Proffer to Republicans

You don't want us Democrats to criminalize policy differences?

God, what a weaselly formula, but you've managed to get the whole establishment media to adopt it. David Broder even wants the criminal enablers of torture to keep their reputations. If the proper officials do it, it must be proper:

The memos on torture represented a deliberate, and internally well-debated, policy decision, made in the proper places -- the White House, the intelligence agencies and the Justice Department -- by the proper officials.

Here's the deal, Republicans: Refrain from criminal policies, and we won't lock you up for it. And it's not negotiable, at least not for me.

Of millstones and McConnells

For Mitch McConnell (R-Squirrel Brains, KY), it's all Duhbya's fault that the Republican Party is unpopular. Mitch himself? Didn't screw up at all.

Never mind that McConnell worked in lockstep with Duhbya for his entire disastrous reign, that he believes in the exact same platform as Duhbya, and that he even forgot his jealously guarded Senatorial prerogatives by dropping even the pretense of Congressional oversight of the Executive. McConnell's not going to take responsibility. He's from the party of everyone else's personal responsibility.

Instead, here's what we'll hear from Tobacco Mitch:

• He's disappointed that Obama's not so "bipartisan" that he agrees with the Republican right. Y'know, like Joe Lieberman. Or David Broder. I applaud anything that disappoints McConnell.
  
• Republicans do, too, have a budget, just not one that requires any liberally biased arithmetic. They can call it a blueprint all they want; you still couldn't build a house from it, not even a house of cards. What it really is is a cocktail napkin dressed up as a ... fancy cocktail napkin.
  
• He's proud to lead the party of no. He'd filibuster anything. Continuing resolution? Isn't it time to try Newt Gingrich's excellent adventure again and shut down another Democratic government?
• The Republicans in Washington are not going to change their ossified minds about anything.
  

John Boehner on the Republican side in the House is even worse. You'd think since the votes he controls are impotent that he'd at least have time to put together a more plausible wingnut budget.

Except that there's no way to get Republican bullshit to add up without repealing the math facts that grade schoolers learn before the fourth grade...

Leona Helmsley principles

Scamming the state expense account is fine, but you'd better take care of the tax man.

The Washington Post first reported last September that Palin had billed the state for nearly $17,000 worth of meals and other living expenses while staying in her own home...

Now the state wants its cut. For justified expenses, this would make no sense at all. The problem is that these are not justified expenses, and that pitches it over into net income.

Is shared failure to civic duty what David Broder means when he pursues bipartisanship above all else? Maybe Sarah Palin can charge her glass house to Alaska, but she should just call Tom Daschle if she needs a ride.

Why the hell is Naomi Campbell, modelling's enfant terrible, gracing this page? Any excuse will do for the big media to show us Sarah Palin. I'm just counter-programming with a bit more variety. For image license details, click the picture.

Good time for a brainy pundit

I feel just awful that David Broder is stumped about economics. Maybe that's why he likes John McCain so much.

Here's the thing: An effective media would feel obligated to come to grips with actual understanding of the issues. A real press corps wouldn't vacillate from ignorant scandal-mongering to ignorant hagiography. No, I don't need someone else to tell me how gosh-darn smart Barack Obama is, gee whillickers.

What I want from the press is what the blogosphere offers if you blow through enough chaff: a conscientious attempt to learn and analyze the issues and the people, to appeal to expertise when needed, but to put everything through a fine-grained bullshit detector.

What I get from the press: the attitude of middle school cheerleaders, who long since learned that smart is unpopular, who acquire dumbness - posed or not - for social purposes, who shrug in geometry class and steer the conversation to that really cute asshole cut-up football player who was really wasted out by the high tension lines after the game on Friday night. Their only expertise is personality, and frankly they get taken in by every insincere bullshit peddler who has a little flash.

So I guess I'm on my own. I do wish Broder would admit to his ignorance more often. Then maybe he'd give up his retirement in place and get off to addling his grandkids or the friends he could then meet up with every day for breakfast and coffee. Enough coasting on work he did fifty years ago.

(h/t Ahab)

Even worse

Warren Christopher has denied that he was the pushover portrayed by "Recount", but we now have our proof that he's a fool for Bushist flim-flam. He has signed on with James Baker, who strong-armed him before, to replace the War Powers Act with the War Powers Consultation Act, which would further emasculate Congress:

It requires Congress to vote up or down on a deployment within 30 days, and it permits a cutoff of funds for deployments if approved by two-thirds of the House and Senate.

What Congress is already too weak to do by majority vote, the law would now require a supermajority to do.

Of course, David Broder loves it:

[T]he Florida antagonists have devised a clever way to signal a healthy change toward bipartisanship in foreign policy.

This bipartisanship, his graven idol, is what got us in the shit we're in, but he always wants more of it.

What America really needs is a Congress that will stand up to Bushists, not one that will accept crumbs from the master's table.

No fear

Obama is not afraid that strong people will outshine him. Good thing, too, because he's going to need Al Gore for more than just global warming.

Obama is not highly experienced in the ways of Washington, and those ways are tribal, insular, and devastating to outsiders who try to offer something different. In fact, though his relative lack of the taint of Washington attractive, too, I really want for him to avoid the fate that Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton both faced - the hostility of permanent Washington as exemplified by David Broder dishing to Sally Quinn, "He came in here, and he trashed the place, and it's not his place."

So, it's very good news to me to hear that Obama knows he can't be a one-man show. He may be getting some chagrined advice from Gov. Deval Patrick about trying to break into a tribal, insular political society that would really rather not be disturbed.

Veepstakes

Obama needs heft for his VP. Clinton needs to broaden her appeal. Sorry, Bill Richardson, you're not the guy.

Colin Powell would be a bold choice for Obama. Double down on race, reach across the aisle to someone who still - mysteriously to me - has a positive reputation, and play both sides of Iraq. But this would confuse the hell out of Obama's base and not in a good way. Powell had his chance to be useful on the national stage and completely muffed it.

Wesley Clark could be a good military heavyweight who's not in thrall to the Bushists, but he doesn't bring his own geographic constituency, and Obama could use some border state appeal to flank the GOP. Since Obama's organization on the ground is so strong, Clark's lack of that isn't a drawback.

Sam Nunn? At least he wouldn't be called upon to deliver charisma. Weirder things have happened, but I don't see this as really helping Obama anywhere. Chuck Hagel would be better, more aligned on Iraq, and a regional threat into Republican areas, but Senators don't have executive military or foreign policy experience, though that's probably too much inside baseball to matter.

Hillary can't double down on gender. It's too bad, but she can't. She simply has to have Obama. There's no other way she can win. Even that is no guarantee, but a triumvirate of Hill, Bill, and Barry could be a potent story.

You'll know if she's doomed to lose to McCain: She'll pick someone else after talks with Obama fall through.

Or maybe she and McCain could run together on a unity ticket! David Broder would pop another Viagra after creaming his jeans the first time.

Broder's flaw: Stick up his butt

Is there anyone left who still thinks Broder has insight?

Good manners - feh!

What's wrong with Democrats? Even after what the Bushists and especially Karl Rove did to him, Tom Daschle still says:

Rove either has "a very faulty memory, or he's not telling the truth"

When the hell would Daschle ever bluntly state the obvious truth, "Karl Rove is a liar, has always been a liar, and will always be a liar. There's no point in anyone listening to a single word he says."

Would that be too goddamn impolite? And David Broder can shut the hell up on that subject.

Trade you Sharpton for O'Reilly, Malkin, Limbaugh, etc.

Ta-Nehisi Coates wonders why we still listen to Al Sharpton. Good question!

Still, it's hardly a reasonable place to start asking that question. Rev. Al has been wrong about lots of things, about Tawana Brawley the most viciously. But he's a piker compared to practically any wingnut pundit bloviator.

Why does anyone still listen to the entire Fox network, to Limbaugh, Hugh Hewitt, David Broder, or a thousand others? They obviously couldn't find their often ample asses with both hands and a map, yet the elite media keep thrusting them at us instead of finding better analysis.

So, by all means, leave Rev. Al to talk to himself - it's my guess he won't try silence - and find someone fresher and more likely to make a valid point. But while you're firing idiot pundits, make a very long list.