"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler
He is shocked — shocked! — to discover that John McCain is a lying two-faced backstabbing crapweasel:
Pandering is one thing, shameless careerist pandering is something else, and then there’s John “Goddamned Fence” McCain marching along the border in a badass Navy baseball cap looking like he could choke out a coyote with his bare hands.
In response to this pathetic travesty:
To which I can only reply:
A. Nobody ever downloaded a hot plagiarism video.
Nor could lesbianism hurt Elena Kagan’s chances of being confirmed to the Supreme Court, whereas her role in a Harvard plagiarism scandal might be big trouble:
As Dean of Harvard Law School in 2004 and 2005 she treated two liberal law professors with kid gloves when they were busted for plagiarism. Her chicanery was so blatant that even a leftist academic said she should be fired for her “whitewash.”
Kagan’s essential absolution of both professors has been virtually unnoticed . . .
But the way she handled professors Larry Tribe and Charles Ogletree, when they both were caught swiping the words of others, seems to violate basic principles of fairness.
She let the professors off easy for the kind of offense that for which any Harvard undergraduate or law school would have been suspended if not expelled. . . .
As the [2004] controversy [over Ogletree’s plagiarism] festered, Harvard Law School professor Larry Tribe, a party line liberal, came to Ogletree’s defense. Tribe told the Boston Globe that Ogletree is someone who “because he often says yes to them many people all over the country who ask for help on all kinds of things, he has extended himself even farther than someone with all the energy can safely do.”
Tribe vouching for Ogletree’s character quickly sounded like Eliot Spitzer vouching for your monogamy.
A law professor who read about Tribe’s defense tipped off The Weekly Standard that Tribe’s 1985 book, God Save This Honourable Court, had purloined quite a bit from University of Virgina emeritus professor Henry Abraham’s acclaimed 1974 book, Justice and Presidents. . . .
In a lengthy article for his blog, Massachusetts School of Law Dean Lawrence Velvel said Kagan and Summers should have been axed for their “whitewash.”
He cited example after example of how Kagan and Tribe essentially offered excuses for the very actions they purported to condemn.
Evan Gahr has much more where that came from.
UPDATE: White House bristles at mention of Kagan’s sexuality:
“I’m just not going to get into somebody who is doing what that person was doing on CBS’s website. This is about who she is going to be as a justice,” Gibbs said.
“That person” is Ben Domenech, who might have something relevant to say about liberals and double standards.
UPDATE II: Why do right-wingers keep bringing up Kagan’s sexuality? You know, all those horrible, hateful, homophobes like Andrew Sullivan.
UPDATE III: Also sounding like a right-winger, Jane Hamsher:
“Accepting Kagan just because people like Obama is wrong. That’s appropriate for American Idol, not the Supreme Court. Nobody knows what she stands for but him. It’s just a cult of personality with Obama. This is the Supreme Court.”
Jane, you’re this close to a real breakthrough. I think we can help you. There’s this TV show that comes on at 5 p.m. Eastern on Fox News . . .
Instapundit links some interesting discussion on Republicans and the blogosphere by Dan Riehl at Riehl World View, and Melissa Clouthier weighs in at Liberty Pundits. Once you’ve read all of that, come back and let’s talk.
UPDATE: OK, so now that you’ve had time to read Dan and Melissa’s critiques of how the GOP deals with New Media, let me add this: Republicans suck at Old Media, too.
For years, I’ve noticed that the GOP communications apparatus is staffed with people who’ve never worked a day in a newsroom. When the Obama administration was staffing up, bloggers commented on the fact that an awful lot of allegedly “objective” reporters from the MSM were hiring on with Team Obama. Fair criticism, but why is it that Republicans so seldom hire reporters to do media relations?
Instead, GOP hire media staff on the same basis that they hire everybody else: “Hey, he was my buddy when we were in College Republicans together,” or, “She’s the governor’s niece. Put her on the payroll somewhere.”
The influence of cronyism within Republican Party staffing decisions is probably underestimated by outsiders, and then there is the disastrous effect of faux-meritocracy. When somebody’s college roommate doesn’t get the job, the next alternative is to hire “Joe Resume,” the immaculately groomed guy in the $700 suit who can deliver a persuasive 20-minute Powerpoint presentation. An ability to deliver the superficial appearance of competence, of course, is a poor substitute for actual competence, but Republicans place a lot of emphasis on looking good in a suit.
That the well-groomed Republicans got their asses kicked in 2008 by a campaign orchestrated by a slob like David Axelrod demonstrates the shortcomings of the Dress For Success school of political strategy. And before that, the polite Republicans got their asses kicked in 2006 by a campaign orchestrated by Rahm F***ing Emanuel.
Which is not to say that the magic formula for Republicans is to hire more rude slobs. I’m just saying that bloggers’ complaints about GOP New Media consultants, in general, replicate more general problems with the dominant culture inside Republican politics. Republicans tend to approach politics from a business perspective, which is good, except when it tends toward the MBA-cult approach:
Go back to the GOP electoral disasters of 2006-08 and see if you can remember anyone in the Republican Party who ever said, “Hey, this is my fault. I screwed up. Blame me.” If the evasion of responsibility is Job One, defining “competence” becomes problematic. Where do these problems come from? I believe they are an ironic product of success.
The great conservative boom of the Reagan years, followed in the 1990s by the Gingrich era — when the GOP gained a 12-year hold on Congress — and the Bush presidency, attracted to the Republican Party a lot of people who took victory for granted.
Before McCain-Feingold, before the rise of MoveOn.org and the Soros apparatus, the GOP generally enjoyed a substantial fund-raising advantage over Democrats, and so Republicans became accustomed to having a few overpaid incompetents on the payroll. The people who ran the show could afford to say, “Here, give the senator’s nephew a job — any job will do — and while you’re at it, see if you can hustle up a consulting contract for my college roommate.”
Well, now the Good Old Days are gone, money’s tight, and competence is at a premium. This is a general problem in Republican politics, of which specific complaints about GOP New Media consultants are symptomatic. Bloggers have a ready-made platform on which to air their grievances, and so we tend to bitch about whatever it is that affects us specifically. But there are other people who have their own reasons to bitch about other dysfunctional aspects of the Republican Party, and we ought not let the episodic problems of the trees blind us to the systemic problems of the forest.
Perhaps some readers will recall this noxious video:
When I posted that horrible thing April 24, I warned that “Fark.com has quite accurately described [it] as ‘The worst version of “Sweet Home Alabama” in the entire history of ever.’ ”
Operating as usual in fire-and-forget mode, I paid no further attention until May 2 when I observed that this had become “The Longest Comment Thread in the History of This Blog” and added:
For the record, I cannot vouch for the accuracy of any of what people write in the comments. . . .
So now I’ve got the blogospheric equivalent of a “Jerry Springer Show” episode in the comments of a two-week-old post that I just put up as a bit of weekend snark. But I guess it goes to show the unpredictable nature of online viral phenomena.
Well, this yammering continued — now 500+ comments — entirely unheeded until today when I received an e-mail “cease and desist” notice:
Submitted to Evidence:
5/10/2010
Case #0014374892010crv
Submitted to: State(s) Federal Bureau of Investigation div. of Cyber Crimes
(New Jersey, Florida, Ohio, Tennessee, Oregon, North Carolina, Texas, North Dakota, Louisiana, Mississippi, Idaho)
Submitted to: Local Law Enforcement Columbiana County Ohio / Cleveland AAU Div. . . .
From:
Blaze Records USA
Department of Legal Affairs
*Please be advised that Blaze Records USA and the Artist’s that it represents Have not posted to this blog.
Any and all information posted here has been tracked, traced, documented and submitted as evidence to the proper authorities.
Legal Issues (AP Press Release) April 27, 2010
We are very pleased to announce that on April 27, 2010 Blaze Records USA has been granted an injunction to file a National Class Action Lawsuit on behalf of Blaze Records USA and the Artist’s that it represents.
Over the past eight months, Blaze Records USA and the Artist’s in which it represents, has endured continues harassment, slander and defamation of character from several individuals and companies.
During the past eight months, the Blaze Records USA Internet Security Team has collected and documented over 6,000 pages of evidence related to this case. They have also collected and documented over 400 cases of Copyright Infringement and Trademark Violations from several individuals.
A legal advisory panel consisting of 11 Attorney’s, 4 Judges and several law enforcement officials has been assembled to ensure the handling of this case and to seek justice for all parties who’s legal rights have been violated.
Both Civil and Criminal charges will be filed against all persons involved and will be filed in the following states: Oregon, Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Dakota, Florida, Texas, Idaho, Tennessee, Georgia, and New Jersey.
Insuring the rights and safety of Blaze Records USA Artist’s, is and will continue to be a priority and this behavior, will not be tolerated nor taken lightly.
Any and all questions or concerns with this issue should be brought to our attention and will be immediately addressed as a priority and handled with confidentiality. . . .
Blah, blah, blah. Although I’m not a lawyer, I’m reliably informed that the so-called “safe harbor” provision of the Communications Decency Act means that I’m not responsible for idiotic comments by idiotic commenters, especially comments I’ve never seen on a three-week-old post.
Certainly, I cannot be accused of malice against people I’ve never met, on the basis of comments I’ve never seen, which were posted by anonymous assclowns.
However, despite its legal and grammatical deficiencies, this e-mail about a “legal advisory panel” threatening me with “Civil and Criminal charges” prompts me to wonder about Blaze Records USA. Does anybody else find it strange that this record company (which nobody ever heard of) should employ both a “Legal Affairs Department” and an “Internet Security Team”? Since they can afford all that stuff, maybe they should also invest in a halfway decent Web site.
Or hire some singers who can, y’know, sing.
Exit Question: Is Champagne Dream the Jackie Mackie Paisley Passey of music?
Privately, she’s gay enough for Obama, and her anti-military record at Harvard should get Elena Kagan lots of kudos from “Blame America First” Democrats. But the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List wants Senate Republicans to get the new Supreme Court nominee’s abortion views on the record:
Today, in response to President Obama’s nomination of Elena Kagan to the United States Supreme Court, Marjorie Dannenfelser, President of the Susan B. Anthony List, offered the following statement:
“Elena Kagan has no judicial record from which to determine her position on Roe v. Wade, but she has publicly criticized the 1991 Supreme Court ruling to allow the Department of Health and Human Services to restrict funding from groups that performed or promoted abortion, and has also criticized crisis pregnancy centers. Additionally, President Obama has said he prefers a Supreme Court nominee who would take a special interest in ‘women’s rights’ — a barely masked euphemism for abortion rights. Through the judicial confirmation process the American people must know where Elena Kagan stands on the abortion issue, and it is the responsibility of the U.S. Senate to find out.
“Ms. Kagan’s publicly demonstrated prejudices do not lend themselves well to blind justice. . . . Women will never be served by ignoring the rights of unborn children. When evidence of personal preference appears in any Supreme Court nominee’s judgment, it should give all women pause.”
And here’s Charmaine Yoest at Americans United for Life:
“Elena Kagan has strong ties to abortion-advocacy organizations and expressed admiration for activist judges who have worked to advance social policy rather than to impartially interpret the law. Americans United for Life will oppose President Obama’s attempt to reshape the Court as an activist, pro-abortion institution through which unelected judges will work to impose an out-of-the-mainstream social agenda upon the American people.”
The “Elena Kagan gay” meme has been good for blog traffic today, but most conservatives don’t care what she does in her private life. Before you can have a private life, however, you first have to have a life. So why would Elena Kagan deny the right to life of the unborn innocent?
The big headline out of Pennsylvania today is the poll showing Joe Sestak pulling ahead of Arlen Specter in the Democratic Senate primary, but the May 18 special election in John Murtha’s 12th District is highlighted at Townhall by NRCC Political Director Brian Walsh:
We’ve seen a great deal of polling information since this race began, some that has had both the Republicans and Democrats in the lead. But one thing is clear – Republicans are close in this traditionally Democrat-dominated district, and Nancy Pelosi and her liberal allies are running scared. Even with Democrats possessing a nearly 2-1 advantage among registered voters, no one is denying that this race is heating up, and even political handicappers Stu Rothenberg and Charlie Cook have moved this race to pure toss-up. Tim’s message of fiscal conservatism and family values is one that’s resonating, and his push for the repeal of Healthcare Reform and the halting of the Obama/Pelosi agenda is one we can all agree on.
This special election comes at a vital time for our country. Democrats have rammed through legislation over the past 16 months that has placed the United States on a road to more bureaucracy and higher taxes – with no end in sight. On May 18th, Americans have a chance to send Washington Democrats a clear message by cutting into Nancy Pelosi’s vote count in the House of Representatives.
House Republicans will be looking to western Pennsylvania, where a special election to fill the seat held by Democrat John Murtha for 36 years looks like a good bet to switch parties.
Many Republicans believe a win there by Republican businessman Tim Burns will mean that they’re headed for a pickup of as many as 50 seats this fall, far more than the 40 they need to take back the House. . . .
If Republican Tim Burns takes Murtha’s seat after 36 years of Democratic control – and despite a two-to-one voter registration advantage in Pennsylvania’s 12th District – some say that means the GOP will hit the high end of estimated pickups this fall.
Conservatives got encouraging news last week:
Democratic special election nominee Mark Critz is headed into the final 12 days of the campaign with a serious cash disadvantage.
Critz reported $73,000 cash on hand plus another $40,000 in debt in the pre-election reports released Thursday.
Businessman Tim Burns, the GOP nominee, reported having more than four times that sum with $308,000 in the bank.
OK, so the Republican has enough cash to go the distance, now what he needs is volunteers to help. As I reported last night in the Hot Air Green Room, the conservative group Code Red is putting out the call:
We are on the ground in PA-12 for the special election. We have called and identified several thousand conservative democrats and independent voters that need to be visited in a door-to-door program this week.
Because of the make-up of the district, this election will be a nail biter and EVERY vote picked up could make a difference in the outcome. Conservative CODE RED is organizing door-to-door efforts around the district. Please come to PA-12 and help us turn out the vote.
You can make a difference! Be a part of history. . . .
If you can come to western Pennsylvania to help out in this vital election, please email me at [email protected] or call me at (740) 792-2400.
You can get the latest updates by checking #PA12 on Twitter, and also by following @TimothyBurns or his campaign’s outreach coordinator, Angela Lash (@Lash3). Learn more at TimBurnsForCongress.com.
PREVIOUSLY:
Tonight, I’m reaping the Google traffic bonanza from “How Gay Is Elena Kagan?” (Short answer: Gayer than Rosie O’Donnell guest-hosting the Ellen DeGeneres show.) Now everybody’s Googling for America’s most famous stealth lesbian:
Kagan, 50, served as the Dean of Harvard Law Lesbian School from 2003 to 2009. Obama nominated her to serve in her current post as solicitor general early in 2009, and she won Senate confirmation by a vote of 61-31. She is the first woman lesbian to serve as solicitor general of the United States. . . .
Some liberal critics have said that Kagan’s views on executive power and the treatment of terrorist detainees are too conservative lesbian . . .
Obviously, some editing was required there. Does anyone care what I think of Elena Kagan’s judicial philosophy? No, but they’ll scour every corner of the Internet for “Elena Kagan lesbian” or “Elena Kagan gay,” and it’s been months since I’ve had a Google-bomb winner like that. (If you’re looking for “Elena Kagan nude” or “Elena Kagan sex video,” you’re pathetic and disgusting, but traffic is traffic.)
For some reason, while conservatives are mostly indifferent toward Kagan’s gayness, the Obama administration has acted as if it were a huge scandal, as conservative lesbian Cynthia Yockey explains:
Well, thank Gaia gays and lesbians can count on the left — the gay-lovin’, gay rights supportin’ left — to have their backs. So how are they taking the news? KA. FREAKING. BOOM! SHAME-A-PALOOZA! The White House announced that Kagan is straight and it is all Bush’s fault if anyone says otherwise. HuffPo has declared war on the “Republican whispering campaign.” Human Rights Campaign is decrying discussion of Kagan’s sexual orientation as being “straight out of the right-wing playbook.” . . .
Lesbians and gays are outnumbered on the left by other demographic groups that hate us and want us dead. . . . I believe it is these leftist anti-gay identity groups who are working hard to shift blame for a “whispering campaign” onto conservatives and Republicans.
The purpose of the Kagan “whispering campaign” blame game is the same as the Tea Party “racism” smears: To convince Americans (gay, straight, black, white, whatever) that conservatives are dangerous, irrational bigots. As it becomes starkly apparent that Democrats are incompetent to cope with the nation’s economic and national-security problems, the Left has increasingly resorted to defamation and demonization of their political opponents. It’s the only argument they’ve got.
Beyond that, if you want serious discussion of the Elena Kagan nomination, try Legal Insurrection, Michelle Malkin, Tammy Bruce, Weasel Zippers or The Lonely Conservative. Legal analysis isn’t my specialty. I’m just a blogger trying to make a buck.
Don’t hate me for being a capitalist.
UPDATE: Hands off my Google-bomb, Donald Douglas!
UPDATE II: Bob Belvedere and Da Tech Guy are not ashamed to covet the lucrative Google-bomb.
UPDATE III: More non-rumors from Cliff at Another Black Conservative and from Jules Crittenden.
Meanwhile, in the comments below, Jennifer from A Conservative Shemale seems offended by my sense of humor. Although National Offend a Feminist Week ended yesterday, permit me to wonder hypothetically whether Jennifer would be offended or flattered if I replied, “Run along and get me a cup of coffee, sweetheart.”
Being oppressed by the patriarchy = acceptance?
