;)
The Commentariat -- Sept. 25, 2012
Profs. Suzanne Mettler & John Sides in a New York Times op-ed: "... nearly all Americans -- 96 percent -- have relied on the federal government to assist them. Young adults, who are not yet eligible for many policies, account for most of the remaining 4 percent.... Conservatives were less likely than liberals to respond affirmatively when asked if they had ever used a 'government social program,' even when both subsequently acknowledged using the same number of specific policies.... When Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey noted that his father, who 'grew up in poverty,' had used the G.I. Bill..., it was in the context of a speech criticizing our 'need to be coddled by big government.' ... Instead of dividing us, our experiences as both makers and takers ought to bind us in a community of shared sacrifice and mutual support."
Andrew Ross Sorkin of the New York Times: "To say that the choice of [Tim] Pawlenty, [the former Republican governor of Minnesota,] to represent the banking industry is odd would be an understatement, but his appointment is the clearest sign yet of the flexible ethic that makes the revolving door in Washington spin faster."
Nicholas Confessore of the New York Times: "Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman of New York on Monday rebuffed demands from Congressional Republicans to refrain from requesting tax returns and other information from tax-exempt groups that have spent heavily on campaign ads."
Presidential Race
David Lauter of the Los Angeles Times (in the Chicago Tribune): "... Mitt Romney faces a fundamental problem as the presidential campaign moves into its final phase: Voter attitudes about the state of the economy have begun to improve, and enthusiasm about voting has risen among key blocs of Democratic-leaning voters, particularly Latinos. Since the beginning of the campaign, one assumption has served as the foundation for Romney's campaign: that voters deeply upset over the state of the economy would want to fire the incumbent enough to push aside any concerns about his challenger."
Paul Waldman of American Prospect on the GOP's foreign policy problem: "Not Obama" + "America Strong!" is not much of a platform.
60 Minutes Man. Andrew Rosenthal of the New York Times: "... now I know for sure why Mr. Romney avoids getting into specifics.... When he does get specific, he doesn't make much sense.... One particularly hilarious moment came when he criticized Mr. Obama for failing to close the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.... Mr. Romney does not actually favor closing the camp.... [When asked] 'What's your big idea? he responded: 'Freedom. I want to restore the kind of freedom that has always driven America's economy. And that's allowed us to be the shining city on the hill.' His Big Idea is freedom. And quoting Ronald Reagan." CW: okay, maybe Jim Fallows is wrong [see video & link below] about Romney's great debating skills.
Jim Fallows of the Atlantic writes an excellent piece on Romney as a debater. It should worry Obama supporters. And the President himself, along with his debate prep team, should read Fallows' analysis.
Jeremy Peters of the New York Times: "... conservative 'super PACs' and other outside entities working to defeat President Obama ... operate largely from the same playbook, sharing polling data and focus group research to develop many of the same lines of attack. And they are being careful to keep their efforts consistent with the themes being emphasized by Mitt Romney's campaign." AND it's all perfectly legal! ...
... You may remember this. Attorney Trevor Potter explains how it works:
Alec McGillis of The New Republic: "Romney's arrival [in Ohio] coincides with a new ad hitting Obama for being too soft in pushing back against China's trade violations. Romney says Obama should impose tariffs on products made in China. But way back in 2009, when Obama did impose a tariff on tires made in China, Romney said just the opposite -- that in the long run tariffs are never a good idea." ...
... "Let Them Go to the Emergency Room" -- the New RomneyCare & a stunning flip-flop:
... Jonathan Cohn of The New Republic: emergency rooms "will not provide basic, ongoing care.... Romney doesn't simply want to repeal the Affordable Care Act, effectively taking health insurance away from 30 million people who, starting in 2014, are likely to get it from the law. He also wants to end Medicaid, making cuts that would leave between 14 and 27 million additional people without insurance. And he wants to change the tax treatment of employer health benefits, in ways that could make coverage more expensive or harder to get." CW: and who pays for that ER care for the uninsured? Those of us who are insured. This was stupid when George W. Bush said it. It is even more stupid coming from Romney.
Paul Krugman Expresses "Sympathy for the Doofus: ... Yes, [Mitt Romney is] a pretty bad candidate -- but the core problem is with his party, not with him."...
... Even though Romney has no sympathy for most of us. David Corn says the most damning remark Romney made in Boca tapes was this: "I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives." Corn recounts a poignant encounter with a 47-percenter a/k/a moocher.
Why Won't the Windows Open on this Gosh-Darn Plane?
When you have a fire in an aircraft, there's no place to go, exactly. And you can't find any oxygen from outside the aircraft to get in the aircraft, because the windows don't open. I don't know why they don't do that. It's a real problem. -- Mitt Romney, explaining why his wife Ann's plane had to make an emergency landing
Can we finally accept that Willard is not too bright? -- Constant Weader
Update: Aw, shucks. Supposedly Romney was joking, which Ashley Parker (Maureen Dowd's acolyte) failed to mention in her pool report. The L.A. Times picked up the story & recounted the comments as if Romney were serious because there was nothing in Parker's report to indicate otherwise. ...
... Update Update. You be the judge:
Consolation Prize: Romney still believes in cold fusion & he thinks the University of Utah "solved" that as a way to generate power conduct electricity. CW: Must have been written up in The Journal of Magical Underwear. (I apologize -- don't bother to write to tell me I'm a blasphemous fool.)
Mitt Romney & Bill Clinton are really nice to each other. (Video here.)
Congressional Races
Jamie Novogrod of NBC News: "Today's final deadline for embattled Missouri Republican Senate nominee Todd Akin to withdraw from the race is just hours away, and he has scheduled a news conference at 3:00 pm ET. Is he potentially dropping out of the contest? Not a chance, his campaign says."
Greg Sargent: Sen. Sherrod "Brown's [D-Ohio] lead in the polls should not obscure the fact that in one key way, the contest remains the most important Senate race in the country. That's because the Ohio race is providing a clearer referendum than perhaps any other Senate race on the question of whether outside money can depose an incumbent ... largely irrespective of the candidates themselves.... No other race combining this level of spending with such a clear disparity in the quality of the contenders. Brown has been a popular figure in Ohio (though Dems say his numbers have eroded a bit under the ad onslaught), while [his RTP opponent, Josh] Mandel has committed a string of missteps." ...
... Katrina vanden Heuvel of the Nation, writing in the Washington Post, champions the Senate candidacy of Elizabeth Warren: "Warren will focus on the core issues, and ask Massachusetts' voters to decide who is on their side. And if she wins -- hopefully joined by Sen. Sherrod Brown in Ohio and perhaps Rep. Tammy Baldwin in Wisconsin -- she'll not only lead a new generation of progressive reformers into the Senate, but also begin to teach Democrats how to fight for working people once more." ...
Karen Tumulty of the Washington Post: "The most closely watched Senate race in the country has taken a sharp turn off the high road. As Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) and challenger Elizabeth Warren (D) enter the final phase of their exceedingly tight race, each is seeking to undermine the other on the very traits that had been considered their greatest political strengths: his independence and her character." ...
... Warren takes on Brown's repeated attacks claiming "Professor Warren" is an Affimative Action hire who exploited her Amerindian heritage. CW: I think she finally got some good campaign advice:
Greg Sargent highlights the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's "first ad of the cycle that ties a vulnerable Republican member of Congress — Chris Gibson, in New York’s 19th district — to Romney."
Local News
Thomas Kaplan of the New York Times: Stephen M. Saland of Poughkeepsie, "one of the four Republican state senators who voted for , claimed victory Monday in a close primary against an opponent critical of his vote, while another of the four [-- Roy J. McDonald of Saratoga --] appeared increasingly certain to lose his party's nomination over the issue.... One of the four Republican senators who voted for the Marriage Equality Act, James S. Alesi of Monroe County, had decided not to seek re-election. Two, Mr. Saland and Mark J. Grisanti of Buffalo, have now won competitive primaries...."
News Ledes
AP: "WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange plans to address a meeting on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly via a videolink from his hideout at Ecuador's London embassy, seeking to draw new attention to his efforts to avoid extradition to Sweden over sex crimes allegations. Ecuador's mission to the United Nations said Tuesday that Assange was scheduled to speak Wednesday alongside foreign minister Ricardo Patino at a specially convened event to discuss his asylum case."
New York Times: "The housing market continues to gather strength, and the biggest gains in price now appear to be among the least expensive homes, whose values fell the most in the downturn and have weighed against any would-be recovery."
New York Times: "Libyan militia fighters assaulted a hotel in Tripoli housing members of the newly elected General National Congress on Tuesday, dramatizing the challenge the government faces in enforcing its ultimatum that all unauthorized brigades must submit to its authority or disband by the start of the day.The attack came as an American team arrived in Tripoli to investigate the death of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens in an assault this month on the American Mission in Benghazi." ...
... AP: "One of the young Libyan rebels credited with capturing Moammar Gadhafi in a drainage ditch nearly a year ago died Tuesday of injuries after being kidnapped, beaten and slashed by the late dictator's supporters -- the latest victim of persistent violence and instability in the North African country. The death of Omran Shaaban, who had been hospitalized in France, raised the prospect of even more violence and score-settling."
AP: "Israel's defense minister [Ehud Barak] on Monday called for a broad unilateral withdrawal from the West Bank if talks with the Palestinians remain stalled, saying in published comments that 'practical steps' are needed to breathe life into the stalemated peace process."
AP: "A quiet day on Wall Street turned into the worst sell-off in three months after a Federal Reserve official said he doubted the bank's effort to boost economic growth would work. Charles Plosser, president of the Fed's Philadelphia branch, told an audience Tuesday that the Fed's effort to support the economy would likely fall short of its goals."
New York Times: "President Obama will tell the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday that time for diplomacy to curb the looming Iranian nuclear crisis is running out, according to excerpts from Mr. Obama's planned speech provided by the White House." ...
... Update: here's the text of Obama's speech, as prepared for delivery. ...
... The Washington Post's report on the speech discusses its political implications.
Share Article
Reader Comments (30)
My hope is that Mitt continues to attack, attack, attack. His attacks added to the coming vile last months negative ads by the anonymous super pacs should establish Mitt as a "nasty man."
Running mate Ryan is a "nasty man" already. I think that there will be a lot of resistance to a ticket of two "nasty men".
Our Prsident should stay positive and answer vile statements with facts and not make personal attacks on Willard.
Those outside our President's campaign should of course, be concentrating on Willard's many character faults.
Jim Fallows' primer on debating Romney concentrates on the Rat's competency and fluency as a forensic competitor.
Those traits were certainly on display (as were his weaknesses) but it bears repeating the names of those against whom the Romney Mechanism was debating.
So he beat a collection of morons, imbeciles, poorly prepared panderers, and a psychotic solipsist? BFD.
This is not to say that Obama should take this rodent lightly. He must surely be prepared to counter a blizzard of lies with truth conveyed as directly as possible without the kind of stilted apparatus and faux outrage that support and decorate the Rat's every utterance.
Obama is much cleaner and more at ease than Gore and Kerry but should never talk down to someone who NEEDS to be talked down to.
The dominant rightwing media will kill him.
Hell, it'll kill him anyway. Don't you know that the so-called unbiased "reporters" like Mark Halperin (not to mention the Fluffy Gregorys) have already written their debate headlines" "Mitt Lands Serious Blows Against Unprepared Black Man"?
Romney's incompetence has so inured the public and the punditry to his doltishness that even being able to play chopsticks will give ascribe to him the patina of a Chopin.
Obama, on the other hand, will have to be Daniel Webster to Satan.
Anything less will be considered an abysmal failure (see Gore v Idiot Bush).
The Rodent has everything to gain and nothing to lose. All he has to do is not trip over his tiny dick.
And that, as Lady Rodent would attest, is ridiculously impossible.
Still, consider his previous debate partners.
It's a lot easier to win a debate against comatose nincompoops than a human being with an operational brain.
The question will be whether the press will rip Obama for taking advantage of a mentally, ethically, and morally challenged child when and if he wins.
I agree with you Akhilleus and am quite skeptical of Fallows' conclusions. Romney may have some skills in the debate area, but he appears to have an abysmal command of facts relating to domestic and, especially foreign policy. I just don't see him as o strong for that reason.
Joe Nocera tackles the unfairness of the capital gains tax in his current column. In examine the refrain that a lower capital gains tax encourages investment he says, " There is no correlation between the two. The idea that a lower capital gains rate spurs economic growth is one of the enduring myths of conservative thought."
Among other results of an unfair tax code: the rich keep getting richer at a disproportionate rate - as the latest iteration of the Fortune 400 list reflects.
..."It's a lot easier to win a debate against comatose nincompoops than a human being with an operational brain." (Akhilleus)
Quite so, Akhilleus, but do not forget that our dumbed down electorate has a plethora of misplaced empathy for a stumbling loser! MittWitt will do his little stutter and eyeblink during the debate, and try to look innocent--while Barry will look serious (read arrogant) and when he laughs (if he does) will be viewed by Fluffy and the MSM FlyBoys as one-upping. BAD!
My disdain for the MSM grows daily by leaps and bounds. The only show I can watch these days is Rachel Maddow--and I sometimes forget that she is not really a pundit, but a Ph.D. from Oxford in political science. If I see little Luke Russert one more time (talk about small balls) pontificating on election odds, I may have to donate my Tee Vee to Goodwill. Honestly, how did that unimpressive little jerk ever get on the air--besides nepotism?
What I really wanted you all to know is that I have strapped my stuffed camel--who looks kinda like an Irish Setter--on top of my little RAV-4, with a poster in his paws "Shame-Us!" I have had lottsa honks and a few fingers--large numbers of Rednecks around here ya know. Thank you, Julie, for the inspiration!
Oh, lest I forget: REMEMBER THE SUPREMES! TAKE BACK THE HOUSE! OVERWHELM THE SENATE!
@Kate; Like you, I am in utter despair about the MSM. Don't the Gregorys et al. ever get any feedback about how feeble and lazy they are?
I just sat through the diatribe that Morning Joe of MSM persisted with for 5 minutes on how the President has failed on foreign policy because he is not a people person and has no relationships with leaders in the Mid-east. Evidently this was in the NYTimes today and the assertion was even applied to the President not building personal relationships with opposing members in Congress. What a crock of crap. Scarborough's bitch was ignited by the President's statement that there have been some "bumps in the road" with respect to the democratization of the various countries in the region. Well, Joe, who the hell would the president have personal relationships with in these countries where groups of people are fractured and the "democratic elections" elect people that are historically at odds with the U.S. and our culturally based colonial view.
Would it be better to say, "It's a fucking mess over there and we are withdrawing all of our people, governmental and civil!"? Or do we put really capable people in Libya, for example, with the risk that disaster may happen (4 deaths in Bengazi)?
There are various levels of engagement. The President did talk to the president of Egypt after the riots began and for a couple of days the Egyptian government was equivocal about condemning the violence and even I could see results with respect to protection of our embassy there.
I guess I'd rather engage with our embassy people, even with the risks.
@Fromtheheartland: You raise an excellent question as to exactly who the President would befriend on the ever shifting sands of the Middle East. It is possible that Scarborough has some models in mind - people like the Shah of Iran. That worked out so well.
Or maybe he has in mind Georgie holding hands with Bandar Bush.
Seriously, latching on to one particular leader over there seems a questionable stategy at best.
Re: The custodian and the CEO; If I was involved with the up and coming debates I would want the President to talk and act like the guy that is cleaning up the mess that Mitt's side made. I would never let the listeners forget that Mitt's party were the ones that had the party on the listeners dime. Mitt is not a change, he is a return to the same policies that were in place when Obama got the keys to the place. Wars, theirs. Economic cliff, theirs. Social inequalities, theirs. The Custodian comes in with push broom in hand and instead of helping the party animals do everything they can to stop the clean-up. The Custodian cleans as he can. The new CEO on the other hand offers no plan to clean up; only a plan to continue the party. The Custodian explains to the prospective CEO how the company runs from a ground up prospective. The Custodian repeats the message over and over again. It's maintenance that the company needs. The Custodian engages the CEO like all custodians treat CEOS, with respect. Respect that comes from knowing that the CEO is clueless when it comes to finding the mop closet.
Kate,
Right on about Russert. Had he been Joe Blow from Kokomo, he'd be lucky to be holding the keys to the NBC broom closet JJG mentioned. He's a simpering little twit who, I think, is trying to position himself to be the next Fluffy Gregory, whenever NBC promotes Fluffy to Chief Correspondent for Taking Care of Republican Testicles.
These guys work so hard to be on the inside they forget that that's NOT their fucking job. Their job is to find out what's really going on, not serve as party functionaries with connections to party insiders who will give them their next "scoop", meaning, hand them a press release with party talking points.
I'm not saying that a young guy cannot be smart enough to figure out what's going on and to do the necessary journalistic leg work for a good story, but Washington is a byzantine place and starting at the very top of the pole like little Luke did means that he never had to scramble for stories, never had to do the hard work of street level, retail journalism. A perfect example is Ross Douthat. Granted, he's not a reporter (pardon me for even suggesting such a thing). But to hand such a prestigious job to a jejune pretender whose pedestrian writing is barely steps ahead of his scattershot thinking is a good indication of what's wrong with the Times and with the MSM in general.
In 1952 Bogart starred in one of the best newspaper films, Deadline USA, with a cast that included Ethel Barrymore as a Katharine Graham type publisher. It's a great film in a lot of ways but I recall a scene in which a young Russert/Douthat type kid shows up at editor Bogart's office demanding that he be given the position of foreign correspondent. "Somewhere exotic, like Egypt" says the kid, adding that he once read something about Egypt in a college course. Bogart begins to question the kid on his background and experience. He asks him if he knows who's running the country, what the politics are like, can he speak the language, does he know the country's history, its demographics, economics, issues. Has he read any of the country's major authors? Does he know what the current stories are in Egyptian newspapers? How familiar is he with local customs? And on and on.
He finally suggests the kid learn the craft of researching and reporting on simple stories before trying to step into a job that is clearly years beyond him.
But not today. Today, Luke Russert shows up at NBC and wants in at the top. "Hey, I sat in the studio and watched my dad. I'm already a master journalist!" And he gets the job. Then what does he do? He shows up at banquets as master of ceremonies handing out awards to politicians and lawyers who work for advocacy groups. The same people he should be reporting on.
Wonder what the Bogart character would think of that?
I know what I think. Probably what you all think too. These are the sort of people who are helping to shape what the public thinks about issues of great import.
But don't worry. They read about all that stuff in a college course once.
The Karen Tumulty piece about the Massachusetts Senatorial race is a typical bogus "plague on both your houses" MSM story: Tumulty poses the usual false equivalence between an out and out personal attack by Brown against Warren versus a very measured attack by Warren on Brown's positions. Very different. What will it take to get the MSM to wake up and start reporting in a real neutral way, instead of their phony "he said, she said" nonsense?
"In the 1994 debates, Romney’s evident lack of interest in the work of governing roused Kennedy to one of his best unscripted moments. Kennedy was arguing that however Massachusetts voters might feel about Romney himself, they should remember that in adding one more Republican to the Senate, they would be bringing Strom Thurmond, Jesse Helms, and the rest of the party that much closer to Senate control. “The fact of the matter is party discipline,” he said, warming to a discussion of the Senate functions to which he had devoted his life and for which Romney displayed a lofty “It’s all politics” disdain."
This is exactly what Warren did in her debate with Brown reminding us what would happen if one more Republican got into the Senate. The fact that Romney is ignorant of the nuts and bolts Obama can drill him down revealing his lack of the real building that goes on in trying to run a country with a Congress so divided you could slice through it with a rusty knife.
A friend sent me an interesting little tidbit.
Now Willard wants us all to know that he is the smartest little rat on the planet, right? After all, he stole all that money from old ladies and people who were put out of business by him and his pack of vultures at Bain, right? He knows "eeecomonmics" right? And he's such a good buddy of the Israeli Prime Minister that he repeatedly (and actually, inappropriately) refers to him as "Bibi".
As a lifelong presidential candidate, he's spent countless hours on planes criss-crossing the country he sees as his own personal fiefdom.
So how come he doesn't know how they work?
After Lady Ann's plane was grounded because of an electrical fire on Friday, the Rat wondered (aloud! fer crissakes!) why people aren't allowed to just open the windows on the plane and let all that nasty smoke out.
3rd graders know the answer to that. How come the smartest rat in the world doesn't?
Maybe because he IS a rat. Or maybe he's not nearly as smart as he keeps telling us.
Maybe he can call "Bibi" and ask him.
"Hello, Bibi? Hey, howzit shakin'?....just a little humor. I really don't know what that means. I heard a 47% er say that once, but you know, they're not very smart, being poor and waiting for government handouts"
"Hello? Who the fuck is this? And how did you get my number?"
"Bibi! Hey, it's me. Mittens! Remember?"
"Who?"
"MITT ROMNEY"
"Oh. What do you want?"
"Just this: If you were on an aeroplane at, say, 20,000 feet, and there was a fire, with, like, smoke and stuff, wouldn't you want to be able to open a window and get, like, a breath of fresh air?"
"Who is this again? Don't call this number anymore. AND DON'T CALL ME BIBI. I don't know who the fuck you are! Moron."
*click*
"Wow. He must really be pissed at Obama today! I know. I'll call Karl. He knows about planes and stuff."
P.S. And speaking of Fluffy––watched the debate between Kaine and Allen last night with Prince Gregory officiating. There was one point where he was pressing Allen to answer the question whether or not he agreed with Romney's statement about the 46% business––Allen by- passed it twice and when asked a third time and still not getting a decisive answer, Fluffy let it pass and went on to something else. So for just a moment it looked as though Gregory had Allen stuck in the corner, but true to form let him off the hook and continued with the tee-jus format.
Ak: Bogart: He, to me, exemplified a man that was truly male in that ancient, ever popular sense: he projected a physical self-assuredness, physically, phallically––he didn't care about many trivial things, he was intelligent and shrewd and he had talent. He could be old fashioned about a woman and with Betty Bacall he met his match––"you know how to whistle, don't you? you just put your lips together and..."
@Calyban: if you watch Warren's 30-second spot, I think you'll change your mind. It's a damned good spot, but Warren accuses Brown of "attacking my family." No, really, Brown is doing nothing of the sort. That's the kind of cheap shot I think Tumulty has in mind.
Marie
@Marie: With all due respect, Brown IS attacking Warren's family and her family history.
Can't wait for the MSM to tire of Chris Christie. But in addition to the NYT Op-Ed piece that CW referenced today ...Huff Post notes that "NJ is Sitting on $300-Million Meant to Fight Foreclosures." If Christie is sitting on it, probably no one noticed that it is there!
Funny, as a kid, I learned that I am part Delaware Indian. My brothers and I were thrilled. We always 'bragged' about it. Likely we are 1/32 or 1/64th or something...And this heritage is probably less of an exception that most might think.
...I watched the first Brown/Warren debate and he WAS SNOTTY in his statements to her. Something to the effect, "...not seeing her color." It was offensive. Yes, I would take it as an attack on her/her family.
@Calyban: no, not at all. Brown is claiming that Warren has used her fractional Amerindian heritage for professional advancement. Despite some documented evidence that she did so, I accepted Warren's claim -- and the testimony of people who hired her -- that she didn't. Neither by American law nor by tribal law is Warren entitled to claim she is Native American any more than I can claim Canadian citizenship because one of my great-grandmothers was French Canadian.
There's a substantive difference between what Brown is claiming -- that Warren abused Affirmative Action practices -- & saying "Your mother is a liar." He isn't disparaging Warren's heritage at all. I'm certain you can see the difference. Brown is not attacking Warren's family or her family history. His is attacking what he characterizes as a false claim that she -- not her family members -- made.
If anybody else can't "get" this, let me know. It seems crystal-clear to me even if I'm not expressing it very well.
Marie
I realize that everyone has a right to their opinions and can say whatever they like, but seriously, is Madonna an idiot?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/madonna-tells-fans-support-black-muslim-white-house-article-1.1167874
"We have a Black Muslim in the White House!!" (loud cheers from idiots not on the stage).
If you don't know what you're talking about, STFU.
Now maybe she was kidding, but arch irony is often wasted on fans at most pop music concerts. Then again maybe Willard was kidding about that plane statement (he being the king of archness).
I'm gonna say no to both. Even if the Willard Mechanism was making a joke, his delivery sucks, and since when do you make jokes about planes being grounded for potentially dangerous problems?
As for Madonna, stick to music. Friends like that the president doesn't need.
@MAG. Okay, I see you also agree with Calyban. I don't think I heard Brown make that remark, but I read several accounts that he was snotty & a remark on the order of "I don't see your color" would sure as hell qualify as snotty. But I don't see that it says anything negative about Native Americans or Warren's heritage. It was just his ham-fisted way of saying, "You don't look like an American Indian to me." Since I think we can all agree that full-blooded Amerindians have physical characteristics that are noticeably different from, say, full-blooded Frenchmen, I just can't see even such a remark as an attack on Warren's family, which is what she claims in the ad.
Marie
P.S. Scott, with his handsomely-chiseled features, looks to me more like some Natives Americans than Warren does. Maybe in his next career, to begin in January, he can be a film actor & play the part of an American Indian in the movies.
Having just watched the Brown ad, I have to say that I don't see it as a personal attack on Warren's family. An attack against her, for sure, but not against her family or her heritage.
The contention, according to the spot, is that Warren reaped some benefit by making a claim that she had some American Indian connections in her family's past. The spot does go on to assert (don't know how they can do this, but since when do facts play a huge role in GOP arguments?) that there is zero evidence to support Warren's claims.
Now, you take issue with the fact that Brown is a dick, and that he was a smarmy asshole at the debate with that crack about her not looking Native American, but within the narrow confines of this ad, I don't think you can make the case that he's attacking her family. He's claiming that she used a minority status to get ahead. That's it.
But, on the other hand, it is certainly difficult to examine any particular statement or assertion in a vacuum. The enmity of the GOP towards non-whites is pretty clear and well documented, and although I don't have any evidence to demonstrate that Brown himself harbors the kind of racial hatred and bias that has become woven into the fabric of what it means to be a Republican in 2012, he certainly supports those who do. That alone is a reason to vote his ass out of office, but this spot is pretty clean. And, actually, not a bad one, if you're a supporter of pretty boy pretenders.
The final cringe inducing clip, of Warren simply being honest about whether or not there are any other things in her past that might hurt her, is not something a seasoned pro would ever say, at least not in that way, and never on camera, and she gave Brown's producers a killer close.
I have to agree with Marie, here. Although Brown, beginning the entire debate with his allegations that Warren used this "Indian" thing to help her up the ladder is NOT the same thing as attacking her family or dismissing a native American heritage––he's just claiming she USED that teeny,tiny bit and SHE thinks he is doubting whether there actually IS a teeny-tiny bit of Indian mixed in with that Delaware and perhaps that doubting may be what SHE sees as an attack on her family. On the campaign trail we grabs what we can and we run with it and if I were Warren, I'd milk it, too. And Scott's pursuit of this in the debates seemed churlish and desperate.
The evidence of LSB's stellar debating skills enumerated in Fallow's article seems thin to me. As Akhillis, suggests it didn't take a mensa member to look good next to the primary candidate clown car. Really, what would be the coherent answer to the latest version of "let them eat cake" = "send them to the ER". Bottom line, I don't think he's all that smart. He may be well rehearsed and he has a good hairdresser. Leave the spray tan at home.
Okey Dokey, THIS should DO it! (From Video Cafe)
Sen. Scott Brown Staffers Caught on Video Chanting Indian War Whoops, Making Tomahawk Chops
A video, posted by Blue Mass Group this morning, shows the ugliness and depths a campaign can sink to when they're seeing an inevitable loss. Faced with the grim prospect of imminent unemployment, the Brown staffers take matters into their own hands.
via WCVB, Boston:
BOSTON —Staffers for Sen. Scott Brown chanted Indian "war whoops" and made "tomahawk chops" during a rally for the Republican senator this week in Boston.
In a video posted on YouTube, Brown's staffers are seen holding campaign signs near the Erie Pub, chanting and making tomahawk chops, presumably in reference to Elizabeth Warren's claims of Cherokee heritage.
Brown's deputy Chief of Staff Greg Casey and Constituent Service Counsel Jack Richard, and GOP operative Brad Garrett are pictured in the video, NewsCenter 5's Janet Wu confirmed.
Earlier this week, Brown's campaign launched a new television ad featuring clips of news reports on Warren's Native American claims.
Scott Brown has since said he doesn't "condone" such behavior, yet the damage may already have been done to his campaign as such amateur hour tactics have foreseeable consequences at the ballot box.
@Kate Madison. Okey-doke, I guess I lose this one!
Let me just say that before you disabused me of my premise with your crack investigative journalism there, I thought that Brown had done nothing to disparage Warren's Amerindian heritage. Even if he hasn't personally said anything publicly, his top-level staff are demonstrably a bunch of bigots. If you accept the premise that a fish rots from the head down, as I tend to, then yes, indeed, Brown was "attacking Warren's family," not to mention the millions of us who are proud of however much Native American blood courses through our veins.
I'll post the video in tomorrow's Commentariat.
Marie
Kate,
I hate to say it, but even immature, racist stupidity is not enough to deep six Republican dicks anymore, so far into the muck has the right dragged the level of national discourse. Brown will pass this off as nothing more than high spirited lads reveling in the dismay of a lying liberal. The MSM will play it but few will condemn Cosmo Brown for anything more than silliness.
When was the last time the MSM cared about a little Native American bashing? Native Americans have been trying for decades to get the fan base of an entire team (the Atlanta Braves) from doing their "Tomahawk Chop" at games. Hell, you can even download a Tomahawk Chop ringtone from the Braves official site.
And don't forget equal opportunity hate-machine, Rushbo (women make my penis shrink!) Limpbaugh, who a couple of years ago took time out during Thanksgiving festivities to unleash a torrent of hatred against Native Americans who, Addict Boy, complained, scammed us ("us" being white Americans) in the sale of Manhattan island. Those scheming Indians, boy, they've been making out like bandits at our expense ever since!!
So, I'd love to believe that this video will help deep six Cosmo Brown, but I doubt it. People are so used to Republicans being assholes, this won't make a dent. Worse, many are emboldened by Republican racism and hatred. They take it as an opportunity to unleash their own inner malevolence and hostility.
So much for that idea.
I'm not buying this Romney supreme debater thesis at all.
The only reason he receives good grades in the staying mostly calm department is because he is a fucking ROBOT. He actually feels no emotional reactions from the outside world and just has Tigger switch him on auto-pilot before he walks out in front of the teevee (the switch is located between his tiny tinfoil testicles and his debris dispense valve. Don't ask me how I know). However his downloaded personality program has major defaults and repeated attacks on a certain domain can provoke irrational behavior and then all bets are off. Incoherent babbling ensues and a reboot is quickly needed via strategically placed channel changers throughout the audience (the receiver is naturally located in Romney's deep, soulless pupils. Where else to give him a quick charge of 'life?'). You can bet the Repugs are stocking up on longer-lasting Duracell batteries for the Presidential primaries because Obama's ice cold attacks could prove fatal to Romney's overheated mainframe.
To be sure Romney is scanning onto his flash memory card all of Rove's stock bullshit statements that Romney will retrieve and recite line by line. Obama will certainly need to prepare for the wave of vague, empty proposals emitted from Romney's speaker and counter accordingly. But Obama knows Romney is a complete hack and has a mountain of evidence to pull from to discount whatever comes his way. The biggest challenge will be to speak down to the ignoramus American electorate in terms they too can understand.
I think Obama will start off a little stiff and then find his mojo by turning the right screws. Romney offers literally nothing of substance to his proposed policies and Obama will make that point loud and clear.
Despite thinking that Brown will not pay much of a price for this latest video, I think I can now state that there is adequate evidence to judge him a racist pig. We all know racists. Some are even related to us. We can't do much about them but when you hire not just one or two employees of questionable character, but a collection of them, as well as some in senior positions, who feel free to publicly demonstrate their idiocy, there is no way to absolve the head idiot.
Racist Brown for Senator!!
Safari,
"Debris dispense valve"?
Excellent!
It appears that the RomBot's lower valve has been on the fritz for some years now. His new primary orifice for the dispensation of fetid muck is the one just above chiseled chinny-chin-chin.
(Great line though; definitely steal-worthy.)
AK: "...steal-worthy." And T.S. Eliot agrees: "Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal."