TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Taylor Marsh has been writing on line since 1996, with the archives provided here a representation of that work.

Tag Archives | Sarah Palin

Update on the The Hillary Effect

By on 08 November 2011

Today’s not going to be the day we publish, but I promise we’ll have a big send off for the publication next week! It will be worth the wait.

Some book PR to give you a little more on what it’s all about.


Spanning nearly two decades of American politics, The Hillary Effect is the provocative and insightful story of the first viable female presidential candidate in history to win a primary and do so in spite of her campaign team’s mistakes. And the galvanizing impact that her loss represented for both women and men, in and out of Washington. It revolves around media coverage that treated her differently as first lady, senator and then presidential candidate – not only because she was a woman, but because she was Hillary Clinton.

Candidly written by veteran political analyst, Taylor Marsh, it is the view from a recovering partisan, someone who the Washington Post called a “die hard Clintonite” in their profile of her in 2008.

The Hillary Effect began when Hillary, as first lady, dared to challenge China’s treatment of women. A countless number of women have and will benefit from her presidential loss, the most famous being Sarah Palin (the Tea Party queen of 2010 and first female on a national Republican presidential ticket), who weaves throughout this story as the anti-Hillary. The Hillary Effect also sees Michele Bachman as a player, as the first Republican female to win a straw poll, primary or caucus.

The male leads in this stunning tale are Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama (someone who turned out to be very different from candidate Obama), with David Plouffe and Mark Penn making appearances. The story includes a host of media personalities and their outlets, but also new media and progressive voices, and famous names like Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Sally Quinn, the late Tim Russert, Richard Wolffe, Laura Ingraham, Liz Cheney, Peggy Noonan, Maureen Dowd, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and even Bill O’Reilly, who offered Hillary the best interview she would do during the 2008 season.

All of this is seen through the economic and political crises of today, health care, women’s individual freedoms being challenged by the right, Afghanistan, women’s rise around the world, the debt ceiling debate, tax cuts for the wealthy, Occupy Wall Street and an American public disenchanted with Republicans and Democrats, just as the race for 2012 revs up.


Read full story · Comments are closed

Republican Nut Jobs Help Obama Rise

By on 02 November 2011

President Barack Obama’s job approval rating is up, from a negative 41 – 55 percent October 6, to a split today with 47 percent approving and 49 percent disapproving in a Quinnipiac University poll released today. The president has leads of 5 to 16 percentage points over likely Republican challengers. Voters also are divided 47 – 49 percent on whether Obama deserves reelection, compared to last month, when voters said 54 – 42 percent he did not deserve reelection. – Quinnipiac University National Poll Finds; Cain And Gingrich Up As Romney Stalls And Perry Fades

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Is it time Republicans started to root for Newt?

Compared to Herman Cain’s idiocy, I’d say yes.

At least Mr. Gingrich has a working knowledge of the last 50 years and won’t pontificate about China going nuclear, as Cain did with Judy Woodruff, evidently not having a clue that they’ve been nuclear for decades.

Poor Sarah Palin, she’s a genius compared to the current frontrunner, a man who doesn’t know squat about foreign policy and whose economic plan is a joke.

It’s why I’ve been writing for over a year that Pres. Obama is still the best bet to win in 2012.

Never have Republicans had a better chance to fulfill their dream of making Mr. Obama a one-term president. But with these bozos, who keep proving they’re not fit for 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., the American people are getting a sense that though Obama isn’t inspiring at his job at this point, these people would be far worse.

The lesser of two evils bites again, at least so far.

However, I still feel if Mitt Romney can make it through the clown primaries, he’d be a formidable challenger for Obama.

Meanwhile, many hope for an outsider type to enter the race next year. Anyone who could give the establishment moneyed men a challenge.

Read full story · Comments { 2 }

Hillary’s Close-Up

By on 30 October 2011

“We came. We saw. He died.” – Secy. Hillary Clinton, TIME magazine

The issue above is slated to hit newsstands on November 7, the day before my book, The Hillary Effect – Politics, Sexism and the Destiny of Loss comes out. I urge you to read this article, which is behind a subscriber wall. It will cost you $2.99 to get access for one week. Do it, if you possibly can. The media establishment needs to see evidence that Hillary Rodham Clinton, whether you love her or hate her, is a woman worthy of coverage and that people will pay to read candid articles and books about her, because of what she has accomplished. It’s how Sarah Palin happened, even after her vice presidential candidacy collapse. Sarah became bankable because of her fans. No one deserves to become monetized in media terms, that people will pay to read about her, more than Hillary Rodham Clinton.

They say timing is everything and I certainly hope so. Because Hillary has earned it, that’s why I wrote my book. This woman, this dynamo, this fighting female made history and her story matters to American politics, but now even the world.

The TIME article also has an iconic Hollywood type shot of Secy. Clinton looking positively fabulous, by Diane Walker. You will love it. As she heads into what will be her last year at the State Department, at least according to her own statements, there can be no doubt that Hillary Rodham Clinton is riding the wave she created, the Hillary Effect.

Beyond American politics, including the galvanizing impact her loss represented for both women and men, in and out of Washington, which is the focus of my book, the Hillary Effect can be seen across her diplomatic efforts, but also in the latest action by Pres. Obama, the bombing of Libya. It’s one of the things over which Secy. Clinton and I differ greatly. But if you believe the New York Times reporting, among others, which I do, Hillary was instrumental in what manifested. The militaristic reaction by Pres. Obama and his administration, including Clinton, toward Kaddafi’s threats to massacre Libyans made them act through NATO with bombings and force. And guess what, it worked to get rid of Kaddafi.

I was strongly against Pres. Obama’s decision and disagreed with Clinton’s choice to side with Samantha Power and Dr. Susan Rice, though I understand and sympathize greatly with their humanitarian reasons to suggest bombing Libya to save the people. But what will replace Kaddafi? The stories so far are not promising, nor is what this action means to U.S. foreign policy as part of an overall strategic vision.

It’s the militaristic reaction from women, now represented very well through Libya, that proves we’ve got a long way to go before females can add the dimension needed on foreign policy matters. Of course, it helps that it’s just not practical anymore to send a large footprint into nations. However, a smaller force doesn’t mean no involvement or that our impact will not be costly to the U.S., not just financially, but more importantly in our global focus.

When it comes to military action, Secy. Clinton, as well as Power and Rice, but also Madeleine Albright, have proven women aren’t yet ready to lead differently than men. Albright once saying “What’s the point of you saving this superb military for, Colin, if we can’t use it?”

Will it be different as American women take larger roles in the military and get more involved on the front lines of battle? Conservative women are always the first to say fight, “man up,” while simultaneously spewing that women shouldn’t have combat roles. The irony is not lost on people like me who study these issues and the surrounding hypocrisy.

There’s a story that’s gone around for a long time about Clinton being one of the most trusted Democrats by the Pentagon establishment, because she understands the military. It’s something former Pres. Bill Clinton did not enjoy. All of the research I’ve done proves this to be the case regarding Hillary. It comes out of her generation and her persona, which has at its core traditionalism, something that informs all she does, particularly her larger foreign policy philosophy, beyond her diplomatic instincts, but particularly her domestic priorities.

If Secy. Clinton wasn’t the star talent she is, knowing how to speak the language of men and might, she would never have convinced the Arab League and leaders of the Arab world to approve of Pres. Obama’s actions through NATO.

This is also part of the Hillary Effect.

But so was Sarah Palin’s history making presence on the Republican presidential ticket; Michele Bachmann’s Tea Party candidacy, which also made her the first Republican female in U.S. history to win a straw poll, primary or caucus; so is Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who’s stepping out to help women like Rep. Hochul and many others; as is Elizabeth Warren, whose fan base makes her look like a presidential contender. These are just a few examples of women breaking out since Hillary’s historic candidacy that made her the first woman in U.S. history to win a major party presidential primary.

Secy. Clinton’s tenure at the State Dept., through the brilliance of Pres. Obama choosing her to not only run State but resurrect it from the ashes of Bush-Cheney, has shifted the world in the short-term. This shift is one reason why Clinton’s work post-State will be so important, because it’s a continuation of her “human rights are women’s rights” speech in Beijing, China as first lady, which began the charge of her life: convincing the world that women and girls matter to countries and that the stability of nations depends on females being part of the political process and economic future of each country.

Clinton’s feminist philosophy, if you will, has established “human rights are women’s rights” as a tenet to U.S. diplomacy, which includes women’s ability, no matter where they live, to have access to reproductive health care, in order for women to plan their life and their family.

How she’s altered the State Dept. through her leadership is the story yet to be told, which will no doubt happen once she starts her next chapter. Experts on diplomacy and statecraft will no doubt weigh in soon, though I’ve offered a brief preamble in my book.

Clinton opens a chance for women to succeed in the hierarchy of U.S. foreign policy. What has not happened is that women today have yet to break out of the male dominated militaristic language and attachment to use of force tactics to solve problems that are well outside America’s strategic interest.

Secy. Clinton has made U.S. history in putting women and girls at the forefront of U.S. diplomacy. Her impact in Afghanistan, Africa, but also in the world at large is undeniable. Across the globe backward countries like Pakistan, Syria, Afghanistan still abuse and marginalize women, as will no doubt happen in Libya if sharia law is implemented. But Clinton gave women a voice, a megaphone and a platform, and though there will be brutal battles ahead to drag religious fundamentalist Arab and Muslim countries and the citizenry into modernity, it has begun.

It’s another facet of the Hillary Effect.

Read full story · Comments { 31 }

About the Book Cover

By on 25 October 2011

The party’s over.
The view from a recovering partisan.

My e-book is scheduled to be published two weeks from today, November 8th. It will be available on Amazon, to download on Kindle, or on Barnes and Noble, as well as your iPad. It’s a busy, exciting time in my world.

Since I announced my book two weeks ago, I’ve had a lot of feedback on the cover. Continue Reading →

Read full story · Comments { 28 }

Obama Wins the Week

By on 21 October 2011

President Barack Obama meets with members of his national security team in the Situation Room of the White House, Oct. 11, 2011, to thank them for their work in disrupting a plot to assassinate Ambassador Adel al-Jubeir of Saudi Arabia. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

Republicans made Pres. Obama look very good this week. They just cannot get their act together and the one they’ve taken on the road for tryouts has been a flop.

As weak as Pres. Obama is today, with large majorities believing he doesn’t know what he’s doing on the economy. The Republicans are absolutely inept at making any economic case at this point, with Herman Cain the biggest obstacle to fiscal sanity I’ve ever seen coming from the right. Mr. Cain’s 9-9-9 is positively incomprehensible, especially if you’re a small government conservative.

Joe Scarborough said it best earlier this week:

“… This is exhibit 800 over the past year why my Republican Party has lost their way in such a serious, serious way. We laugh about it, but it is… it is actually tragic.”

Scarborough’s op-ed at Politico eviscerates the Republican field and for good reasons.

It’s a long way to November 2012, but right now team Obama has to be giddy. They’ve even got a priceless slogan, compliments of the Roberts Court and a progressive outside group, to help them drill the point home that Romney is a Wall Street Republican: The Romney Rule.

The “animosity” between Perry and Romney doesn’t look like it’s going away any time soon, either. Perry’s going to bear down for a final push. He’s got the money to do a blizzard of negative advertising, hitting Romney where it hurts. I just don’t see Romney rising unless other candidates start to drop out and there’s no evidence of that happening soon.

Then yesterday, a NATO airstrike, compliments of the U.S. and France, hit a convoy carrying Muammar Gaddafi on his way to Sirte. But that’s not the good news, because NATO taking out the malevolent maniac would have been one thing. However, Libyan rebels capturing Gaddafi after the strike, then delivering street justice means NATO and the rebels worked together, with the death blow delivered by the Libyan people.

It doesn’t come any sweeter, with the Obama administration getting very lucky on this one. Pres. Obama coming out on top.

Pres. Obama’s foreign policy choices have delivered Osama bin Ladin and Muammar Gaddafi to their maker, among a long list of Al Qaeda, including one American terrorist Anwar Awlaki with a drone strike into Yemen.

However, as Glenn Greenwald wrote yesterday, the collateral damage burns, as it does in Afghanistan, Pakistan and other regions. The other side of than coin is that if people associate themselves with bad actors, bad things will eventually happen. But killing Awlaki’s teenage son, due to the indiscriminate nature of drone attacks, is unsettling.

That’s what fighting the “war on terror” is all about, which is why many voted for Barack Obama, because he was going to be different from George W. Bush.

I remain unimpressed by the Administration’s lack of imagination and continued one note militarism. A Republican could have done many of the same acts of carnage, though I shed no tears for Osama or Gaddafi. Anwar Awlaki is a bit more troublesome. There’s something unsettling about offing an American citizen on foreign soil.

Hey, but that’s picking gnat crap out of pepper for Pres. Obama’s biggest fans, as well as his progressive and Democratic allies.

The bad news for team Obama and the President is there still isn’t anything positive to log on the American economy. Presidents can’t do a lot in the current situation, but when things get worse on your watch, you’re the one who looks bad.

…until the next Republican debate.

Read full story · Comments { 18 }

‘Obamabots’ Fan Out in Defense of their Hero

By on 18 October 2011

“They don’t have any belief system, they don’t have any political views, they only have reverence for and loyalty to President Obama,” [Glenn Greenwald] said. – ‘Obamabots’ defend POTUS in Twitterverse

The amusing piece by Politico’s Ben Smith and Emily Schultheis is all about the “Obamabots.”

Under the mainstream radar and largely on Twitter, the Obamabots are waging a high-intensity guerrilla war against the liberal-leaning journalists and activists who have — as they see it — gone weak in the knees and abandoned the president in his time of need. As liberal pundits have swooned at Obama’s occasionally feisty rhetoric during recent weeks, the Obamabots were ready with an “I told you so.”

[...] The Obamabots are the ragtag digital cavalry riding to the president’s rescue, a cadre of decidedly amateur supporters, people far outside the Beltway and its norms, whose intense loyalty and passion at a moment of wide disaffection can be reminiscent of Sarah Palin’s core of backers.

What Glenn is describing in the top quote is a virulent strain of what I call fan politics, which is most visibly seen today by Obamabots, as they’ve been called around here since 2007. Greenwald has been attacked on this site by them, as has Mr. Krugman. Fan politics is about people, like the Obamabots, who support a politician regardless of the policies he or she delivers upon, thinking anyone finding fault in their candidate of choice is committing some larger sin for not following in line. Fan politics is particularly destructive because it demands party loyalty take the place of political dialogue, party trumping principle.

The bad news for Obamabots is that we’re now living in a new era of political independence, which is only going to grow in the years ahead. The good news is that the momentum may not crescendo in time to sweep Barack Obama out.

However, the energy behind Occupy Wall Street protests, which reveal disgust with Democrats and Republicans could help the energy build and build toward a 2012 voter explosion to throw everyone currently in office out again. There’s no evidence yet that there is this power, but it’s not an outlandish proposal to say this may be where we’re heading, depending on the staying power of the energy behind OWS, long after the protests break up.

In the Politico piece, Joan Walsh is quoted as follows:

“I’ve become a conscientious objector in this war,” she wrote in an email to POLITICO. “It seems to me that the energy ‘progressives’ spend fighting other progressives over the administration’s every move could power a small city. And the rising tenor of personal abuse doesn’t help.”

Die hard party loyalists don’t seem to get there is a undulating political upheaval slowly taking place, which has been happening on the right for several years, with the left joining in, the foundation of their discontent the continued drag right of the Democratic Party, which began under William Jefferson Clinton. What saved Clinton from the wrath being felt today, besides the fact that new media hadn’t matured, was the courage he had to launch the largest tax increase in decades, though Lawrence O’Donnell claims it was the biggest ever, which, along with the tech boom, led to peacetime prosperity for everyone. Clinton also has a gift Barack Obama does not and that is he can seduce Wall Street and croon to main street simultaneously.

Progressives are fighting Obamabots over political principle, so it only makes sense the heat “could power a small city.” However, the venting doesn’t mean the majority of the disgruntled won’t come home to vote Democratic come November 2012, something I reiterate over and over again. There is real evidence, however, that excitement about 2012 is muted in Democratic and progressive circles, which very likely could lead to what Clinton experienced in 1996, which is lower turnout on the left.

If Mitt Romney is the nominee, which I’ve said all along I believe he will be, depressed voting is almost assured. It’s why the Obamabots get so incensed when political analysts like myself rightly scoff at the smorgasbord of Republican candidates, each taking their place under the heat lamp. Without a firebrand right-winger, the Obamabots already sense there won’t be the GOTV passion with Mitt. The other problem is that with people’s mood so bleak on the economy, the what-have-we-got-to-lose penchant could run wild.

In the background of the left’s discontent is the belief that if Obama is reelected he will tinker with the New Deal, because he won’t have anything to lose, with his legacy of accomplishments his only priority. But as we’re seeing with health care, as the Administration scuttles Teddy Kennedy’s CLASS, not even Obama’s accomplishments are safe, because of the ramshackle way ACA was designed. Obama also seems to believe, joining conservative Democrats and Republics, that entitlement “reform” should be a priority, leaving most to rightly think that whether it’s a Democrat or Republican in the White House in 2012, the people’s safety net will be weakened.

Of course, Obamabots are taking heart in candidate Obama reemerging to make his reelection case. However, with his record of compromise and capitulation to conservatism, with “hope and change” now retired to the marketing section of Barack Obama’s bookshelf, it’s a coin toss whether people will take a chance a second time.

Obamabots have been around since 2007. Today they’re just angry Obama activists who are incensed that Democrats and progressives want to hold their hero accountable for the “hope and change” marketing, with Obamabots still in denial.

What is at the root of Obamabot invective, however, is the palpable fear and realization that Pres. Obama could actually lose in 2012. This is a stunner for them, especially considering where Barack Obama started his presidency.

But now the President’s fans have their own egos attached to him and the thought of Obama losing is scaring the crap out of them. Their goal to get Obama reelected now tied to not being proved wrong about him, but also to protect gloating rights, never mind that the current choices from either party leave a lot to be desired. The sad truth is there isn’t very much difference between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney that will be felt by people. For Obamabots, it’s not just about Pres. Obama winning reelection in 2012. It’s not about their belief that Barack Obama will champion greater policies in a second term. There is no evidence he will. Obama’s reelection is now also about them. It’s personal, not political or policy driven.

Fan politics for the sake of the politician being supported is always toxic. It also usually disappoints. Just ask the bookend to the Obamabots, die hard fans of Sarah Palin.

Read full story · Comments { 40 }

Rush Limbaugh: Romney is ‘Not a Conservative’

By on 12 October 2011

“The Republican base doesn’t want Romney. The Republican base doesn’t want Romney.” – Rush Limbaugh’s opening chant on his radio show today

…and so it begins.

The Republican establishment thinks they’ve won. But if Mitt Romney’s the nominee, will the Tea Party stay around?

Conventional wisdom among non-conservatives and anti Tea Party people is that Republicans and the right will fall in line and back Mitt Romney.

Comments on my FB page have been very interesting today.

Reader GA6thDem said the same thing in the comments, with part of what he said below:

To me the Tea Party was really just the personality based mirror image of the “Obama Movement” … I also think that the majority of tea partiers will swallow hard and vote for Romney. The question in the end is will it be enough?

Today, Rush Limbaugh blew that notion out of the water, as several callers, as they did yesterday, continue to plead with Limbaugh to take Romney on. There was a lone voice pleading with Rush to remember Reagan’s 11th commandment, don’t speak ill of another Republican, and give Mitt Romney a chance.

Limbaugh also took out after Rick Perry today, who [update] couldn’t even get the date of the American Revolution correct, saying he was “too passive” and “needed to dominate, but he didn’t. Then he went further, saying Perry made himself disappear like “an a list magician in Las Vegas,” all of which I tweeted at the time.

As I’ve said before, the prospect of Obama vs. Romney is not particularly an exciting contest. Both candidates could entice challenges, with Rush Limbaugh revealing real unease in the Republican base.

What it also portends, if Romney is the nominee, is a tough Tea Party or evangelical type as vice presidential nominee.

However, any thought that the Republican base is going to blindly sign on to a Mitt Romney nomination discounts the power the Tea Party has built and portends a resurgence of a movement that has lately been slowly losing power and its clout.

Read full story · Comments { 11 }

ANNOUNCING… THE HILLARY EFFECT – Politics, Sexism and the Destiny of Loss

By on 11 October 2011

A BARNES and NOBLE Exclusive!

“NOOK First” Featured Authors Selection

Goes wide December 15th, available in print and Kindle through Amazon.com,

and iBooks.

The eBook that tells the definitive story.

Published by Premier Digital Publishing.

Spanning nearly two decades of American politics, The Hillary Effect is the provocative and insightful story of the first viable female presidential candidate in history to win a primary and do so in spite of her campaign team’s mistakes. And the galvanizing impact that her loss represented for both women and men, in and out of Washington. It revolves around media coverage that treated her differently as first lady, senator and then presidential candidate – not only because she was a woman, but because she was Hillary Clinton.

Candidly written by veteran political analyst, Taylor Marsh, it is the view from a recovering partisan, someone who the Washington Post called a “die hard Clintonite” in their profile of her in 2008.

The Hillary Effect began when Hillary, as first lady, dared to challenge China’s treatment of women. A countless number of women have and will benefit from her presidential loss, the most famous being Sarah Palin (the Tea Party queen of 2010 and first female on a national Republican presidential ticket), who weaves throughout this story as the anti-Hillary. The Hillary Effect also sees Michele Bachman as a player, as the first Republican female to win a straw poll, primary or caucus.

The male leads in this stunning tale are Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama (someone who turned out to be very different from candidate Obama), with David Plouffe and Mark Penn making appearances. The story includes a host of media personalities and their outlets, but also new media and progressive voices, and famous names like Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Sally Quinn, the late Tim Russert, Richard Wolffe, Laura Ingraham, Liz Cheney, Peggy Noonan, Maureen Dowd, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and even Bill O’Reilly, who offered Hillary the best interview she would do during the 2008 season.

All of this is seen through the economic and political crises of today, health care, women’s individual freedoms being challenged by the right, Afghanistan, women’s rise around the world, the debt ceiling debate, tax cuts for the wealthy, Occupy Wall Street and an American public disenchanted with Republicans and Democrats, just as the race for 2012 revs up.

TM NOTE: Renowned artist Hugh Syme did the cover; Hillary bust by Karen Caldicott, who’s been featured in Newsweek and The Nation.

The announcement has been edited and updated.

Read full story · Comments { 36 }

Taylor Marsh Authors The Hillary Effect – Politics, Sexism and the Destiny of Loss

By on 11 October 2011

Due out in November. Available on Amazon.com, on your Kindle, Barnes & Noble, Nook, and iPad.

Spanning nearly two decades of American politics, The Hillary Effect is the provocative and insightful story of the first viable female presidential candidate in history to win a primary and do so in spite of her campaign team’s mistakes. And the galvanizing impact that her loss represented for both women and men, in and out of Washington. It revolves around media coverage that treated her differently as first lady, senator and then presidential candidate – not only because she was a woman, but because she was Hillary Clinton.

Candidly written by veteran political analyst, Taylor Marsh, it is the view from a recovering partisan, someone who the Washington Post called a “die hard Clintonite” in their profile of her in 2008.
The Hillary Effect began when Hillary, as first lady, dared to challenge China’s treatment of women. A countless number of women have and will benefit from her presidential loss, the most famous being Sarah Palin (the Tea Party queen of 2010 and first female on a national Republican presidential ticket), who weaves throughout this story as the anti-Hillary. The Hillary Effect also sees Michele Bachman as a player, as the first Republican female to win a straw poll, primary or caucus.

The male leads in this stunning tale are Bill Clinton and President Barack Obama (someone who turned out to be very different from candidate Obama), with David Plouffe and Mark Penn making appearances. The story includes a host of media personalities and their outlets, but also new media and progressive voices, and famous names like Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Sally Quinn, the late Tim Russert, Richard Wolffe, Laura Ingraham, Liz Cheney, Peggy Noonan, Maureen Dowd, Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and even Bill O’Reilly, who offered Hillary the best interview she would do during the 2008 season.

All of this is seen through the economic and political crises of today, health care, women’s individual freedoms being challenged by the right, Afghanistan, women’s rise around the world, the debt ceiling debate, tax cuts for the wealthy, Occupy Wall Street and an American public disenchanted with Republicans and Democrats, just as the race for 2012 revs up.

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

Why is Scott Brown Talking About Warren Being Naked?

By on 06 October 2011

**UPDATED**

Elizabeth Warren got in a good zinger in last night’s debate when asked about Scott Brown’s Playgirl layout. “I didn’t take my clothes off” to pay for school, she quipped.

That got to Sen. Brown, who today went on talk radio. But instead of making things better for himself, he took aim at his foot and shot off his toes.

A little smutty humor, compliments of the sexist Republican senator from Massachusetts. Why he decided to go where he did in this interview is beyond me.

Scott Brown quips about Elizabeth Warren’s appearance on Boston radio show

Brown was responding to a crack Warren made in Tuesday’s debate, when the Democrat was asked about Scott Brown using his centerfold spread in Cosmopolitan magazine decades ago to pay for college. Warren said “I didn’t take my clothes off” to pay for school.

Asked by the WZLX disc jockey for a response, Brown said “Thank God,” eliciting laughter from the DJs.

From Greg Sargent, the Massachusetts Democratic Party executive director Clare Kelly responds:

“Sen. Brown’s comments are the kind of thing you would expect to hear in a frat house, not a race for U.S. Senate. We keep waiting for Scott Brown to take his campaign out of the gutter, but unfortunately it seems like the junior senator has determined that mudslinging and dirty tricks are the only way he can distract Massachusetts voters from his record of voting in lockstep with Tea Party Republicans. Scott Brown’s comments send a terrible message that even accomplished women who are held in the highest esteem can be laughingly dismissed based on their looks.”

I think Clare Kelly’s response is way too defensive. We’ve come a lot farther than simply saying Ms. Warren is being dismissed “based on her looks.” What Kelly could have said is that a lot of men find smart women beautiful. If Scott Brown isn’t one of them then he’s too behind the times to be in the U.S. Senate.

But to add… I am reminded of what Hillary always did with these types of questions, something that Sarah Palin never learned, but interestingly, Michele Bachmann did. ALWAYS turn it back to your issue of choice & strength. Get the subject back to policy and what’s important. Don’t let the media divert you, not ever.

Read full story · Comments { 21 }

Sarah Didn’t Want to Make a ‘Big Darn Deal’ About It

By on 06 October 2011

**UPDATED**

It is hard to describe the relief of this awful person finally going away. – Andrew Sullivan

When has Sarah Palin ever not made a “big darn deal” about anything?

This is about her inability to face the national press, unlike Chris Christie, who she not so subtly dismissed in her interview with Greta.

We need more women in politics, stronger female leaders.

However, Sarah Palin proved that she cannot sustain a movement into a national power position. A secondary, lesser spot, a supporting role, is what she ended up being able to handle.

Andrew Sullivan won’t have Sarah Palin to kick around anymore.

…and neither will Fox & Friends, who openly mocked Sarah Palin this morning, which wouldn’t happen unless Roger Ailes had sent the word down. It’s going to be rough for a while for Sarah.

TM NOTE: This post has been edited, video of Fox & Friends added in place of Palin’s interview with Greta, which isn’t nearly as interesting.

Read full story · Comments { 5 }

Sarah Palin Won’t Run for President

By on 05 October 2011

From ABC News:

October 5, 2011
Wasilla, Alaska

After much prayer and serious consideration, I have decided that I will not be seeking the 2012 GOP nomination for President of the United States. As always, my family comes first and obviously Todd and I put great consideration into family life before making this decision. When we serve, we devote ourselves to God, family and country. My decision maintains this order.

The clout Sarah Palin had in 2010 is long gone.

There simply was no way to win.

It’s also hard to be considered presidential when you have the power king of the Republican Party Roger Ailes saying the reason he hired you is because you’re hot, all in hopes of big ratings.

An Eleanor Roosevelt image does not come to mind.

Then again, it’s always good when men on the right are honest about their feelings about women, our value and how serious they take us; as if the blonde brigade on Fox News channel didn’t send that message from Ailes already.

The end of Sarah for this political cycle began after the Tuscon domestic terrorism tragedy. Mr. Ailes reportedly told Mrs. Palin to back down, but she just wouldn’t listen. Her subsequent video message proving that even if Sarah has the fan base, she doesn’t have the judgment for the serious times of today.

The notion that Sarah Palin could raise enough cash to top Mitt Romney or Rick Perry is also in question. The organization alone needed to mount a serious contender campaign for president is beyond what Sarah Palin can manifest. Her biggest worry, as she said recently, is that the presidency might hem her in. Translate that yourself.

But you can never take the Tea Party queen’s 2010 crown away.

Sarah Palin was instrumental in the right’s Tea Party army, giving them cachet and clout from the moment her “death panel” squeal went up. From there it was a short hike to “mama grizzly” world and super celebrity on the way to her million dollar spokesperson career.

What-if is a question that will be asked by her fans. What if she’d been the one to hire Ed Rollins right after the 2010 November midterms, deciding to dig in and do as much due diligence as possible to gear up? What if Sarah had decided it was time to go back to her roots in Alaska when she was taking down Republican insiders and exposing the dregs? She might have joined the Occupy Wall Street protesters, representing the right, and made common cause where she actually once would have had one.

Because if any moment is an opportunity for Americans to join together it’s the Occupy Wall Street protests. Instead the right is too busy trying to tell their fans what’s going on is “class warfare,” while they laugh at democracy in action, afraid instead of the truth that might steal Tea Party thunder.

What’s going on in lower Manhattan is classes warring against Wall Street, because they’re robbing people of the American dream.

However, Republicans couldn’t possibly join in because they’d be rising up against their paymasters.

Sarah Palin is not the first person to be seduced by bright lights and the big league, ignoring what got her into politics in the first place. She won’t be the last.

(Sarah’s letter, continued from above) … My decision is based upon a review of what common sense Conservatives and Independents have accomplished, especially over the last year. I believe that at this time I can be more effective in a decisive role to help elect other true public servants to office – from the nation’s governors to Congressional seats and the Presidency. We need to continue to actively and aggressively help those who will stop the “fundamental transformation” of our nation and instead seek the restoration of our greatness, our goodness and our constitutional republic based on the rule of law.

From the bottom of my heart I thank those who have supported me and defended my record throughout the years, and encouraged me to run for President. Know that by working together we can bring this country back – and as I’ve always said, one doesn’t need a title to help do it.

I will continue driving the discussion for freedom and free markets, including in the race for President where our candidates must embrace immediate action toward energy independence through domestic resource developments of conventional energy sources, along with renewables. We must reduce tax burdens and onerous regulations that kill American industry, and our candidates must always push to minimize government to strengthen the economy and allow the private sector to create jobs.

Those will be our priorities so Americans can be confident that a smaller, smarter government that is truly of the people, by the people, and for the people can better serve this most exceptional nation.

In the coming weeks I will help coordinate strategies to assist in replacing the President, re-taking the Senate, and maintaining the House.

Thank you again for all your support. Let’s unite to restore this country!

God bless America.

– Sarah Palin

Read full story · Comments { 8 }

Was it Sarah?

By on 05 October 2011

She’s not running and I’ve believed that for months.

But the intrepid Maggie Haberman (with Ken Vogel) offers some interesting news that will likely quicken the heart of Palin’s die hard fans.

Sarah Palin-affiliated law firm made early-state deadline inquiries

Ken Vogel and I both have sources telling us that calls were made on behalf of a mystery candidate to various early states to determine presidential filing deadlines.

The calls were made by representatives of the law firm Baker Hostetler – a firm that employs lawyer Mark Braden, who represents Sarah PAC, her political action committee.

Sarah Palin has never mattered less.

Never was it clearer than Tuesday, when Chris Christie’s announcement that he would not run in 2012 prompted a throng of strategists to conclude the Republican field was finally set – never mind Palin’s indecision. A new poll published on the same day revealed that two thirds of Republicans don’t want her to run.

The endorsement everyone now seems to want is Chris Christie.

Read full story · Comments { 3 }

‘In the News’ Dairy Spotlight

By on 27 September 2011

The primary spotlight this week lights up Cujo359 for his terrific diary, Elizabeth Warren On “Class Warfare”, even as he admits he doesn’t know “whether Elizabeth Warren is for real or not.”
 His assessment on the good government does when it’s working at its best for people is right on.

Anyone who thinks of himself as a “self-made” person needs to understand this – few if any of them would have been successful had there not been an orderly and progressive society in which they could live. Anyone who thinks otherwise is earnestly advised to go set up shop in Iraq or Afghanistan, and see how they do there. Not having a functioning government will kill a society faster than just about anything short of a nationwide natural disaster.

The answer isn’t to make government so small that its richest members can make it do what they want, as the Grover Norquists of the world seem to believe. Nor is it to make sure that one side always wins the game, as far too many progressives believe. It’s to make sure that the government functions properly, and removing from it anyone who fails to remember why he’s there.

Spincitysd takes on Joe McGinniss, whose book on Sarah Palin has hit with a loud thud. A couple of weeks ago on Bill Maher’s show, Keith Olbermann could barely bring himself to say it, but he was on Palin’s side. A snippet from spincitysd:

If Sara is a Momma Grizzly, Joe McGinniss has to be one of the more expert bear baiters out there; he is playing her like a $5.00 banjo.

Mrs. Palin has now threatened she “may” sue. ABC News has the letter from Palin’s attorney, which reads in part:

Enclosed is an e-mail by your author Joe McGinniss. In this e-mail, Mr. McGinniss admits that your own lawyers instructed him that “nothing I can cite other than my own reporting rises above the level of tawdry gossip. The proof is always just around the corner, but that is a corner nobody has been able to turn.” Mr. McGinniss also notes in the e-mail that he “ran out of time” to properly source his book. [...]

It is malicious for your company to publish a book wherein it, and the author, admit that they were fully aware the statements in the book were false, intended to be false, and were intended to harm. …

Ramsgate offers a Republican primary reality check in “Perry Still Beating Romney.” Even as badly as Mr. Perry is doing in the debates, the right-wing primary base still won’t go for Mitt.

It’s easy to post a diary “In the News.” I hope more people chime in, including in the comments. Thanks to everyone who stops by and reads the diaries.

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

Incompetence ‘R Us

By on 26 September 2011



Well, at least Rep. Michele Bachmann stepped up to give the presidency a shot, unlike political tease performer Sarah Palin. Bachmann is no less credible a candidate than Rick Perry, who is being pilloried by Republicans, producing an embarrassing state of reality for Mr. Perry, even if Bachmann’s slide from Ames, Iowa has been precipitous.

One Republican official who was ready to endorse Perry said he had been stunned by the debates and predicted that Perry “can’t fix it.” “It is who he is. The things he needs to change are not changeable,” the official said. Perry’s best hope may be that the party base is in a mood where his shortcomings will be easier to forgive than those of his most formidable opponent, Romney. – Rick Perry reels after Florida flop

There is no doubt Romney, the fragile frontrunner throughout, isn’t an exciting candidate. But he’s got one of the most formidable opposition hit teams around, which is preparing an assault on Perry that is deadly in Republican primary politics. From Maggie Haberman:

As Hohmann previewed this morning:

A Romney campaign research document coming out later highlights similarities between Perry and Obama on immigration policy. The two headings, backed up with references to old clips, are “Governor Perry And President Obama Both Support In-State Tuition For Illegal Immigrants” and “Governor Perry And President Obama Have Both Been Dismissive Of Calls For More Fencing Along The Southern Border.” The release ends with the juxtaposition of Obama’s May joke that conservatives want alligators in a moat at the border with Perry comment, also this May, that, “I’ll guarantee you, the 15-foot ladder business is going to get good on that 14-foot fence.

Bachmann’s troubles begin with her own undisciplined mouth. Think Progress compiled some of her biggest whoppers this past June:

(1) BACHMANN WARNED ‘THE LION KING’ WAS GAY PROPAGANDA: At the November 2004 EdWatch National Education Conference, Bachmann said the “normalization” of homosexuality would lead to “desensitization”: “Very effective way to do this with a bunch of second graders, is take a picture of ‘The Lion King’ for instance, and a teacher might say, ‘Do you know that the music for this movie was written by a gay man?’ The message is: I’m better at what I do, because I’m gay.”
(2)BACHMANN CLAIMED ABOLISHING THE MINIMUM WAGE WOULD CREATE JOBS: While testifying in front of the Minnesota Senate in 2005, Bachmann said, “Literally, if we took away the minimum wage — if conceivably it was gone — we could potentially virtually wipe out unemployment completely because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level.” This isn’t remotely true. Even simply reducing the minimum wage would, as Paul Krugman noted, “at best do nothing for employment; more likely it would actually be contractionary.”
(3)BACHMANN CLAIMED THAT SCIENTISTS ARE SUPPORTERS OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN: During a 2006 debate, Bachmann said, “There are hundreds and hundreds of scientists, many of them holding Nobel Prizes, who believe in intelligent design.” This was, and is, not true.
(4)BACHMANN CLAIMED TERRI SCHIAVO WAS ‘HEALTHY’: Not long after Terri Schiavo died, Bachmann said she would have voted for the Palm Sunday Compromise because Schiavo “was healthy. She had brain damage — there was brain damage, there was no question. But from a health point of view, she was not terminally ill.” An autopsy found that Schiavo had suffered irreversible brain damage and her brain, said the medical examiner, was “profoundly atrophied.”
(5)BACHMANN LIKENED VISITING IRAQ TO VISITING MALL OF AMERICA: In 2007, Bachmann returned from a junket to Iraq and told her colleagues, “[T]here’s a commonality with the Mall of America, in that it’s on that proportion. There’s marble everywhere. The other thing I remarked about was there is water everywhere.” As ThinkProgress documented at the time, the comparison was preposterous.
(6)BACHMANN CLAIMED THAT CARBON DIOXIDE IS ‘HARMLESS’: In 2008, a Stanford scientist revealed “direct links” between increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and “increases in human mortality” — globally, he found that as many as “20,000 air-pollution-related deaths per year per degree Celsius may be due to this greenhouse gas.” The next year, Bachmann, who is not a scientist, said that “carbon dioxide is portrayed as harmful. But there isn’t even one study that can be produced that shows that carbon dioxide is a harmful gas.” [...]

These do not include her punchline husband or the latest outrage, which is Mrs. Bachmann repeating the bogus claim from one parent that the HPV vaccine causes retardation.

If a woman is going to be president she will have to at least scale the truth meter, something the potential female candidates on the Right haven’t proven is possible. This includes the perpetual Republican tease, Sarah “send me some money” Palin.

Read full story · Comments { 3 }

Perry Looking Worse than Donald Trump, as Christie Dreams Resurface

By on 24 September 2011

**UPDATED**

Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s candidacy has failed to clear a basic bar with elites and some donors, and his shoddy debate performance in Orlando has only highlighted the window for someone who Republicans searching for a Mitt Romney alternative can rally around. – Christie back in spotlight as Perry sags

Never once did I buy the Rick Perry boomlet. Of course, that doesn’t mean Mitt Romney, who has never fully relinquished his frontrunner status, is beloved by anyone. So, with Perry having peaked the moment he actually started campaigning, Chris Christie is being pushed and prodded yet again, with the piece I wrote back in March remaining relevant today.

Continue Reading →

Read full story · Comments { 6 }

Bachmann Draws Blood on Perry, Romney Stays Steady

By on 13 September 2011

It was a brawl. A beautifully ugly Republican battle.

The Tea Party audience loved Rick Perry. …right up until he made the case for “illegal immigrant” children to get in-state tuition.

“I didn’t mind the vaccine, social security is a ponzi scheme, but the illegal immigration issue is killing Perry.” – Ann Coulter

The boos then started rolling in, which Romney utilized in a strong but not stand-out debate performance. But that wasn’t the worst of it for Perry.

Social Security is the issue that moves Democrats and progressives looking to the general election, with Romney and Perry going at it on it (video), but in a Tea Party nomination process on the way to securing the nomination, it’s crony capitalism that can kill you.

Bachmann’s attack on Perry drew praise from Sarah Palin, a line she used recently in Iowa to take on Republicans as she did in her rise in Alaska:

“That’s good… to call one another out on that,” Palin noted, as was it good to “fight crony capitalism.” “You have to go up against the big guns and they will trying to destroy you,” Palin argued, “I have the bumps and the bruises to prove it.” She predicted that Rep. Bachmann was “going to get crucified by some in the party who say ‘don’t violate Reagan’s 11th Commandment,’” one Palin made clear she had no intention of following herself, as she praised Rep. Bachmann for ignoring it.

Rick Perry’s been in Texas politics a long time and pay to play just happens to be the issue getting a lot of attention right now, with questions rising about whether it’s at the heart of Perry’s power.

When Bachmann got her chance she pounced and didn’t let go. It wasn’t just about the forced HPV vaccination of pre-teen girls, an issue of freedom and liberty, also close to the Tea Party’s heart, but the pay to play process that fueled it. Transcript and video via Huffington Post:


I just wanted to add that we cannot forget that in the midst of this executive order, there was a big drug company that made millions of dollars because of this mandate. We can’t deny that,” Bachmann said, referring to Merck.

“What I’m saying is that it’s wrong for a drug company — because the governor’s former chief of staff was the chief lobbyist for this drug company. The drug company gave thousands of dollars in political donations to the governor, and this is just flat-out wrong. The question is, is it about life, or was it about millions of dollars and potentially billions for a drug company?”

Perry clarified that he received a $5,000 donation from Merck. “I raised about $30 million,” he said. “And if you’re saying that I can be bought for $5,000, I’m offended.”

“Well, I’m offended for all the little girls and the parents that didn’t have a choice,” replied Bachmann. “That’s what I’m offended for.”

Bachmann’s team went further, sending out a press release on Perry’s pay to play:

Texas Governor Rick Perry has admitted he was mistaken to issue his 2007 executive order mandating the Gardasil vaccine against a sexually-transmitted disease for 11-year-old girls. However, it remains unclear how much his ties to Merck, Gardasil’s maker, influenced this decision. Key advisors to Perry worked for Merck as lobbyists before and after he issued this executive order and Merck donated $6,000 to Perry in 2007. The drug maker stood to make tens of millions off Perry’s order until the legislature overturned it. ….

Lobbyist Mike Toomey served as Perry’s chief of staff for two years, then went on to lobby for gambling interests and the manufacturer of the HPV vaccine. …

Internal Perry office emails show frequent contact and coordination with Merck lobbyists, such as Mike Toomey and Lara Keel, in the weeks leading up to Perry’s decision on the executive order.

It had to delight the Romney campaign.

This is the way in on Perry, with Bachmann finding the vein. Romney needs to mine it, because although he was steady tonight, Perry’s clout with primary Tea Party voters is undeniable, as is Perry’s presence, with Tea Party voters besotted with the Governor.

As for the others, Santorum and Newt found their fraternal coupling, with Gingrich giving him a knowing wink at one point when Santorum went after Ron Paul over 9/11.

Ron Paul got booed when suggesting having the U.S. military stationed across the globe causes us trouble. And when he said sick people were on their own to die if they didn’t have or want health care, the audience cheered “Yeah!” for death (video).

Herman Cain had the quip of the night, when Blitzer asked what each candidate would bring to the White House as president: “I would bring a sense of humor to the White House, because America is too uptight.”

Jon Huntsman had a rough night, at one point calling out Perry for “treason” for saying the border could not be secured with a fence. It not only fell flat, but sounded like a line to make him sound more Tea Party-esque, which made him sound fake, because he’s not that guy.

CNN did a good job, with Wolf Blitzer distinguishing himself.

It was another rousing evening for Republicans, no doubt fueling enthusiasm, but who continue to sound crazier than a person wondering the street trying to get paid for his ramblings.

That’s why steady as he goes Mitt Romney has no choice but to just keep on sounding and looking like the grown up amidst the rabble, hoping Michele Bachmann will keep serving up Perry plums, because he can’t attack Perry on crony capitalism because he’s the poster man for it.

Rick Perry’s now got entry wounds even if the Tea Party can’t see them and doesn’t care. Social Security in the general election, but “illegal immigration” tuition is one for the primaries, with the pay to play HPV Merck example certainly not the only quid pro quo in his closet.

But you can bet Team Obama is doing opposition research while hoping Perry ends up being the one.

The Tea Party is giddy that they’ve found their man.

Meanwhile, the Republican establishment is drinking Highland Park hoping it’s all a bad dream.

Read full story · Comments { 12 }

Coulter and Ingraham to Palin: ‘Fish or Cut Bait’

By on 07 September 2011

“[A]t some point, Sarah Palin has to take some responsibility for her supporters as Ron Paul must for his. Palin’s dragging out the tease on her decision has compounded the problem and we’ve reached a breaking point.” (via Eric Erickson)

This is long time in coming and much deserved.

Sarah Palin’s celebrity tease has made her besotted fans look stupid, which isn’t the worst of it. Live by fan politics, be humiliated by it.

Women in national politics need to behave as if they’re ready and prepared to lead if they’re going to get covered and have a say in the national dialogue. It’s the 21st century and political cheerleaders shouldn’t be taken seriously.

After a tremendous 2010, Palin had a chance to take the clout she’d earned and make a difference for Tea Party conservatives. Instead she chose celebrity and money, which is her choice. However, because her fan base is so lacking in critical thinking and objective goals that have anything to do with political solutions, but instead simply live to blow smoke up Sarah’s perpetual political trial balloons, they’re making her rich while adding nothing to the national debate.

In Iowa over Labor Day weekend, Palin reached back into what used to be her strong suit when she was rising in Alaska. She challenged Republicans on “crony capitalism,” also saying the Tea Party crowd needed to stay true to their message. Her fans are left to wonder what might have been if she’d taken the clout she’d earned in 2010 and hooked it to this message. Instead she chose talking head status without any hint of seriousness or policy prowess.

Ingraham and Coulter did a service to conservatives by calling Palin out. She’s been using her fans for months and months to serve her own purposes and it’s long past time they said “enough is enough.”

Read full story · Comments { 0 }

Pres. Obama and Sarah Palin have A Lot in Common

By on 02 September 2011

No two people represent the preening, whining celebrity culture of our politics more than Mr. Obama and Mrs. Palin.

After Speaker Boehner stiff-armed Pres. Obama, I was waiting for this predictable storyline to surface. It’s fitting it comes from Roger Simon.

Who cares? The White House cares. Very much.

[...] Yet the White House did not see this as an obstacle. “With all due respect, the POLITICO-MSNBC debate was one that was going on a cable station,” the White House source said. “It was not sacrosanct. We knew they would push it back and then there would be a GOP debate totally trashing the president. So it wasn’t all an upside for us.”

There was actually no upside for Obama at all. In fact, the scheduling was a softball for Republicans, who decided to turn the whole thing into a bench-clearing political brawl. The problem for the President is that he came out looking feckless, as usual, with the added insult of further demoralizing many Democrats and progressives who have had it with the White House.

The whole thing was handled like amateurs are in charge of the Administration, with the news now coming out that the White House is pissed it all fell apart. Bill Daley is either incompetent or Pres. Obama remains the most gullible man in Washington. Simon’s article has Boehner’s office denying they had any deal on a speech. So, there you have it.

…and speaking of amateurs, seque to Sarah Palin, who’s still garnering press for her never ending presidential teasing. Her latest political tantrum surrounding her speech in Iowa resembles the same thing going on from the Obama White House. Fox News delivers the bad news for Palin’s ridiculous posturing over a presidential run:

All in all, most voters — 74 percent — think Palin should stay on the sidelines in 2012. Just 20 percent think she should run for president.

Sarah can’t afford to announce her candidacy at the point because she’d be humiliated, further destroying the myth that she has a chance at the nomination, which she does not.

Michele Bachmann is the one who ended up making history this year, being the first conservative female to win a straw poll, caucus or primary in Republican history. This happening while Mrs. Palin destroyed the clout she built up in 2010, while making herself look unprofessional by playing in her own presidential sand box as 2012 passes her by. It’s also Bachmann who has the best shot at demeaning Rick Perry, which is an easy thing to do given his ridiculous positions that will cause Independents, women and many suburban Republicans not to vote at all if the GOP is stupid enough to nominate this man.

Looking to 2012, Palin has been easily upstaged by Bachmann, Perry and Paul, while Obama’s economic fumbling and lack of messaging over his first term has delivered a playing field ripe for Republicans.

CHARLIE COOK: “The thing is, I think a placebo would have an excellent chance of winning. I think this is the Republicans’ race to lose. You can’t nominate a placebo, you have to nominate a real person and whether who they nominate can do as well as a placebo.”

If they nominate Rick Perry, lose they will.

Read full story · Comments { 16 }

Most Common Word Linked with Perry: ‘Problem’

By on 26 August 2011

We’ve got Paul Krugman’s “Bernanke’s Perry Problem.”

Why don’t I expect much from Mr. Bernanke? In two words: Rick Perry.

O.K., I don’t mean that Mr. Perry, the governor of Texas, is personally standing in the way of effective monetary policy. Not yet, anyway. Instead, I’m using Mr. Perry — who has famously threatened Mr. Bernanke with dire personal consequences if he pursues expansionary monetary policy before the 2012 election — as a symbol of the political intimidation that is killing our last remaining hope for economic recovery.

I’m not buying Mr. Krugman’s “intimidation” argument here, because I don’t think Bernanke’s paying any attention to Mr. Perry, because he’s not stupid.

The Wall Street Journal‘s got “Perry’s Popping Off Problem.” It’s fairly predictable for Peggy Noonan, who is not likely to be part of the Perry pack.

His primary flaw appears to be a chesty, quick-draw machismo that might be right for an angry base but wrong for an antsy country. Americans want a president who feels their anger without himself walking around enraged.

But then there is Jonah Goldberg’s “My Rick Perry Problem–and Ours,” which is at the foundation of what I believe will be Perry’s impediment to win the general election.

… But here’s my problem: I find the prospect of another four or eight years of defending these cultural distinctions to be intensely wearying.

My weariness is hardly a major consideration for anybody, but I think it reflects a larger problem. Conservatism is starting to have an identity-politics problem all its own. I think conservatism needs to spend less time defending candidates for who they are, and more time supporting candidates for what they intend to do.

Bush’s inability to articulate arguments had nothing to do with his Texan-ness or his Christianity, but a lot of folks on the right defended him as if that were the case. “He speaks American, don’t you get it?”

To which I’d reply: “No, he speaks badly.”

Perry’s not a bad speaker, and I’m trying to keep an open mind. I suspect I agree with him more than I did with Bush, whose compassionate conservatism I loathed.

Nor do I mind folksiness per se. Mississippi governor Haley Barbour can talk seriously and colorfully at the same time. But this time around, folksiness isn’t a substitute for seriousness, and I have very little patience for those who pretend otherwise.

Seriousness, indeed. Perry’s not got Palin’s gravitas problem, but there will always be a problem with letting Perry be Perry.

One interesting note is that he’s reportedly talking with Donald Trump. But guess what, so is Mitt Romney.

Trump, who announced he would not pursue the Republican nomination a few months ago, continues to hold open the possibility of running as an independent candidate in the general election if he does not like who the GOP nominates. Indeed, his team has explored how to get him on the ballot in all 50 states.

A Trump endorsement – or at least Trump’s acquiescence to who the Republicans nominate – could be significant. Public Policy Polling released national data yesterday afternoon about the potency of Trump in a three-way matchup against President Obama and a Republican. “Even though his birther shenanigans trashed his name with most voters, he would still pull 18% to Romney’s 30% and Obama’s 46%, meaning Romney would finish closer to third than first,” said Democratic pollster Dustin Ingalls.

Trump in the place of kingmaker? With economics the storyline, could be. If you don’t understand it, go back to David Brooks’s “Why Trump Soars.” You’ll get it.

Unlike Trump, Sarah Palin has lost her power, missed her window and ruined her prowess with stunts that don’t amount to much at a time when Republicans see hope for 2012 and know she can’t deliver the White House.

It’s way too soon to tell if Rick Perry can, but he’s certainly excited primary voters and Tea Party people, who still feel they’re in an arranged marriage with Mitt, as one Florida GOP strategist put it recently.

Right now Perry’s running on Texas myth fumes and Republican desperation for a brawl. His day of reckoning comes Sept. 7th at the Reagan Library when he’ll be in his first big debate and his opponents come gunnin’ for him.

Read full story · Comments { 2 }