Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
"Dream candidates" for whom?
Posted by: McQ on Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Well her short sojourn with the John Edwards' campaign didn't work out, but Melissa McEwan has the problems of the Democratic candidates pretty well nailed down if you ask me:
What could be better, I wonder, for conservatives than the leftwing having bought into every pernicious lie about Hillary Clinton and every bit of misogynist framing used against her in the 90s (instead of, ya know, just discussing her very real limitations as a candidate without all the seething, mouth-foaming hatred), while simultaneously having carried Barack Obama on their shoulders past the usual meticulous vetting and weakness-probing required of a national candidate (instead of, ya know, just discussing his very real strengths as a candidate without all the pretending he has no room to be even stronger), and then having collectively promulgated the total horseshit that Hillary now cannot win, just in time for any Obama misstep to be blown up into a potentially candidacy-killing drama under the totally true premise that the left has been careless about its due diligence on its leading candidate?
Or how could the left promote one candidate with more baggage than Marie Antoinette headed to a month long stay at the summer palace on the one hand, and also promote an unknown - who happened to sound good and look attractive - without doing the hard work of vetting him prior to his candidacy and then possibly watch the wheels come during the general election when that 'due diligence' is done by hostile forces?

Well, some of the due diligence is being done by hostile forces. Most of it is being done by the Clinton campaign, which is why the right is all for Ms. Clinton remaining "strong" and "staying in the race". The negative Obama litany is building and I'm of the opinion that while you may not see much of a slide in numbers among Democrats, the real slide is taking place in the critical indpendent vote.

The best laugh of the McEwan post came in this paragraph:
I mean, how great has it worked out for conservatives that the reality-based community has failed utterly to perceive a comprehensive reality about either of its remaining candidates, not to mention cast aside all that rigorous adherence to fairness, accuracy, and cynicism about the media and rightwing frames on which the leftwing blogosphere was ostensibly built?
I'm not laughing at McEwan, I'm laughing about her characterization of the so-called "reality-based community" and her apt analysis of how unreal it has actually been about all of this. It is as if the scales have been lifted from her eyes and she is seeing for the very first time what everyone has been seeing since the inception of that "community".

She concludes:
We're going to go into the general election with what looks to be a weak candidate either way, when we had the chance for the total opposite. And that won't be Barack Obama's fault, and it damn sure won't be Hillary's, no matter how many of the numbskulls who got us here try to blame her for their own idiocy.
And the Republicans ask the "reality-based" band to "play on".

The Democratic primary system is a disaster. It has dragged on for what seems like an eternity, and it has turned what most on the left hoped would be two strong candidates into targets by keeping them front and center in the political news cycle. And the inevitable has happened - the candidates have gone after each other. It has made for some unseemly moments, embittered many supporters of each candidate, and generally killed the sense of euphoria the left felt previously when viewing its presidential field (McEwan's remarks being typical of that point). Of course, the result has been to reintroduce the baggage Clinton carries, and, as McEwan points out, to finally see candidate Obama properly vetted - but not in the way or arena it should be done if you want to win the White House.

The left, as usual, has managed to really mess up what should have been a cake-walk this year (that's not to say they won't emerge as victorious, but they sure are working hard to prevent that it seems). You can't help but laugh and shake your head a bit as you watch this train-wreck proceed.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Well, I’m laughing at McEwan for the phrase, "the reality-based community has failed utterly to perceive a comprehensive reality."

Ye gods, she should write for the NY Times. In fact, are we sure this wasn’t written by Bob Herbert?
 
Written By: the wolf
URL: http://
Well, if John Edwards was her guy, she has some issues grasping reality as well.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
Eesh. That first quote is a paragraph-long run-on sentence. She’s babble incarnate.
 
Written By: Achillea
URL: http://
I am unable to read the phrase "the reality-based community" in anything other than an ironic context, frankly.
 
Written By: RDub
URL: http://
I’m just flabbergasted that the phrase "reality-based community" survived John Kerry and the 2004 election cycle in anything but a sarcastic context.
 
Written By: Terry
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider