Ninotchka, on her arrival at the train station, updating her fellow countrymen about latest news in Moscow: "The last mass trials were a success: there will be fewer, but better Russians."
We can't say if Jonah Goldberg woke up wearing last night's dress, but, almost undoubtedly, he'd be happy emerging from his slumber if there were "fewer, but better, liberals".
For it is Liberals who are in Goldberg's cross-hairs, as he barnstorms the country to promote his book "Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning" (and no, The Garlic hasn't read the book yet, beyond catching the various snippets on-line).
That's right, fascism isn't a rightwing conservatism religion, it's a behavior of the Liberal Left, so we can blame the Liberals for all the world's ills.
This might all play out fantastically in Goldberg's head, but, funny thing, and we're not sure if anyone hipped Goldberg to it, but when you write, and publish, a book, people read it ... And, unless you're rock-solid accurate, people then diss you ...
And dissing is what is, so appropriately, following Goldberg around on his tour.
From Matthew Yglesais;
One major problem with the book is that Goldberg has no ability whatsoever to stick to a coherent line of argument. You might call this book "disparate essays about fascism and American liberalism designed to annoy liberals."
Beyond specific errors, lapses in logic, etc. the biggest problem with Goldberg's book is actually that Goldberg himself has the wrong ideology. A certain strand of libertarian, perhaps Justin Raimondo from AntiWar.com, could have credibly written a book with the form of argument "today's liberals rightly identify fascistic strands in contemporary conservatism, but ignore the fascist mote in their own eye" and deliver a diatribe against statism in general and seek to tar everyone, left and right, with lax deployment of the brush of fascism. But that's not Jonah Goldberg. Goldberg is, instead, a loyal foot soldier in the Republican Noise Machine. He's a steadfast supporter of the political party representing the dominant ethnocultural group in the United States, the party that supports torture and unlimited surveillance, the party that supports a larger and more aggressively employed military, the party that supports a more punitive criminal justice system at home, the party whose backers are prone to fretting about low birthrates, the need to police gender roles more rigidly, etc."
Goldberg even ventured onto the set of The Daily Show, to which Jon Stewart lamented "I don’t know what you’re saying", and “How is organic food fascist?” and “I must say you totally misrepresent what progressive means.”
From Editor & Publisher;
Most touchy moment for Jonah came when Stewart asked him if one of the things he was against was people throwing around the charge "fascism" far too easily. Jonah said yes, then Stewart picked up a copy of the book and simply pointed to the title, "Liberal Fascism" -- adding, so why are you doing this?
There's a great interview (with Goldberg splaying all over the place) by Salon's Alex Koppelman ("We're all fascists now");
In the book, Goldberg attempts to convince readers that six decades of conventional wisdom that have placed Italy's Benito Mussolini, Germany's Adolf Hitler and fascism on the right side of the ideological spectrum are wrong, and that fascism is really a phenomenon of the left. Goldberg also attributes fascist rhetoric and tactics to Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and describes the New Deal's descendants, modern American liberals, as carriers of this liberal-fascist DNA. In a sense, "We're All Fascists Now," as Goldberg puts it in one of his chapter titles.
Larisa Alexandrovna weighed in also, with her 'Springtime For Hitler' post;
Either Jonah Goldberg is putting on a new production of the Producers or his latest book is a cry for help from a fractured and disoriented mind.
Titled... wait for it... Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, From Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning, it is a retelling of history through the lens of propaganda.
What Goldberg has authored can be seen only in one of two ways. It is either propaganda, purchased by a sponsor and authored by a writer whose writing is at best tepid and inaccurate (How else is Goldberg supposed to make a living as a writer if not authoring propaganda then?), or it is a defense mechanism of guilty mind, struggling to balance out its own views in the context of history.
There is also a third possible interpretation of this bizarre effort. Goldberg could indeed be hoping to stage his own version of the Producers and this latest literary example is nothing more than parody. I think we should also start betting on just how many charlatans and morons come running forward to proclaim Goldberg's fiction as a historically accurate masterpiece, courageous for its honesty even.
I like Larisa's "purchased by a sponsor" theory, for the timing of Goldberg, and his book, seems a tad conspicuous, this, 2008, being a presidential election year.
With the very steeped fascist qualities of the Bush Grindhouse, a roster of GOP candidates goose-stepping their way through the campaign, promising to carry on, and the likelihood of an historic - and liberal - Democratic candidate that they will have to mount up against, time to begin blurring and obfuscating the lines.
Perhaps Goldberg, and his book, are the first pull of the starter cord of the vaunted RNC/GOP Smear Machine. The feeding tube has been affixed and it's time to start dropping in the gruel.
And what's this got to do with "Ninotchka?"
A bit of inspiration, from John Emerson's post today, "Commissar Goldberg", over on Seeing The Forest;
Jonah Goldberg's book has no importance at all from a scholarly point of view, but the Jonah Goldberg phenomenon is extremely important. He's the most recent of a long string of Movement Republican mouthpieces who have gained places in the legit media, and he's put a few new tweaks into the formula. Unlike Coulter, Malkin, Limbaugh, Savage, and Beck, Goldberg speaks in a nice NPR voice and has a professorial manner, and while what he says is no more than cheap taunting, the way that he says it seems scholarly. So responding effectively to him will be tricky.
Goldberg's book is also intended to inoculate Republicans against the charge of fascism -- "We're no worse than the Democrats" is the standard Republican response whenever they're caught behaving indefensibly. Goldberg doesn't really need to make his case: he just needs to plant a few doubts and give the Republican mouthpieces some new talking points. Even if his book is mostly rejected, there will be some residue, the way accusations tarnish reputations at the unconscious level even when presented from the beginning as false (e.g., "Obama has never been a Muslim and has never attended a Muslim school).
I expect the rest of the media will disgrace themselves by treating him as a reasonable man making a reasonable argument, and that in itself should be enough to tell us what desperate shape our country is in.
Jonah Goldberg, like Ninotchka, wearing last night's dress and just a tiny cog in the great wheel of evolution.
(Photo from ACCUMULATING PERIPHERALS - offhand commentary on E. Asia, the US, and the 12,000 miles in between)
Saturday, January 19, 2008
Friday, January 18, 2008
This is very, very funny.
Keith Olbermann ended his broadcast tonight with it.
"Now that President Bush has declared martial law, it will be illegal to own precious metals after the first of the year ..."Play it and go through the whole thing ... There's a nice kicker right at the very end of it.
NEW BUSH COINS
No word on where she'd rather be, but this has to be - despite Mike Huckabee and what he might say at any given moment - the head-shaker-of-the-day story;
I'm half-surprised the Cable News networks haven't tossed their 24/7 political coverage aside to run hours of loops of the same footage of Britney, accompanied by a parade of Tinsel Town talking heads - the B-Journalists - who, in truth, are very much part of Britney's problems and, exponentially, increase the coverage by running the loops of Anna Nicole Smith, rehashing her sad life and the parallels to Britney ...
Too bad this isn't a Sweeps Month, or that may very well have come to fruition.
I wonder if, like a racetrack's tote board, this jostled the betting at the Dead Pool?
Now, it's time to kick back and wait for the other shoe to drop ... Paris Hilton, complaining that no one has written her obituary yet, or worse, as with her singing, she's going to do it herself ...
Attytood: Thank God the AP is ready for the biggest story of our lifetime
Attaturk: Alert the Pulitzer Prize Committee
The Death Pool - Chronicling Death in Pools since 2007
The Home Of The Celebrity Dead Pool
The Dead Pool
Gerald Ford Dana Carvey SNL - Dana Carvey impersonates Tom Brokaw in a mock news broadcast on SNL as he enumerates the ways that Gerald Ford could die
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Something strange is going on here ...
Did the Obama Campaign plane make a stop at Area 51?... Was he jarred by Mike Huckabee's call for turning the United States into a theocracy, so much so, he got rattled and discombobulated? ... Did the curtain get pulled back, revealing a latter-day Lyndon LaRouche? ...
Obama, a closet Reagan Democrat?
Say it ain't so, O!
Of all the inspiring icons - FDR, JFK, MLK, RFK, and many more - Barack Obama is turning to this guy?
"I don’t want to present myself as some sort of singular figure. I think part of what’s different are the times. I do think that for example the 1980 was different. I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it. I think they felt like with all the excesses of the 1960s and 1970s and government had grown and grown but there wasn’t much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think people, he just tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.
If this is true, that Obama wants to bring to the country Ronald Reagan's "clarity and optimism", I suspect the current roster of air traffic controllers must be getting very nervous.
Maybe it's a vestige, left over from his teen years (you know, the thing Bob Johnson, when campaigning for Hillary, was talking about, but says he wasn't really talking about) , one of those things he locked into ..."Tear Down This Wall" ... One of those silly, goofy, teenage mantra things, an inside joke that doesn't really have any meaning.
Jeekers Frost! ... If this is what is in his bag of hope, a Reagan-style doctrine, a "Brunch in America" (we don't want to copy and steal Reagan's "Morning" thing), heaven help us if he actually moves forward with the nomination ...
Will he bring in Newt Gingrich, as a means of reaching across the aisle, to update the "Contract On America"?
Is there a "states rights" speech coming down the pike?
Do the Nicaraguans need to fear another invasion?
From Jane Hamsher, over on Firedoglake;
No, Ronald Reagan didn't appeal to people's optimism, he appealed to their petty, small minded bigotry and selfishness. Jimmy Carter told people to tighten their energy belts and act for the good of the country; Ronald Reagan told them they could guzzle gas with impunity and do whatever the hell they wanted. He kicked off his 1980 campaign talking about "state's rights" in Philadelphia, Mississippi -- the site of the murder of three civil rights workers in 1964's Freedom Summer. He thus put up a welcome sign for "Reagan Democrats," peeling off white voters who were unhappy with the multi-ethnic coalition within the Democratic Party.Why on earth would a leading Democrat, running for President, choose Reagan as a model to emulate? Hamsher is dead-on about not needing to go there.
One of his first acts was to fire 11,000 air traffic controllers in 1981 -- one of the most devastating union busting moves of the past century. And his vision of deregulation didn't free the country up for entrepreneurship, it opened it up for the wholesale thievery of the savings & loan crisis. He popularized the notion that all government is bad government and in eight short years put in place the architecture for decades of GOP graft and corruption.
There's enough hagiography of Reagan on the right, I don't think Democrats really need to go there."
Pam Leavey, over on The Democratic Daily, is stunned, saying "I simply have a had time wrapping my head around this ..."
Astounding isn’t it? Yep, let’s put the guy who brought us “Iran-Contra, “Star Wars,” and “the largest deficits then ever known” up on a pedestal and claim he transformed this nation with “clarity” and “optimism.”Hmmm ... Has Obama's staff checked him, perhaps there's been a recent head injury ...
From Digby's "You Sir, Are No Ronald Reagan"
"There's a reason their movement has developed this ridiculous St. Ronnie hagiography --- it's to inextricably associate their dark, divisive ideology with his carefully manufactured cheerful persona. It protects their movement from the harmful consequences of their wrecking ball policies. "We're not like those losers --- we're the party of Reagan, the sunny, optimistic, winner everybody loved! Look, here's our new Reagan! Vote for him!" (Check this scary thing out. And this from the man who said bipartisanship is date rape.)The "excess" that Obama, in his embrace of The Gipper, laments are pointed out by Matt Stoller;
I get that Obama is signaling that he sees this election as a game changing election like 1980. And he may very well be right about that. I hope so. But it's disconcerting to hear him casually recount these Republican arguments without a clear disclaimer, as if it's a matter of fact not opinion.
Reagan ran explicitly against the left (and in the process normalized the kind of indecent talk that made Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter millionaires.) Because he won big in 1984, leaders in both parties accepted this omnipotent Reagan myth and have run against liberalism ever since --- and have ended up, through both commission and omission, advancing the destructive conservative policies that brought us to a place where we are debating things like torture. It would be helpful if ending the era of Democrats running against the liberal base could be part of this new progressive "trajectory."
Those excesses, of course, were feminism, the consumer rights movement, the civil rights movement, the environmental movement, and the antiwar movement. The libertarian anti-government ideology of an unaccountable large liberal government was designed by ideological conservatives to take advantage of the backlash against these 'excesses'.Stoller continues;
"I don't know. But if you think, as Obama does, that Reagan's rise to power was premised on a sunny optimism in contrast to an out of control government and a society rife with liberal excess, then you don't understand the conservative movement. Reagan tapped into greed and fear and tribalism, and those are powerful forces. Ignoring that isn't going to make them go away.To bad this didn't come out before the debate Tuesday evening ... It may have made the debate interesting ...
It's understandable for Obama to want to put down Bill Clinton, for he is running against both of the Clintons' (and dissing Nixon is a gimme). However, if this is more about wrapping his arms around Reagan, and he sees the movement he's building as a "Reaganesque" one, than, this might be the time to actually listen to The Gipper's old lady, modifying her legendary clarion call into a mournful, plaintive "Just Say Oh No"!
Bonus ObamaReagan Links
Video - Obama: Reagan Changed Direction of Country; Bill Clinton Didn't
Taylor Marsh: Obama Picks Reagan Over Bill Clinton
Big Tent Democrat: Senator Obama, You Are No Ronald Reagan
Greg Sargent: Obama: Reagan Changed Direction Of Country In Way Bill Clinton Didn't
Carl: President Hillary
Noam Chomsky (Interviewed by Amy Goodman) on Reagan's Legacy: "Bush Has Resurrected"The Most Extremist, Arrogant, Violent and Dangerous Elements" of Reagan's White House"
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
I couldn't escape it. Feeling under-the-weather, it crept up on me as I anchored the sofa, unable to move, to reach the remote control, before it was too late.
Last night's MSNBC Democrat Debate from Las Vegas reminded me, very much, of the opening minutes of Woody Allen's "Stardust Memories"...
It, and those of us watching, were on the sad, dour, lifeless train ...
And it had the additional touch of Allen, with NBC's Natalie Morales standing, singularly, off to the side, reading emailed questions, almost in the role as the narrator of a Greek Tragedy.
Or comedy, for the fat-mouthed man from Buffalo was at center stage ... Always at center stage ... Never wavering or giving up his position of center stage ...
I thought it was going to be a debate, but with Brian Williams, and Tim Russert, listed in the role of moderators, it played out more like the pair emulating a couple of high school sophomore journalism students trying to goof on the upperclassman.
This one laid out so badly, I believe Leonard Pinth Garnell wouldn't have wasted his time or energy panning it.
From Steve Benen at the Carpetbagger Report;
About 22 minutes into the Nevada Democratic debate, a heckler in the audience interrupted the proceedings, saying “these are f**cking race-based questions coming from you two, these are race-based questions…”From Erza Klein's "Worst. Moderators. Ever";
There was silence from the candidates and the moderators for about eight seconds with no mention of the heckler. Tim Russert, continued with his question for Sen. Hillary Clinton which focused on her characterization that Sen. Obama “is raising false hopes.”
I’ve seen debates in which hecklers jeer candidates, and I’ve seen debates in which hecklers take a stand for one issue or another, but this was the first debate I’ve seen in which a heckler went after a moderator. Worse, I think the guy was probably right.
It's almost impossible for me to convey the damage Tim Russert and Brian Williams are doing to the republic this evening.Chris Cillizza caught this little gem;
* Moderator Brian Williams spoke for all of us sleep-deprived and travel weary journalists when he welcomed the audience back to Los Angeles. He was greeted with lusty booing from the Las Vegas crowd.And, of course, Little Timmy Russert had to play his usual games, during a round of questioning about the positions on Iraq, in which all three candidates were in basic agreement to pull the troops out during the first year, with some subtle differences.
But Little Timmy didn't like those answers. Little Timmy got a little angry with the candidates and had to let them know that he was a little angry with them, contemptuously and dismissively snipping at them, complete with shaking head and enlarged eyeballs;
RUSSERT: In September, we were in New Hampshire together, and I asked the three of you if you would pledge to have all troops out of Iraq by the end of your first term.If you didn't watch last night, you didn't miss very much. The more informal stage setting - all three sitting around a table, mere feet from each other - was different, however, it offered, very much, more articulated stump speeches. None of the three erred to any great extent and none really scored points on each other.
All three of you said, you will not take that pledge. I'm hearing something much different tonight.
It was, as we started this post, the Woody Allen train, a dull and uneventful evening.
If it's Tuesday in Las Vegas, it's Meet Timmy and Brian making asses of themselves (and, as I am writing this post, I hear a promo from MSNBC, that this dynamic-less duo will be hosting and moderating an upcoming Republican debate in Florida ... Egads!)
Hmmm ... Maybe it was last night, or hearing of the future moderation duties is what made Maureen Dowd so sick ...
Bonus Debate Links
A "Must Read" here - Matthew Yglesias and his rip-roaring "The Unbearable Inanity of Tim Russert"
MSNBC Transcript - Democratic Presidential Candidates Debate for Jan. 15
Big Tent Democrat: Why Obama, And Democrats, Won The Debate
Joan Walsh: The Democrats defeat the media
Josh Marshall: Nevada Debate Blogging 3.0
Steve Benen: I watch debates, so you don’t have to
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
We gave him some good advice and he just didn't listen.
When he had the chance to pull his head out of his ass, after his love letter to Scooter Libby, he, apparently, decided not to.
The Hillary Clinton Team must be like a glowing orb, the bright light that draws in the nitwit moths ... Or maybe, like in 'Time Bandits', she's "the most fabulous object in the world".
She's gotten Bob Johnson to smear Barack Obama on his admitted teenage drug use ... She's bringing in Terrell Owens to pick up the pace on the crying ...
And today, Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen is seeking to join the team (hmmm, maybe this is Cohen's audition), with a doozy;
Obama's Farrakhan Test
Because Obama hasn't spoken up, or perhaps launched a Bill O'Reilly-like crusade, against the magazine published by the church where he worships (published by the daughter of the minister, just to give you another degree, or two, of separation), for their endorsement of Louis Farrakhan, Obama isn't fit to become President.
And, of course, Cohen does it with his "I'm not accusing Obama of anything ... But ..." chickenshit;
It's important to state right off that nothing in Obama's record suggests he harbors anti-Semitic views or agrees with Wright when it comes to Farrakhan. Instead, as Obama's top campaign aide, David Axelrod, points out, Obama often has said that he and his minister sometimes disagree. Farrakhan, Axelrod told me, is one of those instances.
Fine. But where I differ with Axelrod and, I assume, Obama is that praise for an anti-Semitic demagogue is not a minor difference or an intrachurch issue. The Obama camp takes the view that its candidate, now that he has been told about the award, is under no obligation to speak out on the Farrakhan matter. It was not Obama's church that made the award but a magazine. This is a distinction without much of a difference. And given who the parishioner is, the obligation to speak out is all the greater. He could be the next American president. Where is his sense of outrage?
The Clinton Camp is, likely, a little upset, that Cohen didn't dredge up the Al Qaeda Terrorist Childhood Education that was an early smear attempt on Obama, or speculate, if elected, Obama will take his oath using the Koran, but, give Cohen the credit for going for the reach, to place Obama standing next to Farrakhan (and, I'm a little surprise Cohen didn't have the WaPo Graphics Dept. work-up a couple of life-size cardboard cutouts of the two standing together);
And yet Wright heaped praise on Farrakhan. According to Trumpet, he applauded his "depth of analysis when it comes to the racial ills of this nation." He praised "his integrity and honesty." He called him "an unforgettable force, a catalyst for change and a religious leader who is sincere about his faith and his purpose." These are the words of a man who prayed with Obama just before the Illinois senator announced his run for the presidency. Will he pray with him just before his inaugural?And, Cohen echoes, picks up the baton, on Hillary's "voting present" hit job;
I don't for a moment think that Obama shares Wright's views on Farrakhan. But the rap on Obama is that he is a fog of a man. We know little about him, and, for all my admiration of him, I wonder about his mettle. The New York Times recently reported on Obama's penchant while serving in the Illinois legislature for merely voting "present" when faced with some tough issues. Farrakhan, in a strictly political sense, may be a tough issue for him. This time, though, "present" will not do.Wait a minute!
I must have all this wrong.
This must be Cohen's way of celebrating Martin Luther King Day.
Being that Hillary still can't stumble her way out her clumsy attempt to paint Obama as weak, via her invoking the legacy of Dr. King (she's now claiming Obama is the one who distorted what she said), Cohen attempts to go at it in the other direction, to tying Obama to Farrakhan.
Richard, listen up ... We're going to tell you again ... Are you listening? ... Can you hear me now?
Pull your head out of your ass!
Or, actually, if all you're going to do is smearing and hack jobs, maybe you should keep it tucked up there
Color By Numbers Cohen Links
Matthew Yglesias: How It's Done
Creature: One pin prick at a time
The Carpetbagger Report: Confronting Obama with a ‘Farrakhan test’
Taylor Marsh: Richard Cohen Swiftboats Obama
Greg Sargent: Obama Responds To Richard Cohen Column About His Church And Farrakhan
I got hip to this yesterday, after 2-hours of clearing eight-inches of snow.
Looking to chill out, I received an email from my brother, with the full article copied into it and, as he indicated in his message, I did find it to be a "fun read".
It comes from a Modern Drunkard Magazine (As opposed to, I guess, Old Drunkard Magazine and, trust me, that comes through in their equally entertaining History you can work through), back in October of 2006
Titled "Do you have a favorite drunkard?", Richard English turns out a most energetic and thoroughly entertaining piece on Andre The Giant, and his voracious (and believe me, that is an understatement) alcohol consumption.
Here's a few caveats ...
Another time, in the '70s, Andre was holding court at a beach-front bar in the Carolinas, boozing it up with fellow wrestlers Blackjack Mulligan, Dick Murdoch, and the inimitable Ric Flair. They'd been drinking with gusto for hours when Flair goaded Mulligan and Murdoch into some slap-boxing with Andre, who had poured over 60 beers down his gullet. One of the two "accidentally" sucker-punched Andre. The Giant became enraged, grabbed both Mulligan (6'5", 250 lbs.) and Murdoch (6'3", 240 lbs.) and dragged them into the ocean, one in each hand, where he proceeded to hold them under water. Flair intervened, and Andre released the men, assuring them he was only playing around. Murdoch and Mulligan, who had nearly drowned, weren't so sure, but neither messed with Andre the Giant again. They also picked up the tab.
You won't find it in the Guinness Book of World Records, but Andre the Giant holds the world record for the largest number of beers consumed in a single sitting. These were standard 12-ounce bottles of beer, nothing fancy, but during a six-hour period Andre drank 119 of them. It was one of the few times Andre got drunk enough to pass out, which he did in a hallway at his hotel. His companions, quite drunk themselves, couldn't move the big man. Fearing trouble with cops, they stole a piano cover from the lounge and draped it over Andre's inert form. He slept peacefully until morning, unmolested by anyone. Perhaps the hotel people thought he was a piece of furniture.Check out and read "Do you have a favorite drunkard?"
Monday, January 14, 2008
Football Star To Be "Designated Crier", Freeing Up Hillary, and Her Own Voice, To Hurl Racial Smears
The timing, the Clinton Camp claims, couldn't have been better.
Just as the 2008 Presidential Primary Campaign heats up, Hillary Clinton scores a huge gain, bringing Dallas Cowboy superstar Terrell Owens into the fold, to become the candidates' "designated crier".
"This is a godsend," gushed Clinton campaign guru, Mark Penn.
"He [Owens] has the name recognition, real tears, the cracking voice ... We couldn't ask for much more ..."
Owens broke down in a press conference following the Cowboys collapse and loss to the New York Football Giants yesterday, in the NFC Divisional playoff game.
Owens defended the teams recently-controversial quarterback, Tony Romo, in a plaintive, quivering and cracking voice;
"It's not about Tony," Owens said. "You guys can point fingers at him and talk about the vacation, but if you do that, it's really unfair ..."
His lips quivered and voice cracked. The tears were visible from behind the sunglasses.
"It's unfair," Owens added. "It's my teammate, my quarterback. If you do that, man, it's unfair. We lost as a team. We lost as a team.
"It's unfair because I've been through it. I know what it's like. He gives you his all every day. When you lose, it falls on the quarterback's shoulders. But let it fall on the whole team's shoulders."
The Clinton Campaign has been in a quandary, spending the credit of Hillary's crying and "finding her own voice" on the primary victory in New Hampshire last week and settling in a mode of tossing racial bombs against her main rival, Senator Barack Obama.
Former President Bill Clinton drew a firestorm, after characterizing Obama's campaign position as a "fairytale" and Hillary inferred the Civil Rights legend, Dr. Martin Luther King, needed President Lyndon Johnson to achieve his success.
"Having Owens to handle the crying," continued Penn, "frees us up to hone in on more racial taunts, create a layer of racial fear that will lift Hillary in a good number of the upcoming states."
"We can use [BET Founder] Bob Johnson to hit Obama on the drugs... Hillary on the race stuff and then bring in Terrell to cry about how everyone is picking on her, that it's not her fault ... This will be the Hillary voice moving forward ..."
Obama has hit back at the Clinton Campaign, calling Hillary's statements "ludicrous", "unfortunate" and "ill-advised."
Clinton defended herself yesterday..
"This is an unfortunate story line the Obama campaign has pushed very successfully," the New York senator said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
With the NFL playoffs continuing into the Championship round next weekend, followed by the Super Bowl in early February, Penn indicated he hasn't ruled out bring in more "criers", based on the results of the remaining games.
"We feel good," said Penn. "The gloves are off and Hillary is speaking in her own voice for the rest of the campaign."
Bonus Hillary Hijinks
Sam Stein: Obama Camp's Memo on Clintons' Politicizing Race
Eric Kleefeld: Clinton Aide: Obama Is For People Who Want "Imaginary Hip Black Friend"
Josh Marshall: Not Bean Bag
Matt Stoller: The Clinton Generation
With his season over, TO will be joining the Clinton Campaign as a "Designated Crier"
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Just catching up on some housekeeping business with this post today.
After the week we had here at The Garlic, we are late with our annual offering, our lazy attempt at a "year-in-review" kind of thing ... Rather than toil for days, piecing together a cleverly-laid-out narrative, tying in all the major (and minor) happenings, with a pithy edge, and esoteric cultural references, we throw on the leisure suit and sneakers via, what else, a list of links!
Monitored by the esteemed firm of Dewey, Cheethem and Howe, we cull from our site traffic, RSS Feeder traffic, links, rumors, WOM, random phone calls and emails, and a guy named "Randy" from Baltimore, to come up with the most popular offerings on The Garlic this past year.
So, have at it, and if you see something you like, spread it around ...
Top Most Read/Popular Garlic Posts of 2007
(Or, an official-sounding way to squeeze in three additional posts)
Breaking News! Hagel Speech Causes Havoc; Payless Shoes Flooded With Job Seekers, Resumes; Applicants Looking For " The Safe Jobs Senator Hagel Talked About"; Tancredo Offers Threats
Top Ten Cloves: Possible Problems With Suing God
Wag The FEMA
10: "What If Spartacus Had To Account For 190,000 AK-47 assault rifles and pistols ..."
9: Bill O'Reilly Exclusive! Black People Go To Restaurants ... And They Eat!
8: Breaking News! Another Bombshell - Craig To Enter Rehab; Cites Suffering From 'Restroom Leg Syndrome'
7: Where's Ernest Borgnine when you need him?
6: "They will have flies walking across their eyeballs"
5: Libby Trial Update - The Scooter and Cheney Show Theme Song
4: Vatican Discounts "Bonfire Pope"; Says Flames "Not Hunched Over Enough"; Late Pontiff's Bend Was Measured "Religiously"; Never Used Contingency "Roller Skate Gloves"
3: Jeff Gannon Speaks! ... To The Garlic!
2: The Condoleezza Rice Ballroom Dancing & Charm School; Or: Shopping For A Legacy on Cyber Monday
(Much to our pleasant surprise, the Condi piece got picked up by Reuters)
1: Swedish Film Icon Ingmar Bergman Dead at 89 ; Police Depressed, Working Through Emptiness, Not Ruling Out Foul Play
One Legacy To Go ... Will That Be Cash or Credit, Mr. President? ... The Results - The Garlic's Weekly Poll
This is getting pretty embarrassing.
He's like the guy walking around with toilet paper stuck to his shoe ... Or maybe his fly is down ... Or the last to know that his wife is cheating on him ...
And out Garlic Poll voters see it, especially after this weeks' Iranian kerfuffle, where the Bush Grindhouse, and the U.S. Navy, apparently, can't tell the difference between a Sea or Filipino Monkey.
We did a post on this last week and, The Commander Guy is traipsing around the Middle East like he's a rock star, fully wrapped up in his bubble, babbling on, dishing out his Freedom speeches ...
And the hosts in the various countries lay it all out, give him the star treatment, but more-so, in-the-know, treating him like the uncle or grandfather who is traveling on the road to Dementia ...
After all, the McClatchy Newspapers got the nectar on it, almost by accident;
"The official Arab view of Bush was summed up inadvertently by a diplomat from a major Arab state, who indicated disbelief that the president will use the trip to renew his drive for Middle East democracy.Time to cue up Que Sera Sera ...
"Is that still on?" the Arab official replied sarcastically. He spoke on condition of anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities.
The Results - The Garlic's Weekly Poll January 8 - January 13, 2008
President Bush's sudden attention to a Middle East Peace Plan likely has to do with ...
Softening them up for entry into the "Coalition of the Willing when he starts the attack on Iran Tally 40%
Was checking "The Google" and saw that he hadn't done anything yet Tally 24%
Donations to his Presidential Library are lagging Tally 19%
Looking for a country to place President Pervez Musharraf's home-in-exile Tally 17%
This week’s Poll - With Hillary Clinton "finding her own voice", we can expect ...
Scroll up to the top right corner to place your vote