candidate that simply, calmly, honorably rocks like the new hotness:

And what might the old and tired opposition, “Gentleman” Jim Moran look like?

“I get it. I know a lot of you are here because I earmark money,” Moran said. “I do a lot of earmarking, but I believe in the federal government and federal spending has allowed me to bring millions and millions of dollars to the district.

Hey, you know, Tenth Amendment be damned, eh, Jimmie? Now, granted, a lot of that is DoD earmarking, and you can make a distinction. Which, with $5, will buy you coffee in ‘flyover country’, you knob.

Category: Patrick Murray, Virginia
« go back — keep looking »

    About

    This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

    Subscribe to our feed

    Search

    Admin