#rsrh Geraghty’s back.

Good line on the entire Obama-is-Job thing: “So This Would Make the 2010 Midterms a Landslide of Biblical Proportions, No?”

Also, check out (ahem) RedState’s analysis of the theology involved in the (absurd) original comparison. We were fortunate to have access to an actual theologian; it’s not something that we would normally consider necessary, and I’m just a little annoyed that The New York Times felt it acceptable to drag laughingly bad religious arguments into what should be a straightforward policy debate…

Moe Lane

#rsrh Maddow would be tolerable.

On Jim Geraghty’s list: Rachel Maddow would be tolerable, and she almost certainly has pre-MSNBC conservative friends that she quietly keeps; she probably also is the one that gets along best with non-liberal family members.  Keith Olbermann is too crippled by his overwhelming need to prove that he’s relevant and a Smart Guy; he’s got a honking big inferiority complex over the cow college thing and the starting in sports journalism thing, and it shows.  The talking head… does not allow itself to engage in higher cognitive processes; its interior life is restricted to tingles up legs and lashing out in frustrated projection whenever a negative stimulus (usually some variant of THAT WOMAN, these days) is presented to it.  And Ed Schultz?  That’s easy: nobody likes him.  MSNBC only keeps him around because they figure that having one of their TV personalities die on-screen one day from a self-inflicted coronary will boost the ratings.

Which might even work, at that.

#rsrh In which I solve the NRA’s dilemma for it.

Said dilemma being, as Jim Geraghty put it, that the organization will have to make some hard choices this election on whether to endorse Republicans or Democrats: fortunately, it’s actually easy to solve.  All you have to do is remember this:

Democratic politicians lie.

Democratic politicians lie.

Democratic politicians lie.

Glad to help!

#rsrh Jim Geraghty does yeoman’s work on House races.

This made me laugh:

“Hey Jim, could you put together a list of House races where it’s either an open seat race or a vulnerable incumbent?” the editors ask, oh-so-innocently.

Do they have any idea how much work that entails?

…because even if the NR editors don’t. I do. It entails thirteen webpages’ worth of work, and it’s interesting to see all of that in one place. Well worth reading, the better to refresh your memory; and bear in mind that this isn’t the final list; we’re still six months out from the election.

#rsrh DC a ‘national blight’?

Jim’s being unfair.  To national blights.

This paragraph from Jim Geraghty – larger topic: Charlie Crist’s unforced errors – resonates beyond Crist’s apparent decision to decay his orbit and burn up in the upper atmosphere:

Many Americans see Washington, D.C., as a national blight combining the high morals of late imperial Rome, the good character and widespread honesty of post–Cold War Moscow, the financial restraint of modern Athens, and the respectful modesty of Beijing — and Crist is running on the message that he can work well with everyone who’s already there.

Well, it seemed like a good idea in 2008.  That’s going to be on a lot of political gravestones, by the way; mostly Democratic ones, but Crist is apparently willing to volunteer for one last bout of ‘bipartisanship’ in that regard.

A PSA for future researchers.

Those of you reading this, in say, 2060 or so:

I doubt that the comments section of news sites are reflective of the electorate’s views as a whole. I suspect those who leave comments are more passionate, over-caffeinated, perhaps angrier, and probably quicker to denounce everyone on the other side. They just aren’t like the intelligent, astute, even-tempered charming types who read political blogs.

…let me just stop a few academic papers before they even start.

  1. Jim Geraghty is being heavily sarcastic.  His own site(s) do not feature comments sections, mostly because absent active site moderation they would be rapidly overrun by liberal racists/misogynists/homophobes/bigots looking for a socially acceptable venue to express their racism/misogyny/homophobia/bigotry via projecting said racism/misogyny/homophobia/bigotry on conservatives.  Also, it would attract p3nis enlargement spam.
  2. Very few American males actually do worry overmuch about the size of their p3nises.  We have no idea why every other email that the average American gets is spam offering help in correcting this non-problem.
  3. The ‘3’ above is there to substitute for an ‘e,’ in the futile hope of avoiding more spam.
  4. Where was I?  Oh, yes: on the other hand, your era’s conventional wisdom is correct: the most amazingly useless, pointless, and counterproductive commentary in the world really was to be found on YouTube.  The collective intelligence of the blogosphere’s commentariat went up ten IQ points as soon as people noticed that you could comment on that site.
  5. And, oh, yeah: we just thought RickRolling was funny.  There wasn’t any kind of conspiracy.  Sorry?

Moe Lane

Quote of the Day, Jim Geraghty edition. #rsrh

On Speaker Pelosi:

Today her way of handling the problem of the rebellion of Bart Stupak and the other pro-life Democrats was to declare, “Let me say this: This is not about abortion!” Ma’am, to them it is. And until they get language that assures them that federal money will not be used to facilitate abortions, they’re not going to sign on. This can’t be as hard to grasp as you make it seem.

It’s not, but there are certain things that the Speaker of the House does not dare say, and ‘We have to at least pretend that we concede pro-lifers to be actual human beings’ is one of them.  This can lead to interesting verbal gymnastics.

Quote of the Day, Jim Geraghty / BOOMSTICK edition.

From his Twitter:

It seems some lawmakers believe a “listening tour” begins with them saying, “alright, rabble, now shut up and listen.

The most depressing part? They’re being depressingly stodgy about it, too. This would have been so much cooler:


(Army of Darkness)

Ach, well, it’s not like anybody ever accused the Democratic party of being particularly creative anyway.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

Too unbelievable for the Onion.

Code Pink Protester Sits Quietly, Listens to Testimony, Offers Thoughtful Response After Hearing. I mean, there’s satire, and then there’s Onion-level satire, and then there’s Full Metal Unicorn. Jim Geraghty’s proposal is Full Metal Unicorn. To a Code Pinker, “unhinged behavior” is merely a byproduct of their respiratory systems.

You can trust me on this, you know. I am apparently a smart guy. But if I’m so smart, why ain’t I rich?

Because nobody’s hitting the tip jar, that’s why. But this code should work now:

Crossposted to RedState.

Impressively fast racism-sanitation by the Obama people, there.

Kind of symbolic, really: treat the symptom, not the disease.

[UPDATE]: Hello, Campaign Spot readers.  Fair warning: this site is decidedly geek-friendly.

Via Geraghty, this was some of the text that was originally found here:

The real monkeys are the three Republican analyst that the Party has selectively placed in front of the camera to explain their wicked devices, Amy Holmes, Cook-eyed Ron Christie, and Michael sell-out Steele. If you notice how they talk and what they are saying leaves me with the impression that the only thing that is missing from their reporting is a monkey grinder.

The three of them are like wind up monkey dolls that are programmed to say and think like their Republican counter-parts..

If the Republican Party members think that just because they put these three white around the mouth as Al Jolson Negro’s in front of the public, that this dismisses the fact that they are a racist regime, they are once again mistaken.

…and is now sanitized. I’d show you the Google cache, but they shut it down for that site months ago.

Continue reading Impressively fast racism-sanitation by the Obama people, there.