It's already entertaining to watch how Republicans and conservatives are responding to the triumph of Barack Obama and the near-collapse of the GOP in Congress. Yesterday, I pointed out one extreme reaction: a letter sent to conservatives by Michael Reagan, talk show host and son of Ronald Reagan, who complained that a "new 'Evil Empire'...called Socialism" has "taken over our once-free nation." Reagan announced he was starting a new organization that would, among other things, expose the sexual "flings" of Democratic leaders.
I can't wait. That's exactly the sort of politics that independents and moderate Republicans want to see, right?
Not all conservatives are pulling out their hair in this fashion. My Bloggingheads.tv vlog-mate, Jim Pinkerton, reporting from the Republican Governors Association meeting, says all is well in GOPGov-land:
Here at the Republican Governors Association winter meeting, there is no great sense of defeat, but rather a sense of positive anticipation--and for good reason.
Despite the general GOP wipeout of 2008, no incumbent Republican governor was defeated for re-election this year; indeed, two Republican incumbents, Mitch Daniels of Indiana and Jim Douglas of Vermont, hung on, even as their states went for Obama. Indeed, the case of Vermont's Douglas is particularly striking: he won a fourth term with nearly 55 percent of the vote, while Obama was winning the Green Mountain State by more than 2:1.
So while the Grand Old Party's presidential candidate, and its Congressional wing, were both soundly repudiated at the polls earlier this month, Republican governors did well. Indeed, Republicans still have 21 governors--including a certifiably hot political property for the future, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, who speaks here this afternoon.
Comments
DC,
I hope both sides realize it is time to do some heavy lifting. They have to get some things done.
When one side or the other is flat out wrong - bipartisan is also at least half wrong. I hate the idea that bipartisan is becoming generally accepted as "good" or effective or fair. It just isn't, not always.
Thanks
Posted by: capt
| November 12, 2008 12:14 PM
i think that the repubs should expose democrats' sex-flings!
Posted by: as_if!
| November 12, 2008 3:22 PM
Court rules for Navy in dispute over sonar, whales
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Wednesday lifted restrictions on the Navy's use of sonar in training exercises off the California coast, a defeat for environmental groups who say the sonar can harm whales.
the Navy's own assessment predicted substantial and irreparable harm to marine mammals from the service's exercises
http://tinyurl.com/6oemb6
Posted by: as_if!
| November 12, 2008 3:30 PM
'He tried his best to veil it, but Obama is an intellectual'
[...]
Every White House has had its intellectuals, but very few presidents have been intellectuals themselves - Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Woodrow Wilson, the list more or less stops there. Much of the nightmare of the last eight years has arisen from the fact that one of the least intellectually curious or gifted presidents in history was in thrall to a group of passionate, but second-rate, neoconservative intellectuals, all associated with the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), whose imperial agenda for the US was lost on the man they guided and advised. Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, the architects of the war on Iraq and the "war on terror", were treated by George Bush as experts on parts of the world of which he was ignorant. "Wolfie" knew all about the Middle East; that this knowledge proceeded from a hardline political philosophy instilled in him by Richard Pipes of Harvard and Albert Wohlstetter of the University of Chicago, both avid cold warriors and proponents of US military, political and cultural domination of the globe, was grasped, if at all, only very dimly by the 43rd president, who prided himself in reading no newspapers and being in bed by nine. While Bush was bicycling and cutting brush at his Crawford ranch in Texas, the intellectuals in his administration were staying up late in DC, busy about the task of reshaping the United States into the Roman Empire of the 21st century
http://tinyurl.com/68dsrh
Posted by: capt
| November 12, 2008 9:00 PM
I think all sexual flings should be listed in searchable database. It would be fun to find out if I am having a fling and who is my partner.
During the past 8 years several Republicans went off to Coventry or jail over malfesance of some sort. I assume at least one Democrat managed the same feat, maybe more than one.
Lets get Hustler on the hunt like it did during the Clinton Admin and lets have them search out anyone at all who might be getting more than the average American.
What this country needs is many more sexual escapades made public. It may not slake one's thirst or feed one's hunger but it would make America smile and maybe indulge in more sex. Can't see anything wrong with an increase in sexual activity while we wait for the good times to come back.
Posted by: kalpal
| November 13, 2008 6:54 AM
The record of the last 4 years indicates that republicans have more to lose in a sex scandal race (like the arms race or the space race) than the Democrats have.
After all the undignified drug pusher who was pimping dickup on tv was not John Glenn. It was Bob Dole.
Where is the outrage ?
Posted by: xrepublican
| November 13, 2008 7:59 AM
All politicians should have to provide sworn sex statements, like financial statements except we'll read 'em. Even if they are monogamous, I want to know how often they're doing it, how long it lasts, what drugs they take to enhance the experience, what positions, fetishes, who they're thinking about during. I don't see how we're expected to choose among candidates or assess a politician's success if we lack this fundamental information.
Posted by: ChicagoGuy61
| November 13, 2008 11:59 AM
Post A Comment