This is sort of in response to the flap between the Obama/Hillary camps over David Geffin’s remarks (I love how the only time someone like Geffen is taken seriously by the GOP is when he’s critical of another Democrat…funny how that happens).
Remember the scene in Tarantino’s 1992 film Reservoir Dogs where the gang all has guns pointed at each other? And then they fire.
Le’t s recreate the scene for a moment but around the concept of announced candidates for the GOP presidential nomination. But let’s substitute a couple of the shooters with Steven Greenhut of the Register and Jon Fleischman of the Flash Report and their targets are different candidates running for president.
Yesterday, Fleischman ripped apart Arizona Senator John McCain for his role in limiting free speech by being a co-sponsor of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform; and he takes the Senator to task for supporting tough new environmental proposals aimed at limiting greenhouse gasses and global warming (Jon views Global warming as a threat to our economy, proving he’s another Republican who continues to ignore volumes of research that documents this as a serious, serious problem).
And on Sunday, Greenhut ripped Rudy Guiliani a new one using Rudy’s own record against him. Before 9/11, Rudy was wildly unpopular in New York. The serial affairs and nasty divorce aside, Greenhut actually puts together a convincing arguement why Rudy Guiliani shouldn’t follow in Larry Agran’s footsteps of running for president after having served as a mayor.
So what does that leave us with Republicans? Mitt Romney (flip-flopper won’t carry the South)? Newt Gingrich (character counts; serial adulterer)? Duncan Hunter (pro-Iraq war/anti-immigration)? Sam Brownback (who?), or Tom Tancredo (one issue wonder; gets the John-and-Ken vote)?ÂÂ
The lesson from the 2006 election was American has moved to the middle, so its kinda fun to watch these Republican pundits battle over who isn’t Republican enough.ÂÂ
Everybody in politics lies, but they (the Clintons) do it with such ease, it’s troubling.” “Hillary is overproduced & overscripted.” David Geffen in the NY Times
When Slick Willie did his thing with Monica in the Oval Office, Hillary accused Republicans of a VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY. After he lied to the American people about it and finally admitted it, Hillary never apologized for her comment. However, she thinks Obama should apologize for Geffen’s “vicious attacks.” Geffen used to be a big Clinton supporter and fundraiser. He had a falling out with them over the Marc Rich pardon. Clinton stooge Terri McAuliffe is trying to scare Hollywood into supporting Hillary by telling them “Your either with us or against us.” Hillary’s support must be pretty shallow if she is having trouble getting Dems to support her over a media generated empty suit rookie like Obama with no legislative record to speak of. Even Barbra Streisand is donating to both instead of just backing a woman. George Soros is backing Obama. Hillary has tried to appeal to women by making them think they would be empowered by having a woman president. Having Obama & Edwards running against her is a big advantage for Hillary. It gives her someone to beat. Since their views on the Iraq War are extremely liberal, Hillary can trick people into thinking she is really a moderate instead of a liberal. This puts her in a better relative position for the general election.
The lesson from the 2006 election was NOT that America has moved to the middle. The lesson was that a sizable percentage of voters are impatient. Even then the Dems only squeaked out a bare majority in congress.
Actually Lee, your post has a number of problems. But I love how you quote a prominent liberal in the New York Times. It means there’s hope for you yet.
But Lee, very poor form for you to cut and paste your blog post from the Powder Blue report and dump it here.
It’s Terry McAuliffe, not Terri.
Barrack Obama has more legislative experience than George w. Bush had before he decided to run for president. Sen. Obama was a state senator in Illinois well before he ran for the US Senate. And he was clearly out against the war and on the record as against the war in October 2002.
You’re a poor student of Hillary Clinton; her political life began as one of the “Goldwater Girls” in 1964; she is a moderate in every sense of the word, not liberal, but I know you conservatives think that anyone who doesn’t agree with you completely is a liberal. Perhaps you should read her books to get a better sense of her belief system before you tell the rest of us how she thinks (like you would know).
Hillary shouldn’t apologize for a comment that is completely true.
Come November 2008, George Soros will throw his money behind anyone with a “D” after their name.
The Dems have a small majority in the Senate but its a pretty sizeable lead in the House of Representatives — a bigger margin than when the Republicans took control in 1994. So your statement about a bare majority isn’t completely accurate either is it?