The Right Needs To Extend The Olive Branch To The Left

by Smitty

Inspired by this photo and post over at iOwnTheWorld,

allow me to share a thought.
No, I’m not about to scuttle principles, espouse Brooksian centrism or go totally Charles Johnson on you.
Rather, consider that there are a number of people who sort of know that they’ve been duped by the Left, but haven’t personally been burned yet and thus may see the costs of admitting they’ve backed a false leader as too high.
Don’t make that cost high for them.
It’s quite easy and honest to make the case that the current global economic toilet bowl in which we’re swirling isn’t new.
By refusing to get into an ‘us vs. them’ analysis, and instead keeping a dispassionate, impersonal, historical view, I’ve had plenty of civil political discussions with Obama voters.
Now, I haven’t gone for the ‘big win’, either. None of them have admitted that, “Yeah, we kind of tubed it there.”
But focusing on who quarterbacked which team, at the expense of considering principles, is exactly the kind personality-driven distraction that helped enable the current mess.

So, as the bills come due, slogans like “State’s Rights” may indeed be undesirable. I do submit that the State as a political entity needs to be revitalized. The value of the State as a blast shield against Federal over-reach cannot be pointed out too many times.
States also, moreso from a Conservative than Libertarian vantage, have a valuable place in discussion with the Left. While a Libertarian of any caliber is forced to clash with the Leftist on purely theoretical grounds, the Conservative can limit the scope of Libertarian-style arguments to Federal discussion.
Want Socialism, Lefty? Have fun with that in your State, just don’t leave any Marx on me. Unlike a Libertarian, I can argue strongly the existing legal and historical case for the Federal Constitution, and leave teaching the Economics to the market. Let me restate that: I don’t find it contradictory at all to favor Libertarian arguments at the Federal level, and something else within a State. The State of Virginia defines marriage the way reasonable people do; I was happy to vote for that. I’m not a proponent of a Federal Amendment along those lines, because figuring out what private individuals are up to ought not to be a Federal tasks. We SoCons should lay by our dish on that point.
Back to my hypothetical Lefty here, this kind of simple, positive approach means that I’m really not attacking Leftist thought at all.

Sadly, there is more at stake that theory. It gets down tot the Benjamins.
The discussion, however it unfolds, is going to involve massive sacrifice.
If the Lefty end of your conversation is 50+, you’re going to have to assure them that, whatever the Economic rehab plan is, they’re not coming up empty.
No, Generation X is going to have to be willing to throw itself under the bus ahead of the Boomers in the name of saving future generations.
When you forgive outright and double down with the refusal to be vindictive, even if it means paying for Social Security, knowing that you’re buying so much air, the Lefty can be helped through depression, into acceptance of the fact that the Progressive Era has been nothing but the most expensive failure in human history.

Having said all that, it’s true that the scope of these words doesn’t extend beyond me and the half-dozen or so Lefties with whom I deal.
Plenty of others may see the Left as a sort of Georgia, and themselves a Sherman.
However emotionally satisfying that imagery may be, that’s not the healing route.
And, no, there are plenty on the Left that lack the kind on introspection necessary for this: “They’s some men you just cain’t reach,” from Cool Hand Luke.
I get that. However, this mellow, reflective approach is still the preferred going-in position.

VIDEO: Carolina Sex God in TV Interview

Always reluctant to speak to the media about his shagadelic mojo, Will Folks gives an interview to WCBD-TV:

He rehashes the “protect my family” excuse, which has never made any sense at all. How would a media revelation of an affair be more hurtful to Folks’ family than his self-exposure? He reminds me of the skeezy husband whose wife has gone mysteriously missing, pretending in an interview with the local TV station to be all heartbroken about her disappearance. Then a few days later, you see him being perp-walked after they find his wife’s body in the woods.

Yesterday, Ace of Spades ended a post about the Folks-Haley saga with this:

Not complete proof, but you know what? I would start looking for another candidate, if I’m being honest.

No. As I’ve said, I don’t give a rip about who wins a South Carolina gubernatorial primary, but I don’t agree that Nikki Haley should be thrown under the bus because of something a washed-up political consultant says on his blog. That sets a very dangerous precendent. And conservative lesbian Cynthia Yockey says we must fight back against what she calls “this Axelrod tactic.”

Why We Hate Gresham Barrett

In case you haven’t been following the Folks-Haley saga — and really, this blog is 24/7 Folks-Haley lately — remember that it was supporters of Rep. Gresham Barrett, who’s running for governor of South Carolina, who were reportedly pushing the rumor about Nikki Haley.

Why would Barrett’s people seize on that sleaze? Because Haley is kicking Gresham Barrett’s butt in gubernatorial campaign, that’s why.

And why is Barrett losing? Because he voted for TARP. And that makes him a “leader,” as he explains in a new TV ad:

As a leader, I made a decision. . . . [L]eaders make decisions based on the best information that they have, and they go with it. That’s what I did.

Smearing Nikki Haley? Yeah, that’s what “leaders” do.

Why We Love Ann Coulter

Because she’s funny:

Watching TV this week, at first I thought Republican Senate nominee Rand Paul had flown a commercial jet into the World Trade Center. But then it turned out that he had only said there ought to be discussion about whether federal civil rights laws should be applied to private businesses.
This allowed the mainstream media to accuse Paul of being a racist. Twisting a conservative’s words in order to accuse him of racism was evidently more urgent news than the fact that the attorney general of the United States admitted last week — under oath in a congressional hearing — that he had not read the 10-page Arizona law on illegal immigration, the very law he was noisily threatening to overturn.
And really, how could the U.S. attorney general have time to read a 10-page law when he’s busy doing all the Sunday morning TV shows condemning it? . . .

Read the whole thing, and then read Lisa De Pasquale’s interview with Ann.

Because I said so, that’s why!

Not Good News for James O’Keefe

A guilty plea:

The four defendants who were arrested in January in Sen. Mary Landrieu’s office in the Hale Boggs federal complex in New Orleans pleaded guilty Wednesday morning in federal court to entering real property belonging to the United States under false pretenses.
Magistrate Judge Daniel Knowles III sentenced Stan Dai, Joseph Basel and Robert Flanagan each to two years probation, a fine of $1,500 and 75 hours of community service during their first year of probation.
James O’Keefe, as leader of the group and famous for posing as a pimp in ACORN office videos, received three years of probation, a fine of $1,500 and 100 hours of community service.

When this story first broke in January, the point I tried to emphasize was that this case involved federal charges. U.S. attorneys are not famous for cutting people slack.  Being allowed to plead guilty to a relatively minor charge was the least-bad outcome here — a $1,500 fine is a slap on the wrist in federal court — but it is still bad.

Rule 6: Don’t Be a Complete Douchebag

Thanks to the commenter on the previous post who said that the exploits of Will Folks should inspire an addendum to “How to Get a Million Hits On Your Blog.”

There is a line between ordinary human fallibility — sometime you hit the “publish” button and immediately regret it — and 100% douchebaggery. Will Folks crossed that line the same way most douchebags do, by refusing to admit that he screwed up, and doubling down on stupid.

In this, Folks reminds me of Charles Johnson. The self-destruction of Charles Johnson began when he attacked Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer for attending the 2007 Counter-Jihad Conference in Brussels. If he had been willing to back down and apologize — quite obviously, Geller and Spencer weren’t trying to advance the cause of “Eurofascism” — CJ might have gone on his merry way. But he dug in his heels, determined to vindicate his own infallibility, and the whole thing became an insane crusade to demonstrate that he, Charles Johnson, was the Ultimate Arbiter of Truth.

Start thinking like that and eventually you’ll become Captain Queeg ranting about the strawberries.

An insistence on always being right — demanding that other people validate your veracity — is psychologically unhealthy, and so it is with Will Folks. He absolutely insists that everyone else admit that he had an “inappropriate” relationship with Nikki Haley. Being psychologically healthy myself, I frankly don’t care if, within a few days, Haley goes on TV for one of those predictably tearful confessions: “Yes, I did it. But what woman could resist the raw animal passion of Will Folk?”

If I was wrong to scoff at the possibility of a Folks-Haley affair, so what? I was wrong. How was I to know that Will Folks was such an irresistible stud-muffin? Live and learn. But Haley’s spokesman still says Will Folks is lying:

The latest South Carolina political sex scandal has taken a new turn, with a spokesman for Republican gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley calling a series of text messages posted on the website of FITSNews founder and blogger Will Folks the product of an “overactive imagination” that “has gone into overdrive.”
“South Carolina politics is full of rumors and innuendo, and of course our campaign did everything in our power to prevent false rumors about Nikki from airing out in the media as they now have,” the spokesman, Tom Pearson, wrote in an e-mail to CNN.
Pearson confirmed to CNN that the texts themselves were authentic, but that they referred to untrue allegations that he was trying to work with Folks to keep from coming out.

This morning, I received an e-mail from a friend who had seen the text-messages published by Folks, which could be interpreted as smoke indicating the presence of an actual fire. My friend was enjoying a bit of “I told you so” at my expense. So after I posted my own analysis of the text messages, I sent my friend this e-mail reply:

Let me make clear . . . that I don’t give a damn who wins the South Carolina GOP gubernatorial primary. I don’t know Nikki Haley from Adam’s housecat, and am utterly indifferent to what did or did not transpire between her and Will Folks.
This isn’t about that. This is about Will Folks being a reckless amateur pretending to engage in journalism without anyone to tell him, “Hey, maybe you shouldn’t publish that.” Having been on both sides of the Old Media/New Media divide, I now have a greater appreciation for the fact that, when I worked at The Washington Times, there were people whose job it was to say, “Hey, maybe we shouldn’t publish that.”
I arrived at The Washington Times barely two months before Matt Drudge published his first item about the Monica Lewinsky affair. Trust me when I say that Washington Times reporters were doing everything in their power to get that story first. (As were dozens of reporters from other news organizations.) And there came a point when one of those reporters . . . believed he had enough to go with the story. But the editors looked at it and said, no, you haven’t got it nailed down, keep working it.
Within a matter of hours, however, the Washington Post did manage to nail it down, and we spent the next year trying to catch up with them on the Lewinsky story.
The story was always true, you see, and our editors believed it to be true, but our reporters simply didn’t have enough to prove it was true. Wes Pruden’s motto was always, “Get it first and get it right.” The Lewinksy scandal was a case where we weren’t first because to have published a thinly-source article about such a major scandal would have been short of the “get it right” standard.
As I’ve always said, a good reporter never burns a source and a good source never burns a reporter. There are many times that I learn things off the record that I can’t report, because to do so would be to breach the trust of confidentiality necessary to having any sources at all. So it happens that I become privy to a great many secrets that can never be published, nor even related privately as gossip. It comes with the territory.
A political consultant, of course, learns a great many confidential things in the same fashion and with the same implicit agreement. It is important that his clients be able to trust him. Why would any campaign ever hire a consultant if they knew that, as soon as his contract expired, the consultant would dish dirt on their candidate to everyone who cared to listen?
This is what Will Folks has done. Whatever the veracity of his claims of “inappropriate” behavior with Nikki Haley, the fact is that Folks was paid to provide political communication services to Haley and has since exploited the access he thereby gained in order to aggrandize himself to Haley’s detriment.
Whatever the upshot of all this, Will Folks has demonstrated himself to be untrustworthy, either as a consultant or as a journalist. He appears to be a selfish, dishonorable and manipulative person. People are beginning to attach the word “sociopath” to his name, and who can dispute the diagnosis? Even if everything he says about Nikki Haley is true, what kind of person would seduce his employer and then brag about it? And who, having done such things, would then expect sympathy, as Folks so plainly does?
Insofar as this story has told us anything bad about Nikki Haley, it tells us that she was once foolish enough to associate with a vicious scumbag whose previous claim to fame was getting fired by Mark Sanford.
When the Folks-Haley story first came to light, my response was entirely jocular.
Michael Brendan Dougherty’s report at the American Conservative was the first reason I had to think that a Folks-Haley affair was possible, as my next post noted in an update.
As more of the story has come to light, however, it has become evident (to me, at least) that Will Folks was having a grand old time bragging about his relationship with Nikki Haley until he began to fear that he would be exposed as the original source of the rumors. Folks reveled in being the center of attention — his pompously transparent self-references to “our founding editor” are a huge red flag for his narcissistic personality — so long as he could control the narrative about himself. But once a real reporter like Jim Davenport of the AP started asking questions, it was only a matter of time before everyone knew that Folks had backstabbed Haley with his boasts that depicted her as yet another notch on his belt.
That was why, in his text message to Tim Pearson on May 20, Folks said, “I am honestly losing my mind a little.” It wasn’t Haley he was worried about. A sociopath has no empathy for others. No, Will Folks was worried about Will Folks.
And with good reason. He was an arrogant, impulsive amateur who got in over his head and refused to admit his own incompetence, since such an admission would contradict his own narcissistic narrative of Will Folks, the Greatest Guy Ever. He is now utterly doomed, a laughingstock, and there is only one person to blame for this: Will Folks.
My apologies for the long e-mail, but I wanted to make clear my own view of this, and I trust you won’t mind if I publish this on my blog — minus any reference to you, and without identifying you as the recipient. Because a good reporter never burns his sources. Give me a call this evening . . . and next time you’re in DC we’ll have to get together for some of that fine Irish stew at Murphy’s.
— RSM

When you work at a newspaper, you’ve got bosses and co-workers who can tell you if you’re being a douchebag. And if you push it to the point of complete douchebaggery, you could get fired. So it’s hard for me to fathom why David Brooks is still employed by The New York Times, or why MSNBC keeps Chris Matthews on the air, but there are at least theoretical limits on their douchebaggery.

Whereas, in the blogosphere, nobody can fire you, no matter what a ginormous douchebag you are, and it’s possible — as in the case of Charles Johnson and Little Green Footballs — that you can attact enough mini-douchebags to form a sycophantic echo chamber where it’s always upding! upding! upding!

Nobody ever sets out to become Der Fuhrer of the Axis of Douchebags, but just as with CJ and his minions at LGF, there are commenters at Will Folks’ blog telling him, “Yeah, buddy! You go get that Nikki Haley! You show her who’s boss!”

This incites Folks to keep wandering down the road to ultimate douchebaggery and the momentary spike in traffic — caused by people curious to see what manner of absurdity Folks will publish next — will be followed in due course by the predictable Hindenburg-at-Lakehurst flameout.

Congratulations, Will Folk, on becoming the inspiration for Rule 6 of How to Get a Million Hits: Don’t Be a Complete Douchebag.

UPDATE: Not to be missed, Allahpundit’s summary of the story:

So the media might have been about to break a story that he, when he was single, hooked up with a married woman, and rather than have a private chat with his wife and lie low in hopes that no one would publish anything — remember, even Barrett’s supporter seemed queasy — he decided to beam it out to the Internet. And then, when Haley’s campaign got angry, he downshifted into “aggrieved d-bag” mode, rescinding his vow not to talk about this further, lawyering up, and making an “aggressive effort” to pull together evidence that might destroy Haley. Which not only prolongs the story, no doubt to his wife’s delight, but makes him seem so scummy that Haley will end up looking like a victim here even if it’s all true. Someone should adopt this plotline for a movie with the twist ending being that the Folks character is actually in cahoots with the campaign, blunting the force of the about-to-be-revealed scandal by making himself look like such an A-hole that the lying candidate seems sympathetic by comparison. I’d see it.

Exactly. Martin Bormann would seem sympathetic by comparison. As interesting as Allah’s theory is, however, the more plausible explanation for Folks freaking out is that he was about to lose control of the narrative. Other people were about to tell the story, and that story wasn’t going to depict Will Folks as the wicked-funny cool guy. He was going to come out smelling like a double truck-load of fresh manure, and he knew it, so he tried to seize control of the narrative with his “admission” of an affair.

Unfortunately, this did nothing to dispel the odor of manure, and the follow-up seemed an act of desperation. Folks is either a complete liar or he’s the World’s Clumsiest Extortionist.

All he had to do, really, was to keep his mouth shut and be mysterious — being mysterious is pretty cool — but instead he started blabbing  like the ginormous douchebag he is. Classic.

CNN: ‘There Is Nothing in the Correspondence Proving Folks’ Claim That He Had an “Inappropriate Physical Relationship” with Haley’

They buried the lede in the sixth paragraph, but that’s the payoff:

The blogger claiming to have had an affair with South Carolina gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley has posted a series of text messages between himself and Haley’s campaign manager that appear to show the two men colluding about how to handle the forthcoming scandal.
The messages, covering a nine-day period earlier this month before conservative blogger Will Folks went public with his accusation against the Republican hopeful, were posted Wednesday morning on his website, FITSNews.com.
“I’m telling you man, we keep this under wraps and nh is going to win,” reads one text message from Haley campaign manager Tim Pearson to Folks on May 15.
Pearson and Folks swap worried messages about different reporters chasing the story, and one exchange suggests there may be a newsworthy photograph of Haley and Folks.
Pearson confirmed to CNN the authenticity of the text messages.
While Pearson and Folks make allusions to the “rumor,” there is nothing in the correspondence proving Folks’ claim that he had an “inappropriate physical relationship” with Haley in 2007.
But Folks has suggested that he has more text messages and e-mails from Haley proving the supposed affair. He has yet to make that evidence public.

If I claimed to have text messages proving that Will Folks snorts methamphetamine while masturbating to his personal DVD collection of “Hannah Montana” (Season One), would that get me linked by CNN? Probably not.

And if South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster got a search warrant and assigned a computer forensics lab to go over Will Folks’ hard drive with a fine-toothed comb seeking evidence of extortion, what would they find? I don’t know.

What I do know is that Will Folks is playing the “sue me for libel” game with a public figure, demanding that Nikki Haley prove a negative:

Team Haley’s response to our founding editor’s preemptive admission of an “inappropriate physical relationship” was to relentlessly smear his credibility as well as the credibility of this website. . . .
What have they not done, however?
Sued our founding editor for libel.

The “our founding editor” language, of course, indicates that Folks is writing in the third-person about himself, portraying himself as a victim of politically-motivated persecution:

“Oh, that horrible Nikki Haley! First the brazen hussy forced me to have sex with her, and now she has the effrontery to deny it! How dare they impugn my integrity! Why don’t they confront the conclusive proof? After all, I exchanged text messages with her campaign manager about a rumor! My credibility is sacrosanct! If they don’t sue me for libel, that proves I’m telling the truth — and they can’t handle the truth!”

Remember: People who know Folks describe him as “dangerous and unreliable,” and he has been accused of online stalking. And here are the key text-messages that Folks cites as proof, beginning with an exchange with Wes Donehue, a supporter of Haley rival Gresham Barrett:

From: Wes Donehue
To: Will Folks
Sent: May 13, 2010 2:55 PM
I just don’t know who has told more people, you or Nikki.

From: Wes Donehue
To: Will Folks
Sent: May 14, 2010 10:36 AM
Now, I don’t give a f— of you believe me or not. Your the one who screwed her. You’re the one who bragged about it. She’s the one who told BJ. Yall point fingers at your own damn selves and leave me the f— out of it.

Ask any lawyer: This is hearsay. Donehue is saying that Folks “bragged about it” and that Nikki Haley told BJ — her former campaign advisor B.J. Boling, now working for Barrett — about the alleged affair. But this overlooks the possibility that B.J. Boling is liar. Perhaps Nikki Haley never told Boling any such thing, and he’s now just disrguntled toward his former employer, he’s claiming that she admitted an affair in order to damage her and help his current employer.

The one thing I don’t doubt for a minute is that Will Folks is a braggart, and also a drama queen. Six days later, Folks is freaking out because he believes Associated Press reporter Jim Davenport is writing a story about the rumor:

From: Will Folks
To: Tim Pearson
Sent: May 20, 2010 4:29 PM
F—ing nuts. People saying davenport story is imminent. I am honestly losing my mind a little.

Meanwhile, weekly tabloid reporter Corey Hutchins is also chasing the rumor:

From: Will Folks
To: Tim Pearson
Sent: May 21, 2010 6:55 AM
My sources indicate Hutchins is running next week (possibly cover) and Davenport is trying to beat him to the punch.

Count me as having ceased to be remotely interested in whether or not anything “inappropriate” actually transpired between Will Folks and Haley — or between Will Folks and the Haley family’s housekeeper, or between Will Folks and the Haley family’s Labrador retriever. What is indisputably proven by these text messages:

  • Folks bears primary responsibility for the rumor, having bragged to several people that he had an affair with Nikki Haley.
  • Two people with the Gresham Barrett campaign — one of them a former Haley employee — were trying to turn the rumor into a full-blown scandal, three weeks before the GOP primary.
  • When Folks realized that the rumor he started was about to be reported as a news story, he freaked completely out.

Why the freakout? A fair and accurate story, written by a competent professional reporter, would have identified Will Folks as the primary source of the rumors. Folks had been running his mouth for three years, and now he was about to be exposed as a two-faced backstabber.

“I am honestly losing my mind a little.”

Yeah. Game’s up, buddy. And your mind ain’t all you’re losing. However this story ends for Nikki Haley — and right now, it looks like she’s winning — it will end very, very badly for Will Folks. Once you become a regular punchline for Ace of Spades . . .

Say, whatever happened to Jackie Mackie Paisley Passey, anyway?

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? Conor Friedersdorf Sticking Up for Rand Paul?

There must be some explanation, but Friedersdorf has written a column for Newsweek that isn’t half-bad:

Will the dismissive treatment of libertarians nevertheless persist? Will reporters covering a 2012 Gary Johnson candidacy zero in on his opposition to the war on drugs, and ask him questions like “Will sex offenders who’ve served their time in jail be able to buy ecstasy on their way to a Miley Cyrus concert?” Quite possibly. The press loves to ask questions premised on the most absurd applications of libertarian theory. But Obama won’t face incredulous questions from the establishment press about asserting powers that, if abused, would theoretically enable him to declare a political opponent an enemy combatant, deport him, and murder him using the power of the state. . . .

Read the whole thing. Obviously, one clever column isn’t enough to redeem Friedersdorf, but you have to give the boy credit for that one indelible mental image: Miley Cyrus taking the stage in Albuquerque, N.M., and discovering the conert arena is jammed to the rafters with 10,000 drug-crazed perverts paroled by Gary Johnson.